[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6222137,"mediaKeyId","3610724-d1321e664100ee11bd2d6d772acc6124","parentId",3610724,"title","Committee hears competing views on regulating health‑care sharing ministries under HB 2,268","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",2906000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3610724-d1321e664100ee11bd2d6d772acc6124&start=2906&end=2906","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3610724-d1321e664100ee11bd2d6d772acc6124/thumbnail_2906000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6222137/Oregon/Committee-hears-competing-views-on-regulating-healthcare-sharing-ministries-under-HB-2268","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6222137-d074ff159f548da5e0c939bce1ebfd6e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770987619&Signature=ivY5LINFQ4CIHtW2~qmgMm0mzOBF5uvMMuD-o1aFCrd3UTBAzkOnVVGNTQ4X1-yfyANjE7g6SZnKGjPAKNCeE4D1PileQfrb6l~gIpiLjo2Y5RZ2ZOonU155~VZVEPBlJcfa53vmfCpTAwhwm9pCl4H38j1iLzBbMrJTuKO6RvfDmfOqIsyRs9Gz4ICOAFBCmDMjnz6KzlkNvNuN~NyUcmULgTNIueL54hsTETjYr6JtrDFXfquulVBZckUdgZ5D58S3RHaDostW2OJzqTy4x15~6r~e7OAdF64YqJ7G6Qkx5DuFyoc~hgwKIY8asBXuN0yKGDcX1mcGoo-Z76tbGQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Oregon Legislature","date","2025-05-29T00:00:00Z","article","SALEM, Ore. — Lawmakers heard sharply divided testimony on May 29 about House Bill 2,268, a bill that would require registration and public reporting by health‑care sharing ministries operating in Oregon.

Supporters told the House Committee on Behavioral Health and Health Care that ministries and other sharing arrangements often market themselves like insurance but are not legally required to pay claims or cover essential benefits; they urged the bill as a transparency and consumer‑protection measure. Representatives of the industry said the proposal would impose invasive reporting requirements, risk constitutional problems and duplicate existing consumer‑protection tools.

Fish Stark, executive director of the Center for Free Thought Equality, told the committee that health‑care sharing ministries “talk like insurance and advertise like insurance until the moment you actually need coverage.” He cited cases in other states in which members who believed they had coverage were left with six‑figure medical bills when ministries denied sharing, and said HB 2,268 would not ban ministries but would require registration, disclosure of exclusions and basic financial reporting so consumers can make informed choices.

Jesse O’Brien, policy manager at the Division of Financial Regulation at DCBS, told lawmakers the agency had no position on the bill but provided background: Oregon lacks statutory rules specifically for such arrangements and DCBS does not license or review them; its ability to act is limited unless an entity is transacting insurance or violates existing consumer‑protection laws. O’Brien said DCBS has taken enforcement action in past years against entities found to be operating as insurance, a process that required extensive investigation.

Angela Donnelly of Oregon Consumer Justice supported HB 2,268 as basic consumer protection that would require ministries to disclose material coverage limits and notify members in advance of major benefit changes. She said the current absence of mandatory reporting leaves regulators unable to determine how many Oregonians participate, how much they collect or how many eligible claims are paid.

Katie Talento, executive director of the Alliance of Healthcare Sharing Ministries, said the ministries represented by her group are religious charities and are not insurance. She said ministries facilitate voluntary sharing among members and that many ministries already post robust consumer notices, accreditation and audited financials. Talento opposed HB 2,268’s proposed reporting and fingerprinting requirements, arguing that Colorado’s reporting law (the model cited by bill supporters) produced misleading data and that the Oregon proposal could require disclosure of members, vendors and internal communications in ways that implicate free‑exercise and association rights. She also pointed to existing state enforcement tools, including actions by DCBS and attorneys general against bad actors.

Committee members asked about how ministries market their products and how members are recruited. Witnesses described online advertising and broker networks; supporters said broker commissions can be substantially higher for ministries than for ACA‑compliant plans, creating incentives to sell sharing arrangements to consumers who might qualify for subsidized insurance. DCBS said it receives occasional inquiries about ministries but often lacks statutory authority to act when a ministry is not transacting insurance.

Chair Rep. Noss closed the informational hearing without advancing the bill and said the topic requires more time and study. No formal action was taken.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Committee On Behavioral Health and Health Care 05/29/2025 3:00 PM","oneSentenceSummary","Supporters of HB 2,268 urged registration and disclosure requirements for health‑care sharing ministries to protect consumers; industry representatives argued the proposal is intrusive, raises constitutional concerns and that existing consumer‑protection laws and accreditation are sufficient.","taxTitle","Behavioral Health and Health Care, House of Representatives, Committees, Legislative, Oregon","taxId",17444,"location","Oregon","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_46":81,"_48":82,"_50":83,"_52":84,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":85,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":86,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6222141,"Oregon providers press lawmakers for ombuds office to address insurer audits and parity gaps",3320,66000,3386000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3610724-d1321e664100ee11bd2d6d772acc6124&start=66&end=3386","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3610724-d1321e664100ee11bd2d6d772acc6124/thumbnail_66000.jpg","/articles/6222141/Oregon/Oregon-providers-press-lawmakers-for-ombuds-office-to-address-insurer-audits-and-parity-gaps","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6222141-5397d5b79c31caecfa57c5b42047a675/orig.mp4?Expires=1770987618&Signature=QBvKggwebtyW7mWeu6g8lJ1z~18~GOwlJ0lg9w-W8RZ8WEGo5LNWsiTXQfELy0f8nnNnIiyF6Ea1LUCEgAt91aL2yBgHO3NtBppPnHvqQaaDahq8JFlh7AO~H7puOjjgJsOklRYR08eBW3GN8ZjTA4JZe1V7Nhu~qy8CW-1GU5yyEBGat7hQGpkNyU5uP-gqtZkF-rzwlswF3GAzlRvjVotjKJEEGpyQi6WbgzBbsoTVUsnnS9UBTUuV9ozOTnvpogCpLevr~7fSM4Sr9-1k~DDl0RGe1c-ze9qOjaZkmDc8lUAg5JUH1qGYXvos6KjpJbzxNrysZLikZ43U58bOYw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","PORTLAND, Ore. — Behavioral health providers told the Oregon House Committee on Behavioral Health and Health Care on May 29 that insurance audits, retroactive payment clawbacks and unclear enforcement of parity law are imposing severe operational and financial strain on small practices and are reducing patient access to care.

Providers asked legislators to create an ombuds office empowered to take and log complaints from providers, share that information with regulators and to escalate patterns of insurer conduct for enforcement or legislative fixes.

The request came during an informational hearing on House Bill 2,040 and House Bill 3,725, which the committee opened to hear provider testimony but did not move for action. Tiffany Ketterman, who identified herself as the owner of a group mental health practice with 45 staff that serves more than 800 clients and provides over 2,300 monthly appointments, described repeated audits and a “never ending threat to my personal financial stability.” She said, “It is by far the most exploitative, difficult, exhausting, stressful work I've ever experienced” and blamed insurance practices for much of the burden.

Larry Connor, a licensed professional counselor and legislative chair for the Oregon Mental Health Providers PAC, told the committee that providers have no consistent way to report suspected parity violations or abusive insurer practices. “There is no structure that allows me as the provider who knows the law and knows the violation to report that to DCBS,” he said, adding that an ombuds process would help surface up‑to‑date information on insurer behavior and gaps in enforcement.

Melissa Todd, a psychologist and solo practitioner, presented historical data to show both improvements since Oregon’s 2021 parity law and continuing problems with non‑quantitative treatment limitations (NQTLs) such as prior authorization, prepayment and postpayment audits and clawbacks. Todd noted HB 3046 (2021) as a law that improved transparency and reimbursement alignment but said regulators still lack line of sight into many modern medical‑management tactics insurers use.

Witnesses gave concrete examples: several providers reported major retroactive recoveries (“clawbacks”) for claims after insurers searched for secondary coverage; one provider reported an almost $10,000 clawback received the day before testimony and another reported a nearly $40,000 clawback in the prior year. Ketterman said multiple audits by Medicaid and commercial insurers have followed providers across years and that artificial‑intelligence‑enabled review tools threaten to scale audits from tens of cases to entire practices.

Speakers proposed an ombuds structure that could sit inside existing agencies or operate externally, gather reports from providers in real time, review insurers’ comparative analyses required by law, and share findings with the Department of Consumer and Business Services (DCBS) and the Oregon Health Authority (OHA). Ketterman and Connor said such a resource would allow providers to register complaints without requiring clients to file consumer complaints themselves.

Amber Redingazzini, a doctor of Chinese medicine and acupuncturist and president of the Oregon Association of Acupuncturists, told the committee that credentialing delays and contract terms also limit access to care. “No agency has the authority to regulate or enforce provider‑insurer contracts for fairness,” she said, describing a six‑month credentialing delay that kept her practice from using available clinicians.

Committee members asked about budget and structure. Representatives and witnesses suggested starting small; Ellen Penny, OHA’s patient ombuds, advised beginning with a single staff person and scaling with demand. Representative Nelson raised funding options including a modest premium surcharge or other fee; Nelson observed that even a small per‑member charge could fund several staff positions. The witnesses said they modeled HB 3,725 on an existing workers’ compensation small‑business ombuds structure.

Chair Rep. Noss closed the informational hearing without action and said the topic would require more study before any bill moved forward. He characterized the proposals as “big” and recommended additional work over the summer and fall so lawmakers could identify funding and operational models.","Behavioral health providers told a House committee May 29 that aggressive audits, clawbacks and unclear parity enforcement are damaging practices and businesses; witnesses urged creation of a provider ombuds office to give legislators and regulators real‑time reports and complaints.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears competing views on regulating health‑care sharing ministries under HB 2,268

Oregon providers press lawmakers for ombuds office to address insurer audits and parity gaps