California Proposes Landmark Bill to Change Health Insurance Treatment Decisions

SACRAMENTO, California – A newly proposed California ballot initiative aims to transform the role of insurance companies in medical treatment decisions. Named after Luigi Mangione, who is accused of killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Andrew Witty, the initiative seeks to prevent insurers from delaying or denying treatments recommended by licensed physicians.

The initiative was recently submitted to the California Attorney General’s Office and would make it illegal for insurance companies to alter any medical procedure or medication recommended by a physician if such alterations could lead to severe consequences, including disability or death. Under the proposal, only licensed physicians acting on an insurer’s behalf would have the authority to make treatment decisions.

Furthermore, the initiative proposes to criminalize the use of non-physicians in the review process of physician-recommended treatments, imposing felony charges for those employed in such roles. If enacted, insurers would need to demonstrate, with “clear and convincing evidence,” that any delayed treatment was unnecessary and would not result in further harm.

This initiative would also empower Californians to sue insurers for damages, allowing for attorney fees and treble damages—three times the jury-determined actual damages. This could provide patients with greater legal recourse against insurance companies.

The public comment period for the initiative will remain open until April 25, giving Californians an opportunity to voice their opinions. After the review, the Attorney General’s Office will finalize the initiative’s title and prepare for the signature collection process needed to qualify it for the ballot.

The proposed measure comes in response to increased scrutiny of the insurance industry following the murder of Andrew Witty. Mangione’s alleged actions are believed to stem from frustration with insurance companies denying critical medical care, igniting a heated debate around the accountability of insurers.

Supporters of the initiative contend that it could reclaim medical decisions from corporate administrators, ensuring that care remains focused on patient health. Dr. Emily Wright, a physician and advocate for the initiative, stated, “No one should experience life-altering consequences due to insurance company policies. This measure would preserve the integrity of medical decisions.”

Conversely, some critics warn that this initiative may lead to significant increases in insurance costs and a surge in litigation. The California Association of Health Plans has raised concerns that such changes could pressure the state’s healthcare system. “While we all want to protect patient care, we also have to consider the implications this could have on premiums and accessibility,” said spokesperson Mark Thompson.

As the public comment period unfolds, the debate surrounding the initiative is poised to intensify among healthcare professionals, insurance representatives, and patient advocacy groups. If enough support materializes, Californians could potentially have the opportunity to vote on one of the most substantial healthcare reforms in the state’s history.