PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9984)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 30, 2009
Fairness in Health Insurance Act - Prohibits a health insurance issuer from offering health insurance coverage unless the issuer demonstrates that such coverage has a medical loss ratio of at least 90%.
Directs the Secretary: (1) to establish a uniform definition of "medical loss ratio" and methodology for calculating it, which shall take into account the circumstances of different plans and activities related to health services, such as chronic disease management and quality assurance; and (2) by December 31, 2010, to develop, publish, and implement the standardized data elements and definitions to be used by health insurance issuers in the reporting of data necessary to calculate such ratio.
Requires each issuer: (1) beginning in plan year 2011, to provide the Secretary with data to enable the Secretary to determine whether the issuer is in compliance with this Act; and (2) to provide payment rebates to enrollees for any plan year in which the coverage has a medical loss ratio below 90%.
People & committees
Sen. Franken, Al [D-MN] · D–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S9984)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9983-9984)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 4, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1730 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1730 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1730 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1730 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.