Health insurance; coverage for autism spectrum disorder. (SB1590)
Introduced By
Sen. Frank Wagner (R-Virginia Beach)
Progress
✓ |
Introduced |
✗ |
Passed Committee |
☐ |
Passed House |
✓ |
Passed Senate |
☐ |
Signed by Governor |
☐ |
Became Law |
Description
Health insurance; coverage for autism spectrum disorder. Requires health insurers, health care subscription plans, and health maintenance organizations to provide coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of autism spectrum disorder in individuals of any age. Currently, such coverage is required to be provided for individuals from age two through age 10. The provision applies with respect to insurance policies, subscription contracts, and health care plans delivered, issued for delivery, reissued, or extended on or after January 1, 2018. Read the Bill »
Outcome
History
Date | Action |
---|---|
01/24/2017 | Unanimous consent to introduce |
01/24/2017 | Presented and ordered printed 17104450D |
01/24/2017 | Referred to Committee on Commerce and Labor |
01/29/2017 | Impact statement from SCC (SB1590) |
02/03/2017 | Reported from Commerce and Labor with amendments (8-Y 7-N) (see vote tally) |
02/06/2017 | Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
02/07/2017 | Read second time |
02/07/2017 | Reading of amendments waived |
02/07/2017 | Committee amendments agreed to |
02/07/2017 | Engrossed by Senate as amended SB1590E |
02/07/2017 | Printed as engrossed 17104450D-E |
02/07/2017 | Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
02/07/2017 | Passed Senate (34-Y 5-N 1-A) (see vote tally) |
02/09/2017 | Placed on Calendar |
02/09/2017 | Read first time |
02/09/2017 | Referred to Committee on Commerce and Labor |
02/16/2017 | Impact statement from SCC (SB1590E) |
02/21/2017 | Left in Commerce and Labor |
Video
This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 2 clips in all, totaling 1 minute.
Transcript
This is a transcript of the video clips in which this bill is discussed.
PEOPLE HAVE TO BE ALLOWED TO VISIT EACH OTHER IN THE HOSPITAL, AND I SEE HERE THAT IT SAYS THAT, ON LINE 32, THAT NO ONE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO ANY PENALTY IN ACCORDANCE TO THEIR SINCERELY HELD RELIGIOUS BE RECOGNIZED AS THE UNION OF BELIEFS THAT MARRIAGE SHOULD A MAN AND WOMAN. SO I GUESS THAT COULD MEAN IF SOMEONE, A NURSE, A HOSPITAL, WHOEVER, A DOCTOR, DOESN'T WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO VISIT ON THE SAME BASIS, THEY COULDN'T BE PENALIZED. BUT REALLY, ONE OF THE THINGS I THOUGHT OF, I DIDN'T WANT TO