HHS Nominee Open to Nixing Maternity Benefits Mandate: Democrat

The EHB package includes 10 classes of benefits, including some, such as coverage for inpatient hospital and coverage for physician services, that were available through most major medical plans before the EHB rules took effect, in January 2014.

Before January 2014, some issuers of individual major medical coverage tried to hold claims, and premiums, down by leaving out coverage for a normal pregnancy and delivery. Supporters of that approach argued that most people should be able to save enough money ahead of time to pay for routine maternity care, and that major medical insurance should be used mainly to pay for large, unexpected medical expenses.

Opponents of no-deductible, or low-deductible, insurance coverage for routine maternity care argue that that approach reduces patients’ “skin in the game,” or out-of-pocket costs, and encourages providers to increase the cost of maternity care. Stabenow and Azar

Stabenow said that, when she asked Azar about the EHB package mandate, “He avoided really answering the question.”

Azar said that “he would, quote, ‘Work to ensure the least disruptive approach to implementing these policies, and to appropriately consider the concerns expressed by stakeholders that need health care, during the rule-making process,’” Stabenow said.

“We don’t need the ‘least disruptive approach’ to implement bad rules,” Stabenow said. “We need an approach that doesn’t disrupt people’s health care.”

Stabenow said she also asked Azar specifically about whether all health plans should be “required to cover maternity care and newborn care at no additional cost.”

“He once again ducked, saying only that, quote, ‘It is critical that every woman have access to high-quality prenatal care,’” Stabenow.

—Read CMS: Essential Health Benefits Benchmark Picks Due Sept. 30 on ThinkAdvisor.

— Connect with ThinkAdvisor Life/Health on Facebook and Twitter.