Advertisement

May 18, 2013

MA Senate Passes Health Care Payment Reform Legislation

After two days of debate that featured consideration of 265 amendments, the Massachusetts Senate last week voted 35-2 to approve health care payment reform legislation. The Senate bill anticipates medical cost savings of $150 billion over 15 years through the adoption of alternative payment methodologies and delivery models. Immediately after the vote, Senate President Therese Murray declared, “Once again we lead the nation.”

The Senate bill now moves to the House of Representatives, which released its version of health care payment reform earlier this month but has yet to debate it. The Senate and House bills propose vastly different approaches to containing medical costs, and the branches will eventually appoint a six-member conference committee to resolve the differences. For more information about the proposed bills, including their differences, see our May 10 ML Strategies alert.

Senate Amendment Highlights

The Senate’s two-day debate resolved 265 proposed amendments. The Senate:

  • Affirmed support for limiting health care cost growth to no higher than the annual growth of the state’s economy;
  • Rejected an attempt to study whether a single-payer health care system would be a more effective long-term model for cost containment;
  • Affirmed support for a proposed $40 million surcharge on insurers that senators say will help fund medical record enhancements and improve medical prevention efforts;
  • Granted expanded authority to the Attorney General to track pricing variations; and
  • Funded community hospitals to more effectively serve patients in need.
©1994-2013 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Vice President of Government Relations and Counsel

George is Vice President and Counsel at ML Strategies, and an associate at Mintz Levin.

617-348-4722

About the Author

Vice President, Legislative Affairs

Julie is Vice President of Legislative Affairs at ML Strategies.

Julie has more than a decade of government affairs and legislative counsel experience. She clerked for several justices in the Superior Court of Massachusetts. Julie served as legal counsel to the Committee on Criminal Justice and as legal counsel to the House Committee on Ways and Means in the Massachusetts House of Representatives. Julie also served as general counsel, legislative liaison, and spokesperson for the Retailers Association of Massachusetts. Prior to joining ML Strategies, she held an of counsel position...

617-348-1885

About the Author

Project Analyst

Devon is a Project Analyst in the Boston Office. She graduated cum laude from Wake Forest University with a B.A. in Political Science and a minor in International Studies.

During her time at Wake, Devon co-founded the Arch Society, an on-campus group committed to fostering academic discussion outside of the classroom. Devon composed the organization’s founding documents, directed meetings, planned on- and off-campus events, and coordinated with administrative officials. 

In the Political Science Department, Devon’s studies focused on public health in...

617-542-6000

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.