North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong signs bill to put checks on AI health care decisions
Apr. 24—BISMARCK — A new North Dakota law is expected to put checks on the influence that artificial intelligence and algorithms have on health care decisions, resulting in fewer delays in treatment and medication for patients.
On Wednesday, April 23, Gov. Kelly Armstrong signed
Senate Bill 2280, which aims to reform the "prior authorization" process for patients needing imaging services, medications and surgeries.
Prior authorization is the approval from a patient's health insurance provider that may be required for a service, treatment or prescription to be covered by their plan, if it's not an emergency. Prior authorization does not guarantee payment, but makes it more likely their health plan will cover the cost.
The new North Dakota law puts deadlines on insurance plans for those prior authorization decisions and requires any denials to be made by a licensed physician, not by AI or insurance companies.
The bill passed unanimously in the House and nearly so in the Senate, and with Armstrong's signature, takes effect Jan. 1, 2026.
Sen. Scott Meyer, R-Grand Forks, the bill's lead sponsor, said it passed due to proponents and opponents sitting down and working it out.
"Just because it was a vote that led to almost unanimous support, it was still a lot of work to get to that point," Meyer told The Forum.
Dr. Stefanie Gefroh, president of Essentia Health's West Market, said North Dakota is one of only a few states without statewide oversight of prior authorization.
"It's kind of an open book with no guard rails, essentially, around what is an acceptable time frame for a patient to receive clearance to get services," Gefroh said.
She said some physicians are having to spend up to 14 hours a week trying to justify a medical decision made for a patient.
Meyer said American Medical Association data shows among all of the prior authorization requests in Medicare Advantage plans that were denied and appealed in 2022, more than 83% were overturned.
The result was delays in care, treatment and medications for those patients.
Gefroh said most delays involve higher cost items: MRIs, surgeries, and chemotherapy and immunologic agents.
The law calls for insurance companies to make timely decisions; within seven days for non-urgent requests and 72 hours for urgent ones.
Requests for services that go unmet or unanswered are considered "authorized."
"That's why the default to 'yes' really is quite extraordinary, because the beautiful part of it is we're not holding up patient care," she said.
In addition, any denials for services must be made by licensed physicians experienced in the relevant condition, not by AI or insurance analysts.
Gefroh said insurance companies that don't adhere to the guidelines will likely have to adjust their internal processes.
"I don't think they want to be approving by default," she said.
There was pushback against the bill from representatives of multiple insurance companies, who said it would increase costs.
In the end, the bill prevailed due to support from the North Dakota Hospital Association, and a coalition led by Essentia of 20 health care and patient advocacy organizations representing physicians, pharmacists, hospitals, physical therapists, and advocates for seniors, children, and cancer patients.
"It's doing the right thing and putting the patients at the center and anytime we can put the highlight on that, I'm pleased," Gefroh said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Cassidy in a bind as RFK Jr. blows up vaccine policy
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has put Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) in a political bind, squeezed by his loyalty to President Trump and commitment to medicine. Cassidy, the chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, publicly wavered over Kennedy's confirmation, sharply criticizing his views before eventually voting for him. Cassidy said he secured a series of promises about vaccine safety, including for Kennedy to not undercut public confidence in vaccines. 'If Mr. Kennedy is confirmed, I will use my authority … to rebuff any attempts to remove the public's access to lifesaving vaccines without ironclad, causational scientific evidence that can be defended before the mainstream scientific community and before Congress,' Cassidy said on the Senate floor in February, just after he voted to advance Kennedy's nomination out of committee. Cassidy said Kennedy also pledged to keep in place a pivotal independent advisory panel on vaccine policy. 'If confirmed, [Kennedy] will maintain the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) without changes,' Cassidy said. On Monday, Kennedy fired the entire 17-member panel, arguing a 'clean sweep' was needed to purge conflicts of interest and help restore trust in vaccinations and public health. The move was an unprecedented escalation in Kennedy's quest to reshape the nation's vaccine policy and seemingly ignored one of the key promises Cassidy said he extracted from the longtime anti-vaccine activist. However, the second-term Louisiana senator and medical doctor did not publicly confront the Kennedy this week, pointing to his political vulnerabilities as he runs for reelection in 2026 and hopes to survive the deep red state's GOP primary. Robert Hogan, department chair and political science professor at Louisiana State University, said it seems clear that Kennedy is playing Cassidy for a fool — but that won't matter to GOP primary voters. 'You would think that that would hurt him electorally, but … I think ultimately, what could have hurt him is if he had stuck with his professional standards and the standards of the medical community' and spoken out against Kennedy, Hogan said. 'Keep in mind that in Louisiana, just a few days ago voted to make ivermectin available without a prescription. … Republicans are all in on this kind of thing and in that kind of environment, especially in a nomination battle where they are going to be the vast majority of people voting … it doesn't pay at all to push Kennedy on these matters,' Hogan said. Cassidy spent three decades as a practicing gastroenterologist before being elected to the House in 2009 and the Senate six years later. He won his 2020 election in a landslide, but he committed a cardinal sin in today's Republican party when, in 2021, he voted to convict Trump of impeachment for trying to incite a riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6. After his vote against Trump, state Republicans changed the rules to create a closed primary, where only Republicans and people who aren't registered in any other party can vote. Since Trump's reelection, Cassidy has tried to make amends. He's supported every controversial Cabinet nominee and touted his visits to the White House to brief Trump. Cassidy reported raising $1.36 million during the first quarter of 2025 with $7.5 million cash on hand. His campaign said it was the most ever by an incumbent Louisiana senator at this early stage in the campaign. Trump has so far largely stayed quiet on the race, but The Associated Press reported last month that Trump and Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) have discussed having the president support Rep. Julia Letlow (R) as a primary challenger to Cassidy. State Treasurer John Fleming (R), a former House member who is also a medical doctor, has already launched his primary campaign against Cassidy. Hogan said Fleming is a formidable opponent. 'If it comes down to, they're equal on every other dimension except [Fleming] did not vote to impeach Trump? That's the message, I think that will come through very clear to Republican voters,' Hogan said. Cassidy declined to comment for this article. He hasn't said much about Kennedy's latest move, telling reporters only that he is having conversations with the secretary. He also wouldn't say if Kennedy violated their agreement and instead pointed to a social media post. 'Of course, now the fear is that the ACIP will be filled up with people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion,' Cassidy wrote on the social platform X. 'I've just spoken with Secretary Kennedy, and I'll continue to talk with him to ensure this is not the case.' Firing ACIP members is far from the first time Kennedy has flouted Cassidy's guardrails. Earlier this month, Kennedy bypassed ACIP entirely when he declared pregnant women and healthy children don't need COVID-19 vaccines. He canceled hundreds of millions of dollars in mRNA vaccine contracts and forced out the head of the Food and Drug Administration's vaccines division. As part of his commitment to Cassidy, Kennedy agreed to testify upon request on a quarterly basis. Yet he declined to do so when Cassidy requested a hearing in April following massive layoffs at HHS. Instead, he testified weeks later during a budget hearing on the HHS appropriations request. Cassidy pointed out it was the first time 'in at least two decades' an HHS secretary testified to the HELP Committee about a budget request. Before the start of the hearing, Cassidy gave Kennedy a clear sign of support when he walked to the front of the hearing room and shook Kennedy's hand in front of a barrage of cameras. While Cassidy largely avoided the issue of vaccines during the hearing, Democrats did not. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) accused Kennedy of misleading senators and the public about his support for vaccines. 'If I were the chairman, who believes in vaccines and voted for you because he believed what you said about supporting vaccines, my head would be exploding,' Murphy said.
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Medicaid churn: How working Americans could mistakenly lose coverage under Trump tax bill
Medicaid churn: How working Americans could mistakenly lose coverage under Trump tax bill Show Caption Hide Caption President Trump gives his thoughts on Elon Musk amid clash on bill President Donald Trump responded to Elon Musk's criticism of his "big, beautiful bill" with disappointment as Musk responded on X. A centerpiece of Donald Trump's tax bill would make millions of Medicaid recipients work, volunteer or study to maintain their publicly-financed health insurance. Republicans say the work requirement is vital to protect taxpayers while motivating nondisabled Medicaid recipients to take charge of their physical and fiscal health. Dr. Mehmet Oz challenged this population to "prove that you matter." But health advocacy groups and analysts say most recipients already work in jobs that don't provide affordable health insurance or pay enough for people to afford their own insurance. They say mandating a Medicaid work requirement − combined with more frequent eligibility checks − would create an administrative nightmare that drops coverage for many who qualify for the public health insurance program for low-income and disabled residents. What is Medicaid churn? Medicaid rolls vary from month to month as people lose eligibility due to a new job, a raise or other income source that disqualifies them for coverage. A job loss or change in life circumstances could make someone newly eligible. The constant change of Medicaid rolls is what health policy experts call churn. A person who temporarily loses coverage due to a paperwork issue or mistake then must again sign up. "Churn is what happens when these eligibility systems become difficult to navigate," said Jennifer Tolbert, deputy director of the program on Medicaid and the uninsured for KFF, a health policy nonprofit. The federal government requires state Medicaid programs to check enrollees eligibility once a year. The Trump tax cut legislation would mandate states double eligibility checks to twice a year. And states would have the added duty of verifying a person's employment or exemption status. The legislation, which passed the House and awaits Senate approval, mandates Medicaid recipients who are "able-bodied" adults without children work 80 hours per month or qualify for an exemption such as being a student, caregiver or having a disability. The bill defines able-bodied as people who are not medically certified as physically or unfit for employment. The legislation also would strip coverage from undocumented immigrants who get Medicaid through state-funded programs. Health policy experts say more frequent eligibility checks and red tape will add administrative costs and cut off people who qualify but fall through the cracks due to administrative miscues. "People are going to have to document work status or exemption status multiple times a year, and at each point there's a risk that someone who is eligible could lose coverage," Tolbert said. Thousands lost coverage under Arkansas work requirement During the first Trump administration, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services gave states the option of implementing a work requirement for nondisabled adults on Medicaid. Arkansas' work requirement cut more than 18,000 residents from Medicaid within the first seven months of the program. People were removed often because people were unaware of paperwork requirements to keep their coverage, research shows and analysts said. In April, a study by researchers from the Urban Institute and Loyola University Chicago found the Arkansas uninsured rate jumped 7.4 percentage points among low-income adults age 30 to 49 after the state's work requirement began. The policy's impact on employment among that age group was "negative, small and statistically insignificant," the study said. Arkansas adults who didn't have access to the internet at home were disproportionately harmed by the policy, a sign adults might've had trouble accessing the state's online portal to report work histories or exemptions, the Urban Institute said. If the work requirement for Medicaid recipients is adopted nationwide, health experts say millions of working poor Americans will inevitably lose coverage. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated 10.9 million Americans would lose health insurance coverage through 2034 under the legislation. Most would lose coverage due to the Medicaid work requirement and the twice-a-year eligibility checks, but about 3.1 million would become uninsured from tweaks to Affordable Care Act enrollment, according to a KFF analysis. The ranks of the uninsured could grow larger if Congress doesn't extend the COVID-19 pandemic-era tax credits that have made ACA plans more affordable for consumers. If the tax credits expire and Congress passes the current version of the Trump tax bill, as many as 16 million Americans would lose coverage , according to CBO. "Coverage loss from work requirements should actually be very small," said Kathy Hempstead, a senior policy officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. "But we anticipate it will be very large, because people will not be able to comply with the requirements and will lose their coverage." Dr. Oz: Medicaid spending is 'crippling the system' The Trump administration's top Medicaid official has defended the House legislation as a necessary step to slow spending for the federal health program that covers nearly 80 million low-income and disabled Americans. In a June 4 interview with Fox Business, Dr. Oz challenged Medicaid recipients who would face work requirements should "prove that you matter." Oz, the Trump-appointed administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, said the work requirement asks "able-bodied individuals who are able to go back to work at least try to get a job or volunteer or take care of a loved one who needs help or go back into school. Do something to show you have agency over your future." In a Fox News interview posted on the social media site X, Oz said Medicaid spending has surged 50% since 2019, a pace that is "crippling the system." However, some Republicans have pushed back on the proposed cuts. In a May opinion piece in the New York Times, Sen. Josh Hawley, R- Missouri, said "slashing health insurance for the working poor" is "morally wrong and politically suicidal." Survey: Americans worried about Medicaid cuts The public is paying attention to the proposed Medicaid cuts. Slightly more than half of adults said they're worried significant cuts in Medicaid spending would negatively affect their family's ability to obtain and afford health care, according to a KFF health tracking poll released June 6. The survey this survey of 2,539 U.S. adults was conducted online and by telephone over three weeks in May. The survey said nearly 6 in 10 adults said the Trump administration's policies would weaken Medicaid, but there is a stark divide based on party affiliation. Nine in 10 Democrats but just 2 in 10 Republicans expect the administration's policies would weaken Medicaid. Republicans also were far more likely than Democrats to say that the Trump's policies would strengthen Medicaid. Still, while the survey suggests people are tracking the news, many likely wouldn't know whether their coverage has changed until they try to get medical care. "People don't often know that they've lost coverage until they try and fill a prescription or see a doctor," Tolbert said.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Food Bank of Iowa warns about SNAP implications in President Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
DES MOINES, Iowa — The Food Bank of Iowa is sounding the alarm while the fate of the President's 'big, beautiful bill' sits in the United States Senate. The concerns outlined by the organization are food insecurity and limited resources that food banks already have. 'We're gravely concerned about the one big, beautiful bill act as written,' said Annette Hacker, Vice President of Strategy and Communications for the Food Bank of Iowa. 'It stands to slash $267 billion with a 'b' from SNAP over ten years. And it takes 9.5 billion meals a year off of the table for people facing hunger.' New law helps clear the way for birthing centers in Iowa The bill has states pay for these federal benefits, in part, through a cost sharing method. Hacker said that this would be roughly $40 million a year the state would have to account for, which to her doesn't feel possible. The legislation also raises the age of SNAP work requirements to 65-years-old, extending those requirements to parents without children younger than 7-years-old. 'The crushing need this would create is not possible for the charitable food system, that's us, to absorb. If you look at every Feeding America food bank in this country, of which Food Bank of Iowa is one of 200 and all the partners and pantries we stock across the entire country, that's 6 billion meals a year distributed. This would be 9.5 billion more meals, a gap that would have to be filled. And the math just doesn't work,' said Hacker. U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley said that the goal is for the chamber to take it up on the Senate floor in the last week of June. To volunteer or donate, visit the Food Bank of Iowa's website. Iowa News: Food Bank of Iowa warns about SNAP implications in President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' Winner named in Coolest Thing Made in Iowa contest New law helps clear the way for birthing centers in Iowa Iowa governor rejects GOP bill to increase regulations of Summit's carbon dioxide pipeline Third case of measles in Iowa this year reported by HHS Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
