In the September 9th meeting of AMC/NOMA's Board of Directors, Senator Eric Fingerhut (D-Shaker Heights) reviewed several bills he has introduced that are awaiting committee referral before the Ohio legislature - SB 111, 112, 113 and 114.
Senate Bill 111 recreates and provide for the operation of the Joint Underwriting Association (JUA) relative to the issuance of medical malpractice insurance, which was dissolved by the Superintendent of Insurance in the early 1990s. The bill also establishes a Stabilization Reserve Fund (SRF) for the Joint Underwriting Association.
Senate Bill 112 enacts section 3937.51 of the Ohio Revised Code to establish a term of five years for medical malpractice insurance policies and to limit premium increases during that period.
Senate Bill 113 creates the Medical Malpractice Insurance Review Commission and provides for the assessment of insurance companies and health insuring corporations to cover the Commission's operating expenses.
Senate Bill 114 provides for the formation of a nonprofit corporation, controlled by, and a membership consisting exclusively of, physicians, designed to assist its members in obtaining medical malpractice coverage.
Dr. Lane thanked Senator Fingerhut for attending the meeting and asked the Senator why he believes this legislation is needed and what he believes it would accomplish if passed. In response, Senator Fingerhut provided detailed information about each bill.
Upon reviewing the pieces of legislation, AMC/NOMA Board members were curious about how some of these concepts would be funded. For example, where would the funding for the JUA come from? Would it be funded through a surcharge on insurance premiums and policies? Would money remaining from the previous JUA fund be used? Was the plan to start with a temporary surcharge and hope that this problem would resolve itself? Would there be a surcharge on insurance companies as well?
The Senator indicated that he is "wide open" to ideas and that he would have no problem with a surcharge on the insurance companies doing business in the state.
Another concern raised by AMC/NOMA was that putting stringent caps on insurance companies or the 5 percent increase mandate on these companies could drive the insurance companies out of the market and have an opposite effect since this would eliminate competition in the state. This has been the effect in other states with a similar concept.
Senator Fingerhut stated that he has not been an advocate for price controls. The root of what he is after here is a need to return pricing to an actuarial soundness. The Senator also has a problem with how the Ohio Department of Insurance (ODI) has applied its authority to rules and regulations on prospective premiums.
For the complete story, see the November/December issue of AMC/NOMA's newsletter, The Cleveland Physician.