Some States Lag In Health Law Implementation Efforts

The Washington Post reports that states are progressing at a slow pace — either because of political or practical issues — and the federal government may take on a bigger role as a result. Meanwhile, The New York Times offers a surprising tale of how implementation efforts in New York are facing a GOP revolt, despite the state's popular Democratic governor and large number of uninsured residents. Also, Oklahoma's congressional delegation backs the state's request for a waiver from the health overhaul's MLR requirement.

The Washington Post: As States Lag In Implementing Health Care Law, Bigger Federal Role Looks Likely
Across the country, states are lagging in preparations to erect the health insurance market-places at the heart of the 2010 health care overhaul, bogged down by a combination of partisan hostility and practical hurdles. Faced with the delay, administration officials have been ramping up talks with state leaders in recent weeks over ways the federal government could pitch in without having to completely take over — speaking both informally and at a series of regional meetings underway (Aizenman, 9/10).

The New York Times: GOP Senators In Albany Block Federal Aid To Fulfill Part Of Health Law
With 2.6 million uninsured residents, a popular Democratic governor and tens of millions of federal dollars at stake, New York would seem to be one of the least likely states to join a growing revolt in the nation's capitals against facilitating a federal overhaul of health care (Kaplan, 9/11).

The Hill: Oklahoma Delegation Back State's Request For Health Care Waiver
Oklahoma's entire congressional delegation on Friday urged the Health and Human Services Department to accept the state's request for a waiver from part of the health care reform law. Lawmakers lent their support to Oklahoma's request for an adjustment in new medical loss ratio (MLR) standards. The health care law requires plans in the individual market to achieve an 80 percent loss ratio, meaning they must spend 80 percent of their premiums on medical costs. But states can ask HHS to phase in that standard if adopting immediately would destabilize their markets (Baker, 9/9).