Fate of EMS bill uncertain

As formal legislative sessions wound to a close on July 31, the House and the Senate were able to reach an agreement on legislation governing emergency medical services.

The governor, however, sent the bill back to the Legislature with an amendment that would remove municipal authority to set rates that cover the cost of EMS services.

The bill includes language to prohibit the practice of insurance companies reimbursing patients, rather than providers, for the cost of emergency medical services, a practice that leaves providers – often municipalities – with the responsibility of collecting that fee from the patient.

The House version of the bill would have given municipal officials the authority to set rates that cover the actual cost of the EMS, while the Senate bill provided for the ambulance service provider’s customary charge, or three times the published rate for the ambulance service rendered to the insured as established by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. While the Senate bill placed a tight cap on the rate, it was accepted as a reasonable compromise. The House concurred with the Senate amendment and the bill was sent to the governor.

The MMA argues that the governor’s amendment, giving rate-setting authority to insurance companies, would weaken the intent of the legislation and tie the hands of local officials in ensuring that costs are not passed on to local property taxpayers due to below-cost reimbursements.

“We believe this legislation would protect municipal EMS services and allow for a balanced approach to rate-setting for emergency ambulance services,” MMA Executive Director Geoff Beckwith wrote in a letter to the governor, referring to the language passed by the Legislature.

At press time, the amended bill was in the House Committee on Third Reading awaiting action. If no action is taken during informal sessions this fall, the bill would need to be refiled for the 2013-2014 legislative session in January.