Latest news with #FinancialServicesCommittee
Crypto Insight
2 days ago
- Business
- Crypto Insight
US House Financial Services Committee advances crypto CLARITY Act
The US House Committee on Financial Services has advanced a crypto market structure bill called the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act, which will soon head to the full House floor for a vote. House Financial Services lawmakers voted 32 to 19 on Tuesday to put the CLARITY Act to a full floor vote after the House Agriculture Committee earlier voted 47 to 6 to advance the bill. 'This is the second bill that Bryan Steil has ably led, first stablecoins and now a market structure bill,' said bill sponsor Representative French Hill shortly after the vote passed. Steil, who is the House Committee on Financial Services Crypto Subcommittee chairman, described it as a 'big step forward,' adding that it was 'great to see' that Hill's act had passed the House committees. 'This is an opportunity for America to lead in the future of Web3 on the internet, including financial services using tokenized payments,' Hill added. 🚨The CLARITY Act is heading to the House Floor. @RepFrenchHill @RepBryanSteil — Financial Services GOP (@FinancialCmte) June 11, 2025 Bill to address 'everyone participating' in crypto Hill, who introduced the bill in May, said that the CLARITY Act will 'create a fair, functional, forward-looking regulatory framework that captures everyone participating in it.' The crypto market legislation covers the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and designates their respective roles in regulating digital assets. It also establishes provisional CFTC registration requirements for crypto exchanges, digital commodity exchanges, brokers and dealers, which must also follow rules for disclosure, customer asset segregation and recordkeeping. It also explicitly protects users' rights to hold crypto in non‑custodial wallets and transact peer‑to‑peer. Making amendments to protect devs Earlier this week, Hill introduced an amendment to the bill focusing on the 'treatment of certain non-controlling blockchain developers.' The amendment proposed that certain blockchain developers or service providers would not be considered as 'money transmitters' or subject to their registration requirements. Some Democrats remain opposed Ranking Financial Services Committee member Maxine Waters proposed amending the legislation to address allegations of conflicts of interest related to US President Donald Trump's crypto businesses. She suggested that he could use the bill to personally enrich himself and his family. Meanwhile, Representative Brad Sherman proposed another amendment to prohibit what he termed potential crypto industry 'bailouts' in the future. Source:
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Co-pays, deductibles targeted by health care reform bill
BOSTON (SHNS) – Doctors last week prescribed an insurance reform designed to save primary care practices and ensure patients get timely care. Insurers, though, say another mandate is the last thing Massachusetts needs when health care costs are already a big problem and are asking lawmakers to seek a second opinion. Massachusetts has consistently struggled to rein in high and growing health care costs. The great expense of care and a dearth of primary care providers means that many people put off preventative care. That often means they eventually end up in more serious and more expensive situations that also further stress a strained hospital system. Rep. Lindsay Sabadosa's bill (H 1309) heard by the Financial Services Committee would require that so-called evaluation and management services be included as part of an insurer's basic benefits package, making those services exempt from patient deductibles, according to a bill summary. The Northampton Democrat said it meant that 'several critical conditions' would be included 'without co-pay or deductible, so that constituents can go in and get the health care that they need and not end up consistently in emergency rooms.' Doctors whom Sabadosa introduced to testify Tuesday said high deductibles play a big part in keeping many people away from primary care that can decrease the cost of care over the long run. 'Every time there's a cost-saving measure that doesn't think about how it affects primary care, it ultimately costs the health care system more,' Dr. Kate Atkinson told the committee. Doctors also said high deductibles end up hampering the very primary care practices that are already stressed by other factors. 'What people don't understand is that many patients actually do not pay their bills and their deductibles, and in so doing, that shifts the cost to medical practices as well,' Dr. Wayne Altman, who has a practice in Arlington and is chair of the Department of Family Medicine at Tufts Medical School, said, describing deductibles as a massive administrative burden for doctor's offices. 'When people have primary care practices, what they really want to do is take care of their patients. They don't want to bill patients for deductibles. We just want to take care of our patients. And this gets in the way.' Atkinson was clearly frustrated as she told lawmakers that she recently laid off 11 employees from her Western Mass. family medicine practice and is no longer offering Saturday hours. The Mass. Medical Society trustee said the legislation Sabadosa filed 'came from' the organization and that this year was the seventh time she's testified on the issue. 'It is really frustrating to come year after year and testify, and nothing has changed for primary care doctors in this state, nothing,' she said. 'In all of the past decade that I've been testifying, it's become harder and harder to keep my practice afloat, I'm on the edge of bankruptcy, and measures like this are minor measures for the insurance company, but would be a big effort to keep patients healthier and to keep my practice going, and not just mine.' Lora Pellegrini, president and CEO of the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans, said insurers are worried that Sabadosa's bill and others the committee heard last week would drive up health care premiums for small businesses and individuals at a time when affordability is an urgent health care challenge for the state. 'Each of these bills would impose new requirements solely on the fully-insured market—made up primarily of small businesses and individuals—exacerbating affordability challenges without reducing overall system costs,' Pellegrini said. Pellegrini said that federal law, including the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, is such that the additional costs would not be required to be covered by self-insured companies, which account for almost 60% of the insurance market. Federal regulations also prohibit eliminating cost-sharing for many services through high-deductible health plans, the choice of nearly 43% of commercially-insured Bay Staters, she said. MAHP said plans already cover medically necessary outpatient care consistent with state and federal laws, and that eliminating cost-sharing entirely 'would significantly drive up premiums.' The group urged lawmakers to defer action on the idea until the Center for Health Information and Analysis could complete a full cost impact analysis. 'Massachusetts is at a critical crossroads on health care affordability. With premiums continuing to rise, adding new mandates that increase costs for working families and small businesses takes us in the wrong direction,' the insurers' group leader said. 'MAHP urges the Legislature to protect affordability and oppose House Bill 1309, Senate Bill 764, House Bill 1227, and Senate Bill 809.' The other legislation that Pellegrini and MAHP opposed last week (H 1227 / S 809) would require the Group Insurance Commission, MassHealth and commercial health insurers to provide coverage for biomarker testing, which can be used to personalize treatment for cancer. 'With biomarker testing, this allows care providers and doctors to pinpoint exactly what kind of treatment is going to be the most effective for a patient going through this battle. It can eliminate treatments that are devastating, from causing a patient to suffer through that. And it can lead to better outcomes, better quality of life, and it can give us that precious gifts of time,' bill sponsor Rep. Meghan Kilcoyne said. 'And we're also seeing that this can have huge implications on other diseases beyond cancer, such as Alzheimer's.' MAHP said that CHIA has estimated the biomarker testing mandate could increase health care costs by up to $35 million annually, with a five-year total expenditure surpassing $168 million. The group said the bill would impose the coverage 'without sufficient standards for clinical efficacy or value.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to WWLP.
Yahoo
05-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Leading House Dem Will Block Crypto Market Structure Bill Hearing
The leading Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Maxine Waters, will block efforts to hold a joint hearing between her committee and the House Agriculture Committee on Monday's newly unveiled market structure discussion draft bill. Under House rules, all participants in a joint hearing need to agree to proceed. Waters will object to the joint hearing and prevent it from proceeding as planned, a Democratic staffer told CoinDesk, pointing to U.S. President Donald Trump's recent and increasing engagement with crypto. The Financial Services and Agriculture Committees announced they would host a joint hearing on market structure issues last week, and unveiled the first text addressing the issue — including how the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission would oversee crypto — earlier Monday. "Ranking Member Maxine Waters has been incredibly vocal about Trump's crypto crimes and has pushed Republicans to investigate these crimes," the staffer said. "Ahead of tomorrow's hearing, Ranking Member Waters gave Chairman Hill a phone call and told him she would not approve this hearing unless Republicans included provisions in their legislation to block Trump from further profiting from crypto off the backs of investors." Politico first reported that Waters would object to the joint hearing. In recent days, Trump announced he would host a dinner for the 220 parties holding the most TRUMP memecoins. One of his children, Eric Trump, announced just last week that Abu Dhabi investment firm MGX would use World Liberty Financial's USD1 stablecoin to close its investment in crypto exchange Binance. Freight Technologies, a publicly traded logistics firm, also said last week that it would buy $20 million in TRUMP coins with the explicit purpose of trying to influence trade policy. The Democratic staffer told CoinDesk that Waters and other Democrats on the Financial Services Committee would hold their own hearing investigating Trump's different crypto ties, which would include World Liberty Financial. A spokesperson for the Financial Services Committee's chair, French Hill, said in a statement that, "Since the last Congress, we've had productive bipartisan, bicameral discussions on market structure legislation. We encourage the Ranking Member to attend tomorrow's hearing to express her views and reconsider her decision to object." Sign in to access your portfolio
Boston Globe
02-05-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
Does the status quo sell? Republicans who want to make Trump's tax cuts permanent are about to find out.
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up If they succeed, it would avert a tax hike that could draw political blowback, and in the eyes of Republicans, spare the economy from serious harm. But the vast majority of taxpayers would likely see no changes, depriving the GOP of their best selling point last time. Advertisement The task for Republicans now is to frame the tax fight largely around what won't happen rather than what will — which could be challenging for a president who has relished claiming credit for putting cash in Americans' wallets through direct payments and tax breaks. And, since the legislation may likely be a signature initiative of Trump's second term, then how well Republicans can convince voters they are benefiting from whatever the final result is could influence the mid-terms in 2026, with control of Congress hanging in the balance. Advertisement Indeed, congressional Republicans and the White House are already framing the tax legislation differently. 'I don't think it's hard to sell,' said Representative Andy Barr, a Kentucky Republican and a senior member of the Financial Services Committee. 'What we're trying to do is prevent the largest tax increase in American history.' Yet, the Trump team is already referring to the proposed legislation as ' That framing might be justifiable in wonky budget terms, but using it to describe extending tax cuts that were teed up to expire in 2025 specifically to minimize their long-term debt impacts may confuse the public, said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan advocacy group known for being fiscally hawkish. 'The fact that these tax cuts expire, and they did that to make them look cheaper than they ultimately will be, leaves us in a situation where taxpayers don't know what to expect,' MacGuineas said. 'And for those who understandably aren't following the day in and day out of tax law, they would be surprised that talk of a tax cut doesn't change anything in their bottom line.' Selling the economic concerns of Americans. Advertisement Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, said the possibility of tariff-induced economic pain 'makes it even more important' to pass a robust tax cut package. 'It was already important, but I guess we can say incrementally more important,' he said. Other GOP lawmakers mentioned additional tax breaks in response to the tariff situation, such as a Trump-backed proposal to slash corporate rates to 15 percent for companies that produce goods domestically. But public opinion on the bill may ultimately rise and fall on extension of the 2017 law, known as the Just extending those three planks of the 2017 law would cost roughly $4 trillion over 10 years, according to Some Republicans said they need to dial up their communications to emphasize to the public what would happen if the original cuts were undone. Advertisement 'The American public is expecting that if nothing happens, nothing changes,' said Senator Mike Rounds, a South Dakota Republican, who argued that many taxpayers don't yet understand their taxes could go up if Congress doesn't extend the 2017 changes. 'That's the emphasis that we've got to have.' Estimates vary as to how tax burdens would fluctuate if the 2017 law were to expire, but the Tax Foundation, a think tank that supported its provisions, said 62 percent of Americans would experience some kind of increase. The core case Democrats made against the original Trump tax law was the wealthiest Americans benefited much more than the working and middle classes. According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, households in the top 1 percent of incomes got an average tax break of more than $60,000, while households in the bottom 60 percent got less than $500. The bill also made permanent a major reduction in corporate tax rates, from 35 to 21 percent. 'They want to maintain the status quo, which means the tax has to benefit multinational corporations and the very wealthy,' said Senator Peter Welch, a Vermont Democrat. 'I don't think there's credibility out there with the public, that these tax cuts make a difference to them.' Recent public polling has found limited awareness of the specifics of Trump's first tax bill and what it did. Support for extending those cuts often falls along partisan lines, but Democrats and even Republicans often indicate their preference for Advertisement The Republicans' efforts to persuade voters of the merits of the tax cut extension are made more difficult by the question of how they intend to pay for them. The budget blueprint passed by House Republicans includes $1.5 trillion in spending cuts to government operations, and an increase in the deficit of $4.5 trillion. Democratic lawmakers, and even some Republicans, are warning that reaching that threshold of spending reductions would be near impossible without deep cuts to Medicaid, which helps provide health care to low-income and disabled Americans, as well as children. Significant reductions in Medicaid coverage would likely be politically disastrous for Republicans. Moreover, stuffing additional tax breaks in the package, as many Republicans want, would entail having to find even deeper spending cuts — or more likely, push them to make it seem the legislation does not add more to the federal debt than it actually does. With margins in the House extremely thin, even a handful of the GOP's remaining committed deficit hawks could cause problems if they believe the bill is fiscally irresponsible. Proponents of the emerging tax bill, said MacGuineas, 'seem to want to have their cake and eat it, too' in terms of how they frame it. The fundamental concept behind the plan is 'a legal continuation of tax policy that will have negative fiscal effects in terms of debt projection, and that will have negative economic effects,' she said. 'There's nothing here that is going to be an elixir for the economy.' Sam Brodey can be reached at
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Rep: If Arkansas can do this, so can Massachusetts
BOSTON (SHNS) – Rep. Kimberly Ferguson has been pushing to require health insurance companies to cover cognitive rehabilitation therapy for treatment of an acquired brain injury for at least a decade. Testifying on the issue before the Financial Services Committee on Tuesday, she tried a new approach: peer pressure. 'One last thing I'll leave you with: The state of Arkansas, in March, just passed a comprehensive [cognitive rehabilitation therapy] bill. And if Arkansas can do it, I'm absolutely positive Massachusetts will be doing it soon,' the Holden Republican said, drawing chuckles from the committee and attendees. The legislation Ferguson pitched (H 1151 / S 742) would extend Group Insurance Commission and commercial health insurance coverage for cognitive rehabilitation therapy to people with an acquired brain injury, which Ferguson said could range from a severe concussion to a traumatic brain injury sustained in a car crash. 'This bill is, now more than ever, critical to get passed so that we can require the coverage for CRT, cognitive rehab therapy, for these patients. And it also will help their families and caregivers as well,' Ferguson, who worked as a speech pathologist with people who had acquired brain injuries, said. 'And as we know, early intervention is key to get these skills back and help folks recover as best as they can.' Ferguson said expanding access to CRT in cases of acquired brain injury was one of the unanimously-supported recommendations of the state's Brain Injury Commission that dates back to at least fiscal year 2011. That group's 2021 report said the Center for Health Information and Analysis analyzed a previous version of Ferguson's bill and found that the impact on the typical member's monthly health insurance premium would be between 1 cent and 19 cents, or an average cost of 8 cents per month. The idea has cleared the Financial Services Committee in each of the last four sessions and has twice (the 2017-18 and 2021-22 sessions) been reported favorably out of the Health Care Financing Committee, according to a committee bill summary. But it has not been debated in either branch. It is likely in line for another favorable report from Financial Services — co-chair Sen. Paul Feeney sponsored the Senate version of the legislation and said Tuesday he's hopeful that 'we get enough momentum to get it over the finish line' this time around. Resistance has come from the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans, whose leader voiced her opposition to the insurance mandate earlier this year, warning it would raise costs for consumers and small businesses. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
