Testimony of Christine H. Monahan, J.D., earlier than the U.S. Home of Representatives Training & Workforce Well being Subcommittee, June 21, 2023.
Good morning Chairman Good, Rating Member DeSaulnier, and members of the Subcommittee on Well being, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.
My title is Christine H. Monahan and I’m an Assistant Analysis Professor on the Middle on Well being Insurance coverage Reforms inside Georgetown College’s McCourt Faculty of Public Coverage. I’m honored to testify immediately concerning competitors and transparency in our well being care markets.
Consolidation within the U.S. well being care system is rising, to the detriment of everybody who makes use of and pays for well being care. In each the supplier and insurer markets, we have now seen important horizontal and vertical consolidation over the previous decade contributing to rising costs for well being care.
The growth of enormous well being techniques, with a number of hospitals, outpatient departments, and doctor practices below the identical possession, has been considerably growing what industrial insurers – and, finally customers and employers – pay for care. One egregious instance of that is the addition of outpatient facility charge expenses to well being care providers that may be safely and successfully offered outdoors of a hospital. These expenses usually come as a shock to sufferers who go in for a routine physician’s go to and so they can result in considerably larger out-of-pocket prices than customers have historically paid for such care.
Some states, from Connecticut, to Maine, to Indiana, have began to sort out this challenge by prohibiting these expenses in sure circumstances, and a handful of personal insurers and a minimum of one state worker well being plan have additionally taken steps to restrict these expenses and defend customers from these payments. One problem to focusing on and implementing these reforms, nonetheless, is an absence of transparency within the claims suppliers undergo insurers, which may obscure the place care was really offered.
For instance, a state or insurer could wish to finish hospital facility charge expenses for care offered in off-campus departments or doctor places of work, since this care inherently doesn’t have to be offered in a hospital-setting. However the entire claims from a well being system could appear like they’re coming from the principle campus of the hospital.
There are easy reforms the federal authorities can take to handle this challenge, and set the stage for added motion to restrict what industrial insurers pay for care in these circumstances and finally transfer in the direction of web site impartial funds, as we’re seeing in Medicare. These reforms embody requiring that every separate facility or workplace the place care is offered, like a hospital off-campus division, purchase a singular nationwide supplier identifier or NPI and that each the hospital and all well being care practitioners embody this NPI on their claims for any care they supply there. This may give insurers, in addition to regulators and policymakers counting on claims knowledge, a significantly better sense of who’s charging outpatient facility charges and after they’re charging them and take applicable motion. Extra broadly, it might additionally permit insurers to raised tailor different reimbursement choices primarily based on the situation of care, contemplating components like high quality and value.
Let’s not be naïve about how far relying solely on non-public insurers to comprise prices will get us, nonetheless. They, too, have consolidated horizontally and vertically, and it’s usually of their curiosity to not pushback strongly towards supplier costs. This can be as a result of the suppliers charging the very best charges are thought of “must-have” suppliers for his or her networks, or these suppliers have demanded that the insurer embody anticompetitive clauses of their contracts. However the main insurers even have little incentive to make use of what negotiating energy they do have.
This can be a specific downside within the employer-sponsored insurance coverage market, the vast majority of which is insured by self-funded well being plans with the foremost insurers serving as third-party directors (or TPAs). On this function, the insurers have little incentive to barter aggressive supplier reimbursement charges as a consequence of their relative market energy and data monopoly vis-à-vis employers. What’s extra, employer contracts with TPAs and pharmacy profit managers (or PBMs) are sometimes rife with hidden charges and overpayments, whereas the consultants and brokers employers rent to assist prepare their contracts are taking in large commissions.
That is all taking place although employers, as plan sponsors, have a authorized responsibility below ERISA to behave solely within the curiosity of plan members and to make sure they’re paying cheap compensation to service suppliers, and no extra. Fortunately, the employer group is beginning to awaken to those issues, due largely to current efforts by Congress and the Government Department to carry extra transparency to our well being care system.
However extra nonetheless must be executed to provide employers the data they should change into extra prudent purchasers on this system. This consists of codifying and strengthening federal worth transparency guidelines; revisiting the Consolidated Appropriation Act’s ban on gag clauses; and clarifying and increasing service supplier disclosure necessities. Given their important function and energy within the system, it is usually value exploring whether or not entities like TPAs and PBMs themselves ought to be handled as plan fiduciaries when performing capabilities the place it’s extra necessary that they act in the very best curiosity of plan members than their very own enterprise pursuits.
Thanks on your time. I welcome your questions.
You may learn Ms. Monahan’s full testimony right here. A webcast of her testimony is obtainable right here.
