Access To Health Care Discussed At Public Health Committee Hearing

by Mia Palazzo

HARTFORD, CT – Lawmakers at today’s Public Health Committee public hearing heard comments in both support of and opposition to legislation aimed at protecting access to health care and ensuring the equitable delivery of medical services in Connecticut.

The legislation – Senate Bill 7, “An Act Concerning Protections for Access to Health Care and the Equitable Delivery of Health Care Services” – would establish new safeguards for patients, including those seeking emergency care, reproductive services, and gender-affirming treatment.

Grace Brangwynne, a public policy associate at the Connecticut Business & Industry Association (CBIA), testified against Section 14 of the bill, alongside Rep. Kerry Wood, D-Rocky Hill.

Section 14 proposes a study on the feasibility of regulating stop-loss policies used in conjunction with self-funded health plans, and Brangwynne expressed concerns about the potential legal implications involving the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

“Section 14 of SB 7 treats stop-loss policies coupled with a self-funded plan as one, with the study attempting to find ways to apply state-level regulations to a federally regulated entity,” Brangwynne said. “This could pose major legal issues due to ERISA’s pre-emption clause, which dictates that state laws attempting to regulate self-funded plans will not apply due to federal law superseding them.” 

The CBIA’s opposition centers on the complex relationship between fully insured plans, self-funded plans, and stop-loss policies. Under a self-funded plan, employers bear the cost of medical claims up to a certain threshold, with stop-loss policies covering additional costs.

While the Connecticut Insurance Department regulates fully insured plans, self-funded plans fall under federal jurisdiction, and critics argue that attempts to apply state-level regulations could lead to confusion and potential legal challenges.

Submitting written testimony in favor of the bill and representing the Office of the Attorney General William Tong, Alma Nunley, and Emily Gait noted that this bill would ensure that hospitals in Connecticut would provide life-saving emergency treatment regardless of a patient’s ability to pay or their insurance status, and emphasized its provisions to protect patients experiencing emergency medical conditions. 

“States also can go beyond the floor set by the federal EMTALA [Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act] and provide additional protections to patients in their states. SB 7 does not merely mirror the federal EMTALA, in Section 12 it also provides patients protection from discrimination in the provision of medical care,” the Attorney General’s written testimony stated. “Section 12 is generally consistent with existing anti-discrimination laws in Connecticut and makes clear that those same protections apply in the provision of medical care.”

The bill also seeks to address gaps that have emerged following the US Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned the constitutional right to abortion.

The Office of the Attorney General’s testimony mentioned that state-level legislation like SB 7 is essential for maintaining consistent standards of care for patients, including reproductive health services. It highlighted that the bill would explicitly protect patients from discrimination and ensure equitable access to reproductive and gender-affirming care.

“When an individual arrives at a hospital or free-standing emergency department suffering from an emergency medical condition or in active labor, they should be provided the care needed to stabilize their condition. The patient’s inability to pay for care, or other non-medical factors, should not be a barrier to life-saving health care,” the written testimony stated.