New Evidence Suggests a Lack of Cost-Shifting in Prescription Drug Markets
Recent legislative efforts to regulate drug prices have reignited debates about the interaction between price setting in public insurance programs and commercial market spending.
Comments on No Surprises Act Rulemaking: Part II
Loren Adler, Matthew Fiedler, and Benedic Ippolito offered comments on an interim final rule (IFR) issued by the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury that implements portions of the surprise billing provisions included in the No Surprises Act.
Comments on No Surprises Act Rulemaking: Part I
Schaeffer Initiative experts offer comments on an interim final rule (IFR) issued by the Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury implementing provisions of the No Surprises Act.
“Equal Weighting” is a Poor Framework for Arbitration Decisions Under the No Surprises Act
If arbitrator are required to consider or weigh the various factors “equally” under the No Surprises Act, it would be close to meaningless and leave arbitrators without an actionable framework for making decisions. A lack of clear guidance would be costly—resulting in excessive use of arbitration, excessive payments to providers, and, in turn, excessive premiums.
Recommendations for Implementing the No Surprises Act
Schaeffer Initiative experts examine several key implementation questions within the No Surprises Act and discuss options for resolving those questions.