Open enrollment for ACA health insurance plans, also known as “Obamacare,” runs from November 1 – January 15 each year. This is the last chance to enroll unless you qualify for a special enrollment period.
In the Sunflower State, nearly 46,000 Kansans are in a “coverage gap,” meaning they have incomes too high for Medicaid eligibility but not low enough for Marketplace subsidies.
HB2454
HB2454 is one of hundreds of bills introduced this year across the country to push connected health coverage and access past the coronavirus pandemic. It makes telehealth services enacted during COVID-19 permanent and expands access, according to the Governor’s Office.
Among other things, HB2454 allows out-of-state physicians to provide telehealth services to Arizona residents who register with the state’s applicable healthcare provider regulatory board or agency. The bill also allows medical examinations in the worker’s compensation space to be conducted via telehealth if all parties consent, and prohibits healthcare boards from enforcing any rule that requires a patient to visit in-person before being prescribed most medications.
Despite some concerns from ACA-compliant insurance carriers and navigators, HB2454 remains a landmark law that puts Arizona at the forefront of state-based telehealth policy. It also sets the stage for more state leadership to ensure that virtual care is a long-term, sustainable option for American healthcare. This is a key step in expanding the role of telehealth in mainstream healthcare and, ultimately, supercharging the country’s healthcare system.
HB2455
In March 2010, President Barack Obama signed into law obamacare kansas 2022 (also known as the Affordable Care Act or ACA), which expanded coverage and reduced costs. HB2455 seeks to extend this coverage to certain mental health providers.
HB2455 requires disclosure of donations made by individuals to nonprofits that are not earmarked for political purposes, but are organized to engage in electoral activities. It also prohibits donors from making gifts to organizations that do not engage in “the major purpose” of campaign activity, as defined by Buckley v. Valeo and its progeny.
The bill is of dubious constitutionality under the First Amendment for four reasons. It fails to protect the First Amendment rights to speak on public policy and to privately associate with others; it overlooks decades of jurisprudence applying “the major purpose” test for campaign finance regulation; it dilutes the value of disclosure by creating “junk disclosure”; and it may subject individuals to harassment based on what may be inferred about donors due to the bill’s broad disclosure rules.
HB2456
The state legislature hasn’t been shy about putting itches on the backs of our citizens. HB2456 is no exception. It’s also no small feat that the bill has been able to get a hearing in the House of Representatives as a whole, much less in a single committee or subcommittee. In its current state, HB2456 will likely remain in limbo. Nevertheless, the measure has received the aforementioned attention of several well-informed and savvy members of the League. Regardless of how it plays out, the bill is an important piece of the puzzle that must be reassembled to move forward. The name of the game will be a matter of getting out the vote, one senator at a time.
