GOP senators hope to regulate UPMC-Highmark divorce
Republican state senators said on Monday they're planning informational hearings about insurance and health care issues arising from the dispute between UPMC and Highmark Inc.
Chairs for the Senate's banking and insurance committee and public health and welfare committee confirmed they intend to review the dissolving relationship between the hospital system and insurer. Highmark is moving forward with a plan to buy UPMC's chief rival, the West Penn Allegheny Health System, and UPMC wants to terminate its insurance contract with Highmark in June.
Sen. Don White, the banking and insurance committee chairman from Indiana, said his committee will look at how state officials might regulate the dispute.
The public health and welfare committee will focus on access to care, according to the committee chair, Sen. Patricia Vance, who represents York and Cumberland counties.
White said he believes a public forum will provide more transparency and a better understanding of the long-term effects of the quarrel. The dates and locations of the hearings haven't been finalized.
"Since this battle involves the dominant health care provider and the dominant health care insurer in the region, each move and every statement by either party has a ripple effect that impacts millions of people in Western Pennsylvania," said White, an insurance broker before he entered politics.
"The posturing, while typically a normal part of business negotiations, has caused serious anxiety and unease among consumers. The decisions made by these two entities impact health care in Western Pennsylvania to a degree unrivaled by any other."
Sen. Kim Ward, who serves on both committees, said there's a possibility that both entities could buy rural hospitals in the region and prevent each other from providing insurance. That could hurt competition and limit residents' medical options, the Hempfield Republican said.
"If a major hospital in a county ... is acquired by one of these major insurers, which could easily happen, the access to care for those people in those counties is greatly reduced," Ward said.
"They're either going to be forced to drive into Pittsburgh for their health care, or they're going to be forced into a plan that maybe wasn't their first choice to begin with."
"The plan for these hearings is to bring some certainty to these people to know that we are going to fight, that they do have a voice," she added. "It's not just going to be these two large entities, which we are so lucky to have because they're both really, really good.
"I just wish they'd come sit down at the table and fix this and get back to the mission of serving the people who live here."
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.