The National Law Journal with DC News from Legal Times

30 Day Free Trial

National News
Washington News
  • Home
  • Legal Business
  • Law Schools
  • Columns
  • Verdicts
  • Opinion
  • Video Center
  • Blog

NLJ Home > Heads Up, Lawyers: Feds Act on Key Healthcare Law Provisions

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Heads Up, Lawyers: Feds Act on Key Healthcare Law Provisions

By Jenna Greene and Zoe Tillman All Articles 

The National Law Journal

November 26, 2012

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

The release of new rules offering guidance on how to put key provisions of the federal health care reform law into practice sent a loud and clear message to lawyers: time to pay attention again.

Following what lawyers say was a pre-election slowdown in the pace of federal agencies tasked with crafting rules for implementing the Affordable Care Act, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on November 20 announced three new rules, including one that will make it illegal for insurance companies to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.

"During the election season there was probably a hold because of a lack of clarity on direction," said Proskauer Rose partner Paul Hamburger, co-head of the firm's Health Care Reform Task Force. But with today's announcement, he said, "it seems to be full steam ahead."

While the announcement involved one of the law's higher-profile provisions on coverage for individuals with pre-existing conditions, Hamburger said he's looking ahead to the release of rules on the implementation of other provisions likely to affect his clients – employers figuring out how the law will affect insurance coverage for their employees – in a major way, including the creation of the health care exchange. "We're just sort of bracing for the impact," he said.

The proposed rule on coverage for pre-existing conditions from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which implements provisions of the Affordable Care Act, would go into effect in 2014 and prohibit insurance companies "from discriminating against individuals because of a pre-existing or chronic condition."

Under the rule, insurance companies could not deny coverage or charge higher premiums based on pre-existing conditions or other factors like claims history, gender or occupation. Instead, companies could only vary premiums based on age, tobacco use, family size and geography.

"The Affordable Care Act recognizes that well-run, equitable workplace wellness programs allow workers to access services that can help them and their families lead healthier lives," said Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis in a news release. "Employers, too, can benefit from reduced costs associated with a healthier workforce."

According to the federal government, as many as 129 million – or 1 in 2 – non-elderly Americans have some type of pre-existing health condition, whether a life-threatening illness or chronic condition like asthma or diabetes.

The proposed rule also includes provisions for enrollment in catastrophic plans, which have lower premiums.

The second rule announced today outlined policies and standards for coverage of "essential health benefits" – a core set of benefits that consumers will be able to use to compare different plans, according to the HHS release.

The third rule offers guidance on the expansion and implementation of employment-based wellness programs, such as programs aimed at helping employees to stop smoking cigarettes or lose weight.

The release of new rules removes a lot of uncertainty when it comes to advising clients on regulatory and policy issues, said Robert Bradner, a partner at Holland & Knight's Washington office who represents health care providers. "This will help health insurers who want to offer plans in the health exchanges to roll up their sleeves and start doing the complex calculations and benefit design work they need to do in order to design a policy that follows the law," Bradner said.

Staff writer Todd Ruger contributed this article. Contact Jenna Greene at jgreene@alm.com. Contact Zoe Tillman at ztillman@alm.com.

 



Subscribe to The National Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Holland & Knight
  • Proskauer Rose

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Health Care Reform
  • United States Department of Health and Human Services
  • Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

Key categories

    
  • Health Law

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Law for Laymen
    •      
  2. The Calculus of University Presidents
    •      
  3. Law School Offers A Second Chance for Rejected Students
    •      
  4. IRS Official May Have Unwittingly Lost Right to Silence
    •      
  5. Suspension for Spurned Attorney Who Waged Vendetta
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Hiring Interns? Be Sure to Do It Right

ACC Weighs in on Arizona's In-House Pro Bono Rules

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Enron Sandbox Stirs Up Private Data, Again

LegalTech West Coast Wraps Up With Ethics, VC News

In Tricky Prosecutions, Judges Play Peacemakers

Ropers Majeski Tries to Re-Invent Itself
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Summer Programs Still in a Drought

Lawyer Not Covered for Alleged Malpractice at Prior Firm
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Firm Takes Another Hit in Bid for 'Unconscionable' Fees

New York's Martin Act Faces Test in Challenge to 2005 Case

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

'Follow That Escapee!'

Judge Who Tossed Defense Counsel Accused of 'Partiality'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

 
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media