6 California Insurance Bills That Could Change Privacy, Underwriting & Coverage

Aaron (00:00) Hello everybody and welcome to the Speaking of Insurance podcast. My name is Aaron Bollinger. Brian Bollinger (00:04) And I'm Brian Bollinger. Aaron (00:06) Today is our most exciting podcast yet. We're gonna be talking about six pending bills that are hopefully going to improve privacy protection and other things in terms of insurance underwriting. I know last podcast was enthralling and so exciting with the smoke related legislature and claims handling legislature. I feel like those are actually very beneficial. I feel like some of the things today are gonna uncover some of the problems with recent insurance company underwriting and and some things and some holes that Aaron (00:35) That we're gonna uncover here. Are you are you excited for this, Dad? Six bills? Brian Bollinger (00:39) Six bills, let's rock it out, man. People want to get through this quickly. I mean, the first one was that privacy one you talked about. The fact that those laws allegedly haven't been updated in 40 years. I'd be surprised if that's actually true. I think that there's been, you know, nibbles here and there. it's possible they're trying to completely reform it for the 21st century. now that it's, you know, what, 2026. it's good to, you know, update the fact that we're no longer using probably fax machines and emails exist, maybe social media. Brian Bollinger (01:09) I mean, maybe they've actually added in some some language about that. I don't know. I mean, it'd be interesting to see what they're actually going to be able to accomplish. Aaron (01:17) And the honest truth is that insurance companies do require, for good reason in most cases, a lot of information, personal information about you, credit scores, date of birth, some of the time SSN, depending on if it's workers' compensation, for underwriting your insurance. And that's just a natural part of it. And you had something you want to say. Brian Bollinger (01:36) Yeah, I think the way to think about it is they're trying to assess the risk and anything that they can use to get a little bit of an advantage in terms of selecting better clients will help lower the premiums for everybody, I think is what they're claiming. I think obviously if you're one of people that are being surcharged because of some of this data out there, I could see where you wouldn't be as excited. I know we talked about this thing in past episodes about some of the telematics being used in vehicles to try to track people's driving performances and trying to correlate that back. Brian Bollinger (02:05) Or even tracking your mileage and having you pay by mile on your insurance rates as you drive. I mean, there's so many different factors. Aaron (02:13) lot of different factors and one of them obviously you'd mentioned is the privacy laws the actual legislature behind it that is kind of driving that level of information that they're able to collect on you. And so it really poses the question how much information should an insurer reasonably be allowed to collect to place and give you a a price? And and that that's a really interesting question because like there is no, you know, hard line in the sand in terms of the underwriting data. Aaron (02:42) an invasive data collection that insurance companies can do. And so, like what happens if they're starting to do AI underwriting and they're using a third party to, you know, I don't know, collect, you know, drone images or this and that and do, you know, third-party inspection reports and and have it be virtual. And then they see things in the home and then, you know, they flag those or or they collect some information, they find, dig some dirt up on you. it really gets tricky, especially with the the usage of AI underwriting and aerial imagery. Aaron (03:12) How much information these insurance companies are able to currently collect on you. And so hopefully this bill will give us a little bit more clarity of where that line in the sand is. Because again, for the longest time, it's just you just answer whatever the insurance company wants. And hopefully that there'll be, I mean, because with health insurance, there's HIPAA, there's specific, you know, regulations that your insurance broker has to, has to go through to, you know. Aaron (03:35) I don't know, comply. And so it should be the same thing with insurance companies placing any type of insurance. There should be an understanding of the maximum or where they can't go, you know, like because we've been operating in that gray zone for su gray zone for such a long time. Brian Bollinger (03:49) Yeah, they used to be accused of redlining like certain areas. You know, you were in a poor neighborhood, they didn't want to have you. You were here, you were there. I mean, now we're seeing that with the brush maps. I feel like it's not necessarily that exact. we're also seeing it indirectly, right, with the business the updates on these buildings, right? Some of these buildings are fifty, a hundred years old, and you know, the updates on them are questionable. And the insurance companies don't want to give them full replacement costs or they want to surcharge them. again, it's Brian Bollinger (04:16) Some of these things actuarially make sense, right? You have to be able to underwrite the risk effectively. So I kind of see what the insurance companies are doing, but there's also a point at which more data is not necessarily better data on the consumer. and it does start to violate their, you know, their privacy, right? Do you want them to have your, you know, your camera on your phone, you know, tracking where you've been and and looking at what you're having for dinner or looking at every, you know, receipt for groceries or dinner that you've had? And I mean, again, it it all gets into this idea of what is a Brian Bollinger (04:45) reasonable amount of information to collect, what's unreasonable, and are they reselling it? Like is there some other thing going on here? how is it actually being used? I think that's the other big concern that people have and rightfully so. Aaron (04:59) want 100%. And so like how it's being used and who is it being used by? You know, like it it's not just like a they're selling it to these third parties. How much is this is this being collected? You know what I mean? Like actually stored. And how much of because I mean you see these hacks happening all the time with, you know, these cybersecurity events and whatnot. Your information is is there. It's being stored. How much of it is Brian Bollinger (05:22) Did you did you guys did Brian Bollinger (05:23) you see the the news article this week, I think yesterday or something? I think it was a hundred and fifty-three million driver's license images are on the internet or something right now. It's like some astronomical data. That's your your your you know, driver's license number for your state, Aaron (05:34) Crazy. Brian Bollinger (05:36) that's your date of birth, that's your home address, right? Your height, your weight, I mean your eye color, I mean your hair color, your image. Aaron (05:42) And I mean, Aaron (05:43) you you gotta wait in the line of the DMV for like five hours to get that thing. I don't know how on earth they messed that up, but you know, I mean, obviously to those of you who have had your identity you know, I don't know, taken or, you know, stolen. Wait, you got the story. Brian Bollinger (05:57) You were it was someone from you back Brian Bollinger (05:58) in the day. Yours yours has been I think you're actually working in Florida right now. You I think you were seven and you had a job in Florida. I don't if you knew that, son, but yeah. Aaron (06:06) I'm I'm I'm Aaron (06:06) a hard worker, man. I mean I'm I'm Cali born and bred, but you know, I've I've got a I've got a twin over there in Florida that you know, gets me some some passive income, you know, does does the work on my behalf. Brian Bollinger (06:15) No, that's not actually Brian Bollinger (06:16) true, IRS. that's not accurate. but no, your your identity was stolen a long time ago. it was a health insurance company breach or some sort of, you know, third party building service or one of these clearing houses for the claims. So again, Aaron (06:29) Yeah. Brian Bollinger (06:29) most people's information is out there. Aaron (06:31) E even if you use Duck DuckGo folks, I mean my my dad does his best. If you search up Brian Bollinger don't, you will find his address. That's just how the internet works now, though. I mean, it's information's everywhere. You don't know where it comes from. That's one of the big problems with it. And so we're we're just trying to obviously, with this new legislature, get these things pushed through and hopefully draw that line in the sand and eliminate that gray zone and make it just black and white because you know that that's what people deserve is especially in insurance where there's so much information being collected. Aaron (06:59) Understanding where where that information's going and how how much they're actually allowed to collect. let's let's go on to the next one. So I I was talking briefly about who is collecting the in the data. It's the insurance company. And so these insurance companies, not all of them are the best. I mean, not all of them the greatest, obviously. All of them abide by specific rules and regulations, some of them more than others. this this new law, SB1209, it does offer stronger enforcement tools when an insurer fails to complete corrective actions identified through. Aaron (07:28) Examinations that are now being you know more heavily utilized. So basically the Department of Insurance performs a lot of financial and market conducting examinations on these insurance companies that are allowed to write insurance in your states or in your state. And one of the big problems is that they don't have a lot of actual tools to enforce regulations. Aaron (07:53) To maybe excess insurance companies, maybe insurance companies that are really big in the state, because if they do, then you know there could be some consequences of those actions, ripple effects to the insureds. And so now they're actually creating compliance timelines. they also mentioned an order to show clause process and potential penalties for the insurance companies. So insurance companies are basically gonna be put on a timeline of listen, you've got to comply with X, Y, and Z. Aaron (08:21) to make sure that probably this connects to the privacy information and also to their pricing. this one sounds obviously incredibly bureaucratic. the concept is actually probably pretty interesting to yeah. Brian Bollinger (08:31) And that's always the fear, right? The Brian Bollinger (08:33) fear is more laws are not necessarily better laws. I think that's one thing to keep in mind. I was talking to that attorney yesterday, and one of the things he also mentioned was not only is the law living and always evolving, but these regulations, right, are subject to interpretation. You know, these the insurance companies get to interpret them, the DOI gets to interpret them, and then eventually the courts get to rule out what they actually mean. And along that journey can be a very complicated process, long drawn out. Brian Bollinger (08:59) And it's possible it won't actually give us the results that we need to want. So I don't know. I'm kind of a keep it simple, smiling kind of a person and don't complicate things unnecessarily. Aaron (09:09) One hundred percent. And regulation is nothing without enforcement. I mean, you can say there's a curfew of X, you know, hours and and it's not enforced, people aren't gonna abide by it. It's the same thing with insurance companies. I mean, they they're always looking out for themselves. I mean, that's that's just the truth. they're they have profit margins, people to appease, reinsurance companies to satisfy. And, you know, the the insureds do come secondary to to that. I mean they that's why they're Brian Bollinger (09:33) Well, it's a part Brian Bollinger (09:33) of it, right? Again, they've got a fiduciary due to their shareholders, right? They they can actually go to jail if they don't make money for the for their shareholders, right? I mean, that's one of the things that they can't think about. there are mutual insurance companies that kind of everybody shares in the profits of in the event that there is a profit. so it just kind of all depends, right? How to how to think about that. but no, I totally agree with you. it's always a fear that these insurance companies, they their marketing says that they put the the client or the insured first. And then when it actually Brian Bollinger (10:00) push comes to shove and the claims handling process, I think you really see reality. And I think there's a disconnect sometimes between marketing and claims. and I think that's pretty apparent to anybody who's gone through the process. and again, it's it's it's just that's part of the process. I don't see a way to fix that easily. again, we do our best to make sure the insurance companies do what they say they're going to do for our clients. And then we just try to, you know, help people through the process. Aaron (10:26) Hundred percent. And hopefully, again, like these pieces of legislature and these bills are gonna be a net positive in terms of the regulations. And obviously, like you said, state involvement isn't always a positive thing. You know, I mean you you don't want, you know, more state taxes, you don't want more state regulations necessarily, but where it is applicable and beneficial, you do want it there. And especially with these insurance companies. Aaron (10:52) I think it could be a positive thing because I mean you don't want it to have to, you know, the responsibly be on the people to hold these insurance companies accountable. That that's not right. so the state's hopefully gonna be doing some of that with with these new regulations. next one is SB one two zero six. So yesterday we had an ongoing joke about the year you were born, dad. So one two zero six. Brian Bollinger (11:12) We're not gonna Brian Bollinger (11:13) go that down that path. That's a little bit too old even. So any rate. so Aaron (11:16) Okay, well well Aaron (11:17) y w wh how was insurance back then, do you think? In twelve twelve six? Brian Bollinger (11:21) You know what's interesting Brian Bollinger (11:22) is, you know, the the foundation of insurance, they said was Lloyd's a London, right? It got to be people signing up for how much they wanted to be on the hook for for, you know, ships being covered when they went out to sea. 'cause again, if you owned a ship and it was gonna be destroyed, it'd be nice to have partners, you know, in that to help you rebuild a new ship if yours got destroyed or lost at sea. Brian Bollinger (11:43) So or if the cargo got destroyed or lost at sea. So it was kind of a good idea. I think it's built out from ocean marine to, you know, inland marine to buildings to properties to earthquake to so many liability things that probably didn't exist, you know, a hundred, two hundred years ago. but again, it's an interesting kind of a thought process. What would what would happen if we didn't have insurance? I mean, I think there's a lot of projects, a lot of buildings, a lot of things probably wouldn't get done. Kinda like if there weren't banks, you know, lending money, it'd be very hard to do some of these bigger projects that we do. Aaron (12:15) You might be the world's biggest supporter of insurance. I I know that a lot of people obviously have their critiques on it. I know that you do as well. but I hope that we can all agree that as a positive, it is better to have somebody else pay for catastrophic events than ourselves out of our own pockets. And that's one of the reasons why why we do support it. the 1206, like you say, it started in Lloyd's Alon, and I I bet that there were, you know, shared risk pools and things like that before, of course. I mean Aaron (12:41) like leveraging bets against specific events happening. I mean all those things can be considered as as insurance. but this this one is the least glamorous bill out of the ten. This is just the Department of Insurance annual cleanup and update bill. And so it basically like it it's it's the the annual Brian Bollinger (13:00) Do they have to shred their files and and wash their cars or something or windows or what is it what is it specifically? Aaron (13:04) software Aaron (13:05) Annual software update, like small changes about California's insurance regulatory system and how it operates. and so I I wanted to ask you, why do you think that this is an annual update in terms of like their own regulations? And why do you think that the privacy laws haven't been updated, supposedly, like in terms of you know big legislature changes in over 40 years? But the CADOI has an annual update. Brian Bollinger (13:30) Yeah, I think there's a lot of tweaking going on. I think it's very hard to go through and truly reform things at a government level. I think there's a lot of established precedent that's there. it's hard for even, you know, you think about it, they might have 300 insurance companies the CA DOI is regulating, and there might be 20 or 30 different lines of business within those companies. You know, you've got a huge data set there of of what you're trying to regulate and manage. you know, everything that's an emitted company. Brian Bollinger (14:00) Those rate increases usually are reviewed by the C California's Department of Insurance before they can be approved. it's very, you know, burdensome for the insurance companies to even compile the data required to get the CADOI to even consider making these changes. And so I can see where they need to clean things up. I can see why they have to do it incrementally. I just think it's so bureaucratic and so much information, so much data, so much track history. Brian Bollinger (14:27) I just don't think you can, you know, dry erase it and and draw something new on the board if if you do that right, you're gonna have a bunch of revisions to it. So I I can see these little tweaks here and there, clarifying positions and what needs to be done. Aaron (14:40) And I I again I think it's cool that the insurance you know of California has their annual checkup. I think that every every company, I think that every piece of you know governmental legislature should take a look at itself every year and and make sure that everything is updated to the the ongoing risks. And so I think that the the privacy laws could also use maybe some of that fine-tuning of that that update. I don't know if mom's calling you, she just called me. She I think she's just in the car or something, but we are going to Hawaii, guys. So there was last podcast, there was a a big Brian Bollinger (15:10) We're not saying when Aaron (15:10) Sad. Brian Bollinger (15:11) though, because we want people to, you know, burglarize our home or or anything like that, right? I mean that's Aaron (15:14) We we are going next week. We will be in Maui. Aaron (15:18) And so if you guys decide to crash the party, at least at least let us Brian Bollinger (15:22) yeah, if you're in Maui, Brian Bollinger (15:23) let's connect. Let's do dinner, you know, or something. Lunch, you know, or surf. I can't surf. Aaron (15:26) Okay. I d I don't know. I don't know if you wanna Aaron (15:28) hang out with our family. We're we're a little bit weird. I I mean we're we're doing a podcast about insurance. I don't know if that's but if you're listening, then maybe you're maybe you're just like us, you know? but anyways, anyways, we we digress. The Brian Bollinger (15:39) But I doubt it. I truly doubt. Aaron (15:41) the next one the next one I think our family could use. It's the genetic testing and life disability insurance regulation, A B one seven nine eight. I I feel like we could use some genetic testing. There's gotta be something wrong with us talking about insurance all day bad. Brian Bollinger (15:56) It's the problem with genetic testing, it's only useful if you can fix it, right? If it just says you got a problem, you know, that's not really all that helpful. And I know that insurance companies are looking at certain genes, right? Certain lipids, certain fats you have in your body, LDL, HDL, all that kind of crazy stuff. But there's like some sort of super fat they're worried about that's linked to cardiac disease. obviously Aaron (16:17) Yeah. Brian Bollinger (16:19) men, there's prostate issues. I mean, there's just tons of tons of things that could be, you know, linked to genetics. Aaron (16:25) Yes, one 100%. And so that this actually has a direct correlation to exactly what you were saying. So this actually involves what the insurance company can do with asymptomatic consumers for underwriting. And so the CADOI framed the issue around allowing people to obtain genetic testing for health purposes without fearing the information will later be used against them when they're filing or applying for life and disability insurance. And so, like I'll pose this question to you. See the dogs in the background. They they 100% agree that this is a big thing. Brian Bollinger (16:52) They're worried Brian Bollinger (16:53) about genetic testing. I get it. I mean too. Aaron (16:55) Yes, there would be some underlying issues, I'm sure, that would be exposed for both of those dogs. one of them is the most anxious creature probably on earth. Like you you take a step, you put your foot down, you do a little stomp, and she'll start barking at you and do the little like cat down thing. But she's crazy. The other one is just like a a ball of joy and love. but she's big, like big, like a ball. But anyways, anyways, if you're completely healthy, Brian. Aaron (17:20) But you take a genetic test that says you have a higher probability of developing a disease decades from now, should a life insurance company should be able to use do you think they should be able to use that information to charge you or decline you? Or do you think that that's unfair? Brian Bollinger (17:33) I don't think they should. Like my personal view is, you know, their data sets are based on, you know, huge amounts of data, right? A hundred years of life and health and and death and rates, mortality rates, morbidity rates. They've got a bunch of data out there, right? Their data set does not include genet testing. There's not a, you know, long track record. one of the issues too with data, I don't know if we've talked about this, we can geek out a little bit, correlation versus causation. being correlated with, you know, adverse outcome is one thing. Brian Bollinger (18:04) causing it is something else, right? So a lot of times your genetic defects or your genetic issues you have, most people have at least one or many like me. but the point being that, you know, they really come out through lifestyle choices, right? So, you know, if you're a heavy drinker, heavy smoker, or let's say you're, you know, private pilot, like life insurance wise, private pilots and small aircrafts, right? Those go down pretty regularly, especially helicopters, that kind of stuff, right? There's certain things that just Brian Bollinger (18:33) Have a higher risk profile that are lifestyle based. And so so far, historically, life insurance has been mostly underwritten under lifestyle bases and data that they can actually test in your blood to see your current health condition. They look back in your health file that you know if you've been diagnosed with cancer, if your family history has a lot of cancer or heart attacks, whatever. They they try to create a risk model that way. And again, it's it's not complete data. Brian Bollinger (19:01) it's correlation, right? It's not complete causation. and underwriting is also an art, right? It's not a science. the archeries might might argue with me, but they're looking at large data sets, they're trying to create a price that makes sense. And thank God there's more than one insurance company out there, right? You get five or six companies competing, you're probably gonna get a pretty decent price when it comes to your personal risk profile. Aaron (19:25) Yeah, one one can hope, obviously, for all these people. I I a hundred percent agree that it's it gets really difficult, but then again, it comes down to insurance companies make their money by predicting risk. So they price according to risk, they estimate potential exposures, and they evaluate based off of that and determine eligibility and pricing if you are eligible. Aaron (19:45) So I think it's it's a very tricky double-edged sword in terms of you either have the insurance companies potentially losing catastrophic amounts of money and then eventually having to go out and not being able to insure anybody. And then you have the other end where the people are getting declined everywhere and nobody's able to get that level of insurance with a with a good or reputable insurance company. And so I feel like again, this is where state regulation and involvement and potential helping and easing along in the process with these sort of of pieces of legislature can again identify. Aaron (20:15) That gray zone, determine eligibility requirements, and I don't know, just just properly coordinate with the insurance companies what they can use, which is what all of these things are kind of getting at. I know you have something to say, but we we do have to get on to next one. AB2011. So I feel like this you you might look like a 15-year-old dad. I mean, no, that actually that sounds really weird. okay, this this is the Brian Bollinger (20:36) No. Yeah, let's not say that. Aaron (20:38) Behavioral Health Parity Protection Act. How does that sound? Brian Bollinger (20:41) act like a fifteen year old sometimes, Brian Bollinger (20:43) maybe not as smart as my age. But we all we all want to be forever young. So what did it say there? Aaron (20:48) Okay, okay. Aaron (20:50) So so wow. So you're you're you're on the forever young sort of thing. AB two zero one one would place certain federal mental health parity and addiction equity act regulations into California law. Aaron (21:02) And so the goal of this would be to preserve protections for mental health and substance substance use disorder treatment, even if the corresponding federal rules change in the future. So I guess this would kind of just bolster down, nail down the the underlying requirements in terms of you know mental health and substance use disorder treatment for insurance. Brian Bollinger (21:19) Yeah, mental health parity and Brian Bollinger (21:21) substance abuse parity. I mean, these are, you know, pretty important things, right? I mean, a lot of our friends and people we know, either, you know, relatives, a bunch of people suffer. Brian Bollinger (21:30) through this, right? We've got business partners that have had fam members suffer. We've had, you know, fam members that have suffered from addiction, for example. you know, the the the meth epidemic that we've had the last couple decades has been horrific, right? It's decimated a lot of the young population. I know even like in in your high school, right, you had a a colleague in your class have a you know unfortunate episode and that was horrible by Aaron (21:52) C a colleague. Aaron (21:54) Yeah. So it it was a I don't want to talk too much into detail, but it it was a a nice gentleman on the baseball team, overdosed. And so he was in our class. I I was a I knew him in the ninth grade. things like that are very serious. I don't know if that was directly mental health correlated, but young people who do have to get or do feel like they have to start drugs are are most of the time obviously struggling with something. Yeah. Brian Bollinger (22:15) Self medicating. Yeah, they're usually self medicating, Brian Bollinger (22:17) right? And so I think the biggest thing, you know, mom, you know, she's a social worker, right? So, you know, her her whole, you know, bent on that area is we need to get early treatment to people, right, before they actually have the addiction form and try to do prevention. Aaron (22:31) Yeah. Yeah. So I I mean, obviously we don't want to get too much into the personal aspects of our life and our own experiences, but it is good to to understand that level of risk. you know, obviously everybody's dealing with something and hopefully it doesn't result in that. But a question to you going back hopefully a little bit to insurance. So we we've all seen policies that technically cover something, right? but actually assessing the benefit can be difficult of, you know, the payout, the claim and whatnot. Aaron (22:56) is mental health insurance increasingly an access problem rather than a coverage problem? Do you do you think it's like a coverage issue or do you think it's people are just Brian Bollinger (23:05) Yeah, I think I think what's Brian Bollinger (23:06) happened historically, right, is that, you know, you get a broken leg or a broken arm or you get an MRI and you can see a dislocation and they can physically go in there and do surgery. I think that as a society we're very physical based. I think mental, spiritual, psychological, these kinds of things are much more difficult to to diagnose, treat, prevent. I don't know about cure. Cure may not be a possibility. Brian Bollinger (23:32) But again, a lot of people are suffering from, you know, various levels of of disability in this regard. and it's it's very traumatic for families and for people. it's it's it's a hidden cost, right? I think I think what's happening is the insurance companies have the regulations, the federal level. It's it's on their policies, they give you the 10, 20 treatments a year, whatever it is. there are the organizations, you know, AA and all the other ones. Brian Bollinger (24:00) That are available for certain people with substance disorders. but the the point being is there's not a lot of actual treatment going on. And I've even heard stories from you know professionals that have said certain insurance companies historically have a history of of limiting treatment. like we'll authorize three visits, but after the fourth one, like they have to be institutionalized or there has to be something really wrong with them. and so I think that's the issue, right? It's like these regulations are there, there's subject interpretation. Brian Bollinger (24:28) and again, insurance. If you if you go too far to the other extreme, so I'm gonna play the other side of this, right? If everybody can go see everybody, you know, as many times as they need or want, right, that drives up the insurance premiums and costs and claims costs. So ultimately we pay more for the insurance. On the other side, if you don't get any treatment at all, right, that drains that drives up the severity of these issues for people, which also drives up the cost. So I think the challenge is the regulations need to be somewhere in the middle. Brian Bollinger (24:55) They need to address a reasonable level of of you know human suffering and help people get the tools they need, hopefully on a fairly cost effective basis. And the second part of that is, you know, without i if the you do need a little extra help, right? There needs to be a little bit more of a safety net through the insurance carriers. and I do think that it's it's lacking from you know clients and and people we've talked to for the last couple of decades, historically underserved, underutilized, and and doesn't have enough staff. Brian Bollinger (25:24) to actually do the services that need to be done. Aaron (25:29) Hundred percent. Aaron (25:31) Sorry if you can hear that helicopter. We we live in a city over here. So you know, a bunch of stuff's going down. one one thing that that is a big issue in the United States of America, and I'm sure worldwide as well, is access to long-acting injectable HIV prep. And so SB1023 helps to address that. It's another one of those gray areas that insurance policies have. and it's unsure what side of the insurance policy pays for it. It it can technically be an insured benefit, but it can still be definitely very difficult. Aaron (26:01) access. so this would require health insurers and health plans to cover long-acting injectable HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, probably just butchered that, but it's also known as prep under both medical and prescription drug benefits. So that that sounds like a big thing, doesn't it, Dad? I mean, the purpose is to make it easier for community clinics and smaller providers to Brian Bollinger (26:24) It this is one of those Brian Bollinger (26:25) things that honestly I think we all want to just say yes to. I think the challenge with some of these things gets into the drug cost, right? Of all of the costs that are driving up health insurance premiums in the country, the biggest increases have been in the drug area. I mean, even some of the generic drugs have gone up three hundred, five hundred, a thousand. I mean, I've heard numbers that are like ten thousand percent. I don't know if all those are true, mind you. But but more likely than not, there is truth here. So I do get concerned that that Brian Bollinger (26:54) Things like this, if it was 20 bucks, you know, maybe you should pay for it yourself. If it's covered under the insurance company, there is the potential this could become like a thousand dollar a month injectable. you know, like the GLP ones, like that's a big area too. you know, people are taking the weight loss drugs, and that's great. it's also great there's been competition now and the pricing's been driven down so much on them that the people that need them should be able to afford them. I think that's the intent of this. Brian Bollinger (27:22) I don't know how it will actually work. you know, I don't know what the capacity on the manufacturing of this stuff is, what the costs are. You know, it's it's a big question. Aaron (27:30) It is a really interesting question. This this helps I guess kind of determine that both prescription and medical benefits are being coordinated properly in terms of the the paying for prep. And so both both of them would do it. And so I I think that this kind of underscores potential duplication problem in terms of what covers what. And so consumers really don't care whether something is billed as a medical or pharmacy benefit, I don't think. I think that they just want it covered. Aaron (27:57) So do you do you think that behind the scenes these level of or this level of insurance, you know, this way, that way, different optionalities, different coverages has gotten too complicated? Because again, it's that that's that sounds like a like a duplication issue where both are covering the same thing. Brian Bollinger (28:15) Yeah, these policies, right, that we review with our clients and and our clients' employees and even for our own friends and family and colleagues, it's very complicated, right? These insurance companies are trying to create price points. so the bronze, the silver, the gold, the platinum, you know, they're trying to create these tiers of coverage. And some of it's regulated at the federal level what the deductibles will be for health care. So, like certain medical things have a larger deductible. preventative care, some instance doesn't have a deductible. Brian Bollinger (28:43) You know, you've got the drug coverages that sometimes have their own separate deductible and they even have tiers like one, two, three, four, or A, B, C, D. and so when you're doing that, you just need to understand that that, you know, that's how the program is. They're kind of treated separately. And so this is trying to say, hey, they're tying together, they're linking, they're coordinating. I just don't know how you know i the mechanics of it are gonna be tough. It's gonna be hard for the insurance companies to go back through and reprice all those programs when this actually takes effect. because again Brian Bollinger (29:13) Everything gets driven through the rates or the actuarial models. And ultimately it's possible we'll all be paying an extra 10 or 20 bucks a month because of something like this. And, you know, again, it even gets into the philosophical question here, right? I hate to say it this way, but some of these things are lifestyle concerns, right? Some of them are occupational. You're a nurse, you're afraid of getting pricked by a needle. Okay, I think we can all agree, you know, that should be covered probably. you know, if you want to take a drug like that, I can see where that would be appropriate. Brian Bollinger (29:41) some people it's a lifestyle choice, right? but I can see where first responders should be given that even by their employer if if they want it. but should it be a health insurance benefit? I mean, that's an interesting question. I I don't have a good answer for that. again, my my hope is that the drug is so cheap that we don't have to worry about it. But the pharmaceutical companies have not really done that recently, so I'm a little bit concerned that it could be a Aaron (30:09) I I think it can become a problem too. I mean, obviously, like you'd mentioned with the weight loss drugs, there there have been a lot of competition. So it's very, you know, easy, I guess, for for the market to relatively drive down those prices as the competition gets thicker and thicker. but just generally speaking, I mean this I feel like all of these pieces of legislature are are well intended. I think that there's been a lot of problems with California insurance. I think that everybody can attest to that. I think worldwide insurance, honestly. I mean, it's it's a profit business, it's a margins business. Aaron (30:39) And these predictive models, like you've been mentioning, the actual aerial usage of underwriting information has gotten pretty ridiculous in terms of the information that they've been able to take, the predictive models, what they're able to use in terms of assumptions about your potential future health problems for life and disability eligibility. All of these things boil down to what's the intention of insurance? The intention of insurance, I believe, is to give people a fair price where they have. Aaron (31:09) All of the catastrophic events and potential things that they don't want to have to pay for that are hopefully infrequent covered for them. And again, insurance companies have to make their margin, but it shouldn't be too much of a margin. And it shouldn't be, you know, both the drug company is making a 50% margin and the insurance health company that's paying for it's making a 50% margin. It I feel like it should be. Aaron (31:30) a a better balance between the two. And hopefully we'll see with these new pieces of legislature and the proactivity in the insurance space, a better a better balance. And that's that's all that's all we're looking for is a better balance. And if you're dealing with an any of these specific problems in terms of payouts or coverage coordination between prescription and medical coverage for your HIV prep, just know that there are definitely other people out there just like you dealing with that exact same thing. And Aaron (31:58) Obviously maybe that doesn't make it better, maybe it makes it even worse. But that there are some reforms that are attempting to to address these concerns. and we we talk to people every day about their insurance and and try and help as much as possible. And that's that's our job here. And hopefully you you all got a little bit out of this. those of you who do listen, the the one or two of you who listen to the Aaron (32:19) Crazy insurance podcast. join us in Maui. JK, don't please let us enjoy our vacation. But we will be recording podcasts there, Dad. So I'm sorry to tell you. Brian Bollinger (32:30) on the pickleball court I hope. That's the main thing. Aaron (32:32) You know, we'll we'll be all sweaty, grimy, but we'll be like, you know what? Newsome just passed the bills, guys. Let's do a twenty minute minute celebration dance and record pickleball. Brian Bollinger (32:41) I don't know about that. But anyway, well, until next time, thank you for joining us. Stay safe. Be well. Aaron (32:47) Well one hundred percent. And we'll keep you all informed on the you know changes if these things all go through and other breaking insurance news and some some things that we're dealing with as well in terms of on on the broker side in the upcoming podcast. So thank you for your time, Dad, today. Appreciate it. Brian Bollinger (33:02) Same to you. Take care. Bye son. Aaron (33:04) Take care, bye.