CQ Today (5/7, Ethridge) reports, "Efforts to rein in health care costs by promoting price transparency appeared to go nowhere in a House subcommittee hearing Thursday, despite bipartisan agreement that consumers need more information to make better health care decisions." Notably, "all three measures would require certain health care providers to disclose information on the cost of services, enabling consumers to make better-informed decisions. Sponsors say that without price transparency, patients are in the dark when they choose which health services to get and where to get them." CQ points out that previously, insurers objected to providing pricing information on the Internet, but on Thursday, an AHIP spokesman said, "Providing greater transparency on the prices charged for medical services will help to shine a spotlight on what is one of the main drivers of rising health care costs."

        CQ HealthBeat (5/7, Reichard) also reports, "Democrats and Republicans may agree that consumers need more information to compare the prices of health care services, but the spirit of bipartisanship was not in full bloom at a House subcommittee hearing Thursday that considered several bills on the subject." CQ adds, "Greater consumer awareness of the price of health care services could help Americans get better deals and make the health care system more efficient, [Frank] Pallone [D-NJ] said, but he added that price disclosure must be handled in the right way." Meanwhile, GOP lawmakers, "their anger unabated about passage of the health care overhaul law, spent a fair chunk of their time slamming that measure."

        Modern Healthcare (5/7, DoBias) notes that Pallone "said he would not commit to advancing legislation that requires providers, payers and vendors to publicly disclose the cost of their services." Modern Healthcare points out that one of the bills "requires hospitals, doctors, nurses, pharmacies and a range of manufacturers and vendors to openly disclose prices."

The AP (5/7, Lieb) reports that, by a 27-6 vote, the Missouri state Senate passed a bill requiring "some health insurers...to cover up to $45,000 annually of intensive therapy" for children with autism. The measure now returns to the House for final approval. The proposed "legislation applies primarily to people receiving health insurance from small- to medium-sized businesses whose group policies are regulated by the state" and "would not apply to large employers who insure themselves and are federally regulated." Supporters of the bill hope it will be presented to the governor for signature by the time the legislative session ends on May 14.

        Missouri House Approves Tax For Managed Care Health Insurers. The AP (5/6) reported that on May 5, the Missouri House, in an 87-67 vote, "approved legislation...that would levy a new tax on some health insurers." Under the measure, "six Medicaid managed care companies would start paying an existing state tax on insurance premiums from which they are currently exempt. The revenue generated from the tax would draw more federal Medicaid funds into Missouri that could be used to reimburse insurers, plus boost state revenues," possibly netting approximately up to $15 million. The measure now returns to the state Senate, where it faces Republican opposition.

The Salt Lake Tribune (5/7, Stewart) reports, "Utah and Rhode Island remain the only states undecided about whether to set up temporary high risk insurance pools for the uninsurable as mandated under the new federal health overhaul." The Tribune adds that the decision "has political ramifications for Utah Republican Gov. Gary Herbert who, under a tight deadline and with limited information, must weigh what's best for the state while appeasing members of his own party who are pushing to opt out of health reform altogether." Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers reminded Herbert about "new legislation that requires agencies to report to the Legislature before implementing any part of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act." Notably, HHS "officials have agreed to give Utah more time" to decide.

        Polls Finds 69% Of Utahns Oppose Healthcare Law. The Salt Lake Tribune (5/7, Stewart) reports, "Utahns have felt little to no impact yet from the newly passed federal health care overhaul. But they have grown even more opposed to it, according to a poll commissioned by The Salt Lake Tribune." The survey found that "69% of registered and active Utah voters oppose the law, compared with 57 percent in November when Congress was still debating competing versions of President Barack Obama's health care fix." Meanwhile, "a slim majority would support Utah opting out of the new federal system, even if it greatly cost the state. And 64 percent favor Utah's move to challenge parts of the law as unconstitutional." These findings run "counter to recent national polls showing slightly more Americans favoring than opposing reform, and slight increases in approval ratings for Obama."

Learn how easy and convenient shopping for health insurance can be. Get your free health insurance online quotes today!