State legislative approaches to regulating coverage for experimental procedures.

Abstract

As addressed in past issues of the Newsletter, the Employment Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. sections 1001 et seq., limits the ability of states to regulate the terms and conditions of group health plans. See Newsletters, Vol. 8, No. 6, June 1993, at 6 and 23; Vol. 8, No. 1, January 1993, at 7; Vol. 7, No. 2, February 1992, at 13; Vol. 6, No. 11, November 1991, at 3. Under ERISA, states cannot mandate that self-insured group health plans or employers provide specific types of coverage. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Massachusetts, 471 U.S. 724, 105 S.Ct. 2380 (1985). Such mandates are enforceable only as to insurance companies and HMOs, and only to the extent that they are deemed to "regulate insurance." Id. As a result, state legislative attempts to regulate experimental treatment insurance coverage have largely been limited to health plans that are not self insured. Given the inconsistent handling of experimental treatment insurance coverage by both insurance companies and courts across the nation, state legislatures have demonstrated that they are ready to address this matter themselves. However, unless ERISA is amended to afford employees with self-insured plans the same protections as those with insured plans, such state efforts will not be able to resolve the problem for all citizens.