By Guy Page
Governor Phil Scott on June 16 signed a slew of bills into law but vetoed a bill meant to impose price controls on hospitals.
Scott returned without his signature and vetoed S.190, reference-based pricing and the Green Mountain Care Board. In his letter to the Legislature, Scott disputes the claim by advocates of the bill that it would deliver broadbased healthcare savings. Reference-based pricing is a term used to describe set, mandatory costs of specific hospital services. At present, hospitals determine their own, differing amounts for essentially the same services.
“Advocates for this bill have claimed it would generate significant healthcare savings,” Scott said. “According to analysis by the Department of Financial Regulation, those claims do not hold up. The GMCB has authority to control or reduce hospital prices and revenue, so this bill is unnecessary to achieve both.”
Scott signed into law:
- H.211, data brokers and personal information
- H.294, telecommunications services and wages in correctional facilities
- H.642, youthful offender proceedings
- H.648, banking, insurance, and securities
- H.660, fiscal year 2027 Opioid Abatement Special Fund and Substance Misuse Prevention Special Fund appropriations
- H.938, establishing the Vermont Homelessness Response Continuum
- H.951, making appropriations for the support of the government
- S.71, consumer data privacy and online surveillance
- S.189, establishing a process for the elimination of certain hospital services
- S.193, establishing a forensic facility for certain criminal justice-involved persons
- S.198, the regulation of tobacco products and tobacco substitutes
- S.202, plug-in photovoltaic devices
- S.209, prohibiting civil arrest in sensitive locations
- S.243, distributing funds to the Vermont Language Justice Project
- S.325, regional planning and Act 250 Tier jurisdiction
- S.326, miscellaneous amendments to laws relating to motor vehicles
Regarding his veto of S.190, Scott sent the following letter to the General Assembly:
Pursuant to Chapter II, Section 11 of the Vermont Constitution, I’m returning unsigned and without my approval, in the time permitted by the Constitution, S.190, reference-based pricing and the Green Mountain Care Board.
All Vermonters are impacted by Vermont’s health insurance costs – individuals, small and large businesses, public employee plans, and non-profits – and the Legislature must focus on system-wide savings for all, consistent with the GMCB’s statutory purpose. By vetoing S.190, the savings generated by the Board’s 2027 hospital revenue reductions will apply to all Vermonters paying for insurance, including those few who benefit from the passage of this bill.
This basic concern for fairness is the primary reason for this veto. Title 18 VSA 9372 clearly expresses the purpose of the Green Mountain Care Board (GMCB) in five succinct points. This bill is at odds with two of them. First, the law plainly states that reductions should apply “across all payers.” Second, it calls for “achieving administrative simplification in healthcare financing and delivery.” Yet this bill would exclude most payers from the affordability gains achieved in FY2027 and, in doing so, add unnecessary complexity, inequity, and cost.
Advocates for this bill have claimed it would generate significant healthcare savings. According to analysis by the Department of Financial Regulation, those claims do not hold up. The GMCB has authority to control or reduce hospital prices and revenue, so this bill is unnecessary to achieve both and Act 68 of 2025, the bipartisan bill I signed last year, already codified Reference Based Pricing.
Last year, for example, the Board reduced hospital revenues by nearly $100 million and expressed those savings in lower insurance rate increases. This year, its guidance calls for an additional $40 million in revenue reduction. I urge the GMCB to follow-through with that policy and generate the same level of savings it otherwise would have achieved while ensuring those savings benefit all payers. They should also be cognizant of the concerns our rural, critical access hospitals have raised, several of which are opposed to S.190.
It’s important for Vermonters to know that broader and meaningful healthcare affordability reforms were offered to the Legislature this session. My administration proposed a comprehensive package through H.585 and supported multiple efforts by the minority to advance these reforms through other legislation. These proposals included proven approaches that expanded affordable choices in other states. Organizations representing many of Vermont’s small and independent businesses described H.585 as “…a sweeping package (H.585) to improve affordable health coverage options …” and recognized it as a “serious attempt at health insurance reform.” Yet these proposals – and the concerns of Vermont’s small businesses – were largely ignored by the legislative majority. We also supported the proposal from the Vermont School Boards Association, which they advocated would have lowered VEHI healthcare costs and thus property tax pressure. Unfortunately, this proposal was also rejected by the majority in Legislature.
While reasonable people may disagree on the best path forward, Vermont will not solve its affordability crisis by directing savings to some payers while excluding others. Lasting progress will require structural reforms that expand affordability, increase choices, and ensure savings are shared broadly across the system. For these reasons, I intend to advance several key provisions of H.585 through executive action. The remaining changes will require a more moderate Legislature willing to move beyond the policies and politics of the past (see failed single payer and some of what was left behind).
Vermonters need quality healthcare and affordable insurance options. Rising costs are putting pressure on patients, providers, hospitals, employers, and taxpayers alike. Our focus must remain on delivering improvements to everyone paying into the system. By vetoing S.190, the savings generated by the GMCB’s revenue reductions can be applied fairly and consistently across all Vermonters paying for health insurance, including those the bill sought to unfairly favor.
The post Scott vetoes hospital cost control bill first appeared on Vermont Daily Chronicle.
The post Scott vetoes hospital cost control bill appeared first on Vermont Daily Chronicle.
