Mental Health Parity Bills Move Toward Collision

The Ways and Means health subcommittee rejected a substitute bill proposed by Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., that would have made H.R. 1424 more like S. 558.

The subcommittee approved a substitute version drafted by Rep. Fortney Pete Stark, D-Calif., the subcommittee chairman. That version changes the revenue provisions in the bill.

The House Education and Labor Committee already has signed off on H.R. 1424, and the House Energy and Commerce Committee also will be marking up the bill.

America’s Health Insurance Plans, Washington, joined groups such as the National Alliance on Mental Illness, Arlington, Va., in welcoming passage of S. 558.

“This bill provides coverage for persons with mental illness without undermining innovations in behavioral health services or imposing costs on employers that would make it difficult for them to continue to offer health care benefits,” AHIP President Karen Ignagni says.

Many insurance and employer groups, such as the American Benefits Council, Washington, are opposing parity bill provisions that would permit states to establish stricter standards could create enormous problems for insurers and employers.

Links to copy of Stark’s version of H.R. 1424 and documents discussing Stark’s version are available

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article described the possible effects of S. 558, the Senate parity bill, on state parity standards incorrectly. The version of S. 558 passed by the Senate would permit states to set standards that were stricter than the federal standards.