California SB 1037: Firearms.
Status: April 19 set for second hearing canceled at the request of author. (as of 2016-04-20)
State: California · Session: 20152016 · Bill: SB 1037
Subjects: Firearms.
Sponsors: Allen
Bill Text
• • • • • • Bill Text - SB-1037 Health care coverage: rate review. • • skip to content • home • accessibility • FAQ • feedback • sitemap • login • x Quick Search: Bill Number Bill Keyword • • • • • • Home • Bill Information • California Law • Publications • Other Resources • My Subscriptions • My Favorites • Bill Information >> • Bill Search >> • Text Bill Text PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites |Track Bill | Version: 07/02/26 - Amended Assembly 06/22/26 - Amended Assembly 05/14/26 - Amended Senate 04/07/26 - Amended Senate 02/11/26 - Introduced SB-1037 Health care coverage: rate review. (2025-2026) Text >> Votes >> History >> Bill Analysis >> Today's Law As Amended >> Compare Versions >> Status >> Comments To Author >> Track Bill >> Add To My Favorites >> SHARE THIS: Date Published: 07/02/2026 09:00 PM SB1037:v95#DOCUMENTBill Start Amended IN Assembly July 02, 2026 Amended IN Assembly June 22, 2026 Amended IN Senate May 14, 2026 Amended IN Senate April 07, 2026 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2025–2026 REGULAR SESSION Senate Bill No. 1037 Introduced by Senator Weber Pierson February 11, 2026 An act to amend Sections 1385.01 and 1385.035 of the Health and Safety Code, and to amend Sections 10181 and 10181.35 of the Insurance Code, relating to health care coverage. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 1037, as amended, Weber Pierson. Health care coverage: rate review. Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care and makes a violation of the act by a health care service plan a misdemeanor. Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law defines “unreasonable rate increase,” for these purposes, to have the same meaning as in the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which is that an unreasonable rate increase exists when the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services makes a determination that a rate increase is excessive, unjustified, or unfairly discriminatory, among other things. This bill would instead define “unreasonable rate increase,” for the above-described purposes, to mean a rate increase that the Director of the Department of Managed Health Care or the Insurance Commissioner, as applicable, determines is excessive, unjustified, unfairly discriminatory, or otherwise unreasonable. unreasonable, as defined. Existing law requires a health care service plan or health insurer to submit rates to their regulating entity for review and to demonstrate the impact of any changes in the rate of growth of health care costs resulting from health care cost targets. This bill would instead require a health care service plan or health insurer to demonstrate the impact of health care cost targets on rate development, including medical trends, medical inflation, and medical administrative costs. If a plan or insurer asserts that aging, high-cost drugs, or other cost drivers explain a rate increase, the bill would require the plan or insurer to explain how it reconciles this information with analysis published by the Office of Health Care Affordability. and to demonstrate whether a health care service plan or health insurer’s rate growth meets or will meet the cost target for the rating period. The bill would require, if a health care service plan or health insurer’s rate growth is expected to exceed the cost target for a rating period, the health care service plan or health insurer to include specified information it is rate filing, including, among other things, a detailed list of any proactive steps it is taking, or plans to take, to meet cost targets through rate development. Because a willful violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the director or the commissioner, as applicable, in determining whether a rate is unreasonable or not justified for purposes of the above-described review, to consider the impact on changes in health care costs as a result of the health care cost targets described above. This bill would require, in determining whether a rate increase is unreasonable, the director to consider whether the plan, health care service plan has sufficient or excessive financial capacity for the past 3 years, and the commissioner to consider whether the insurer, has sufficient or excessive financial capacity the insurer’s surplus condition for the past 3 years years, using specified measures. The bill would require the Department of Managed Health Care and the Department of Insurance, in collaboration consultation with the Office of Health Care Affordability, as part of the existing rate review process, to each conduct an enhanced rate review to determine
View California SB 1037 on LegisTrack → — full text, sponsors, votes, campaign finance, and cross-state matches.