Unlike the European Union, the United States does not have a federal data privacy law like the General Data Protection Regulation. State attorneys general, however, are cracking down on data breaches at healthcare organizations, according to this For the Record article.
Healthcare Predictions for 2023: Hard Choices and Working Smarter
What is the primary force that will act on healthcare in 2023? What topics, trends and opportunities are hot this year? And how does the public feel about healthcare provider organizations today?
In this special report produced by Jarrad Inc., McDermott Partner Kerrin B. Slattery and other industry professionals provide insight into the themes that will shape the healthcare industry this year.
Growing Antitrust Scrutiny of Healthcare Mergers: What Healthcare Executives Need to Know
How can healthcare executives navigate the growing antitrust scrutiny of healthcare mergers, and what are some of the key issues facing executives in the current regulatory environment? In this conversation with The Chartis Group, McDermott Partner Katharine O’Connor discusses the legal considerations for healthcare executives seeking to navigate mergers.
The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022: Healthcare Provisions
After almost a year of negotiations among congressional Democrats and the White House, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) was signed into law by President Biden on August 16, 2022. It passed in the US Senate by a vote of 50–50, with the vice president breaking the tie, on August 7, 2022. The bill passed the US House of Representatives August 12, 2022, by a party-line vote of 220-207. This McDermott+Consulting article summarizes the key healthcare provisions of the IRA, including prescription drug reform, inflationary rebates, a cap on insulin costs, a Medicare Part D benefit redesign and a new pharmacy benefit manager rebate rule.
HHS Issues Proposed Rule Under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act: Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities
On August 4, 2022, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM or proposed rule) to reinterpret section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability in a health program or activity, any part of which is receiving federal financial assistance. The proposed rule restores and strengthens certain civil rights protections under federally funded health programs and HHS programs which were limited following the 2020 Trump-era version of the rule, specifically regarding discrimination on the basis of sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity, and returns certain protections for individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP). Additionally, the proposed rule bolsters protections against discrimination in healthcare by clarifying that funds received under several federal healthcare programs, including Medicare Part B, are included in the definition of federal financial assistance under the law. As such, under the proposed rule, the list of entities expected to comply with the nondiscrimination measures outlined in Section 1557 of the ACA is significantly expanded, in many ways aligning with the 2016 Obama-era version of the rule. The NPRM also proposes to expand the applicability of the post-Bostock interpretation of “on the basis of sex” to Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Programs (CHIP) and Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE). For now, portions of the 2020 Final Rule not discordant with Bostock continue to apply.
Manchin Agrees to Expanded Reconciliation Deal
Senators Schumer and Manchin announce a bill that includes drug pricing and an extension of the advance premium tax credits, the amount individuals pay for monthly health insurance premiums when they buy health insurance on the Marketplace.
On July 27, 2022, Senate Majority Leader Schumer and Senator Manchin announced a surprise agreement to move forward with an expanded reconciliation bill titled the Inflation Reduction Act (summary here). The tentative deal includes drug pricing and expands upon a previous “healthcare-only” version of the reconciliation package that focused solely on drug pricing and a two-year extension of the advance premium tax credits (APTCs). The deal would raise an estimated $739 billion, with revenues going toward climate and healthcare initiatives, as well as reducing the federal deficit.
Leader Schumer and Senator Manchin released a joint statement outlining the agreement, which contains two key healthcare policy items: allowing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices and a three-year extension of APTCs. The three-year extension is one year longer than had been widely expected and reported in the previous version of the bill. The Biden-Harris Administration has also announced support for the bill. The package must go before the Senate Parliamentarian for Byrd Rule challenges before it can go to the Senate floor. It is expected to garner the Democratic support necessary to pass both the House and the Senate, and will move quickly from this point. The caveat to this is the impact of COVID-19. Several senators are already out, and Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) announced July 28 that he has COVID-19 as well.
Fired for Having an Abortion? Unlikely, but It’s Complicated
Could a worker be fired for having an abortion? According to this Insider article, workplace laws would likely protect pregnant people from discrimination. McDermott’s Sarah Raaii said employers should make sure abortion health plan coverage does not conflict with federal laws.
“Incorporating abortion benefits into an employer’s existing health plan might help mitigate worker privacy concerns,” Raaii said, “since health plans are subject to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).”
Abortion Questions Swirl Over Health Lawyers in Post-Roe World
Following the US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, health lawyers have been busy making sense of the legal implications of the court’s landmark ruling. In this Law360 article, McDermott Partners Stacey Callaghan and David Gacioch offer insight into the myriad of questions they’ve received from hospitals, pharmacies, telemedicine platforms, investors and other players in the industry.
“The field against whom [abortion restrictions] can be enforced becomes so much broader,” Gacioch said. “It’s such a sea change.”
Workers’ Abortion Privacy at Risk as Texas Targets Employer Aid
A group of conservative Texas lawmakers is warning employers of potential civil or criminal consequences if they offer out-of-state abortion access to their employees. In this Bloomberg Law article, McDermott Partner Scott Weinstein said many companies offering reproductive healthcare benefits are making sure such benefits aren’t tied to a particular procedure.
“The goal is not to know,” Weinstein said.
Complex Patchwork of Laws Await Companies Offering Out-of-State Abortion Travel
Employers seeking to provide their employees with abortion services are facing a dizzying patchwork of laws that differ from state to state, according to this Corporate Counsel article. McDermott’s Sarah Raaii said companies with employees in multiple states “would really need to do a state-by-state analysis of what the abortion laws are, whether and under what circumstances abortion is legal in most states.”