This past Saturday, September 28, 2024, AB 2467 reached the desk of Governor Newsom. Newsom vetoed the bill, which would have mandated coverage for treatments for women in perimenopause and menopause. In this article, we cover some key facts about AB 2467 and Newsom’s response.
AB 2467 Background
Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Chair of the Select Committee on Reproductive Health, introduced AB 2467. The bill proposed mandating healthcare coverage for treatments for women in perimenopause and menopause. These treatments would include hormone replacement therapy (HRT), bioidentical hormone replacement therapy (bHRT), prescription medications, and alternative therapies.
California lawmakers had agreed unanimously in the California State Assembly to support AB 2467. However, when the bill reached Governor Newsom’s desk last week, he vetoed it.
Why did Governor Newsom veto AB 2467?
Governor Newsom cited multiple reasons for vetoing AB 2467:
The bill would require coverage without utilization management review to include at least one option in each formulation of specified perimenopause and menopause treatments.
Health plans would be required to provide clinical care recommendations for hormone therapy to contracted primary care providers annually.
A mandate to cover non-FDA-approved treatments, e.g., bHRT, is unprecedented.
In his veto message, which you can read in entirety here, he stated:
“I appreciate the author's intent to ensure access to comprehensive and up-to-date treatment of perimenopause and menopause. However, this bill's expansive coverage mandate in conjunction with a prohibition on utilization management (UM) is too far-reaching… Further, a mandate to cover non-FDA approved treatments, without UM, is unprecedented. These factors, in conjunction with ambiguities in the bill for undefined terms, raise concerns for cost containment and bill implementation.”
Menopause as a Policy Issue
Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan argues that menopause is a policy issue. Although most women will experience at least one negative symptom associated with perimenopause or menopause, these conditions are not fully covered by insurance carriers in California. Full coverage would allow access to treatments that are currently financially prohibitive for many women.
Stay Up-to-Date with Marti Law Group
We anticipate a continued dialogue around the issue of menopause treatment coverage and access. Newsom’s veto message ends:
“I encourage the Legislature and stakeholders to continue to work towards a more tailored solution that can improve access to perimenopause and menopause care, inform patients of their options, and encourage providers to stay informed of the latest clinical care recommendations.”
At Marti Law Group, we will continue to monitor similar legislation affecting stakeholders, including healthcare providers offering hormone replacement therapy and bioidentical hormone replacement therapy in alternative healthcare settings.
Comments