State Employees Group Benefits Act Modifications

Statutory Revision Committee. The 'State Employees Group Benefits Act' (act) authorizes the state personnel director (director) to enter into contracts with carriers to provide medical, dental, life, and disability benefits to state employees. The bill modifies several provisions of the act to bring it into compliance with current state and federal law and to eliminate obsolete provisions. Specifically, the bill: To bring the act into compliance with federal law, changes the definition of 'dependent' to include a child through the end of the month in which the child turns 26, eliminates the requirement that a child be a full-time student to be a dependent past the age of 19, eliminates the requirement that a child be unmarried to be a dependent, and eliminates the requirement that the employee be the major source of financial support or directed by a court to provide coverage for a child to be a dependent; Removes an employee's domestic partner from the definition of 'dependent' as the director has repealed rules allowing a person to submit documentation demonstrating a domestic partnership with an employee; Removes a reference to lifetime maximum benefit per employee or employee's covered dependents to bring the act into compliance with federal law; Eliminates a provision requiring the director to give written notice of intent to seek a contract with insurance carriers, and authorizes the director to make such announcement in a manner that he or she determines; Eliminates an obsolete provision that required the director to evaluate the feasibility of offering a high deductible health plan and to forward the findings of the evaluation to the general assembly by October 1, 2004; Eliminates an obsolete provision that specified the amount of the state's contribution for each employee enrolled in group benefit plans for the 2003 calendar year; and Eliminates a requirement that the director hold a public hearing prior to the acceptance of any proposal for a group benefit plan, as this requirement is not in compliance with the 'Procurement Code'.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.) , Read More