Special session: Insurance agencies no longer impacted by Senate draft bill

CHEYENNE – Although the Senate reconvened only briefly during the special session Thursday morning, the impact on the insurance industry in Wyoming was substantial.

Insurance agencies would no longer be liable under Senate File 1003 for discrimination based on vaccination status if the bill is ultimately passed by the Legislature.

"We are in too much of a time crunch to deal with the complexities of insurance," said bill sponsor Sen. Cheri Steinmetz, R-Lingle, "and no one wants to cause any detrimental unintended consequences."

This was one of the many significant changes made to the COVID-19 discriminatory practices-prohibition bill, which is one of the only two pieces of legislation to survive the 20-bill introduction in the Senate. It is also the only bill on the Senate side addressing the federal vaccine mandate and pandemic in some form that remains in the special session.

SF 1003 was approved with two adopted amendments after second reading Thursday, alongside the Wyoming gaming commission-scrivener error correction bill.

Before any reference to insurance was removed in the second amendment to the legislation, though, senators voted to make the bill clear and concise.

The first amendment passed removed any modifications made in the bill relating to public health and safety in Wyoming statutes, and turned it entirely into an anti-discrimination bill.

The legislation now addresses Title 6 in Wyoming statutes, which handles crimes and offenses, and turns vaccination status into a protected class.

It states that all persons are entitled to equal enjoyment of all public accommodations and advantages without discrimination based on "race, religion, color, sex, national origin or COVID-19 vaccination status." The penalties for an individual in violation still include a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six months, a fine of not more than $750, or both.

By simplifying the bill in this manner, inquiries regarding vaccination status alone are no longer considered a violation. But there are still risks for employers, airport officials, health care providers and many others who might be seen as discriminatory in certain actions after inquiry.

This led to the majority of lawmakers supporting the clarifying amendment, but some still questioned the validity of the bill as a whole.

"I don't think that this belongs in the list of protected classes," said Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander.

Nonetheless, he voted for the amendment because he said it allowed senators a clear choice when it came to the upcoming final vote on the bill.

In some ways, the insurance industry was helped through the passing of the first amendment. But the next modification made to the bill is where insurance agencies are no longer directly liable for discrimination regarding vaccination status.

The second amendment deleted more than four pages of the legislation, and removed any mention of insurance from SF 1003.

This has significant implications, but any impact in regard to possible legislative action and the Biden administration's vaccine mandate is, in some ways, conjecture. This is due to the fact no rules have been published regarding the federal mandate, and some of the legislation currently being considered in the Wyoming Senate and House of Representatives is pre-emptive.

Still, testimony from senators and input by stakeholders painted a picture of how the bill, without the second amendment, would play out for the insurance industry.

Wyoming Department of Insurance Senior Health Policy Analyst Denise Burke said there could have been considerable impacts. The department remains neutral on the bill itself, but she reported the possible consequences for insurance agencies.

Depending on the rules of the mandate, any federal health care and insurance programs could have been at risk for noncompliance if they were not able to verify vaccination status and could have faced financial penalties. Besides possible punitive measures from the federal government, there could have been litigation from individuals seeking insurance.

But agencies would not have been the only ones affected. Customers also could have seen the ramifications.

According to Burke, close to 15% of Wyoming residents are in the private insurance market. Ninety percent of those individuals receive an advanced premium tax credit, which is essentially a federal subsidy. Without verifying vaccination status, customers of those private agencies could have been at risk of losing the subsidy and unable to afford their insurance.

Currently, individuals cannot be turned away in the private market, or have their premiums raised, due to pre-existing conditions or vaccination status. This is because of protections guaranteed in the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare.

"People couldn't afford to buy insurance [before] because they were being rated based upon their health conditions," she said.

The second amendment to SF 1003 takes away this risk for insurance companies and federal programs, but not for employers. About half of employees in Wyoming are insured through their job, and employers will still be able to ask for verification and face possible charges of discrimination based on their actions.

Within the next few days, discussions will be had as to whether those employers should be held responsible for their decisions based on the answer.

The Senate will continue the special session at 10 a.m. Friday.