Kansas lawmakers alter bidding process for Medicaid services after Aetna loses state contract
TOPEKA — A major health insurance company lost out on a bid to continue its role as one of Kansas' Medicaid providers, and the state Legislature passed a law to avoid a repeat.
Aetna Better Health of Kansas embroiled itself last year in legal battles with the state arguing the selection process for providers of the $4 billion Medicaid program was flawed. Legislators similarly criticized the executive branch for a lack of transparency. One Republican said the ordeal would be a 'stain' on Kansas' contract processes for years to come.
Aetna provided health coverage as a managed care organization under KanCare, as Medicaid is known in Kansas, for five years leading up to the state's 2024 evaluation process. The company tied for third place with another private health insurance company and ultimately lost the bid. In August, Aetna asked a legislative committee to consider changing the rules for MCO selection as it was going through an appeals process, which it lost.
House Bill 2284, which Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed April 4 and the Legislature revived Thursday, forces the executive branch to create policies addressing some issues Aetna litigated. Republicans, who overrode the veto, say the bill improves transparency.
But the governor in her veto message said the bill is a 'dramatic overreach' into the authority of the executive and judicial branches.
'Most alarmingly, this bill creates a haphazard procurement process that does nothing to mitigate conflicts of interest among legislators and creates an environment that is rife for exploitation and graft — exactly the opposite of what the existing process, overseen by the Department of Administration, is designed to do,' Kelly said.
She said the bill risked creating 'legal, ethical and constitutional challenges.'
In the Senate, the override passed Thursday without debate in a 30-10 vote with Sen. Tim Shallenburger, a Baxter Springs Republican, joining Democrats in opposition. The House completed the veto with an 88-37 vote along party lines.
'It's a good bill. Vote for it,' said Rep. Will Carpenter, an El Dorado Republican.
That was the extent of House Republicans' remarks on the bill in their effort to overturn the veto.
Kelly said she would have supported the bill in its original form.
'As amended, this bill is now unworkable and opens the state up to costly and protracted litigation,' she said.
During the 2024 contract bidding process, Aetna and Healthy Blue, a Blue Cross Blue Shield affiliate, earned the same score, warranting a tiebreaker. However, state officials destroyed documentation of evaluators' scoring notes that informed the selection of Healthy Blue over Aetna.
Aetna appealed the state's decision to pick Healthy Blue. The decision, which came from the Department of Administration, eventually was upheld in Shawnee County District Court. Aetna also sued state agencies for destroying the scoring records, and was unsuccessful.
Sen. David Haley, a Kansas City Democrat, refrained from voting on the veto override at first, but after being required to cast a vote under Senate rules, he voted to sustain the governor's veto. He said he supported the bill in its original form but deferred to the governor's opinion.
'I think it's good to have procedures in place when we look at our MCOs,' Haley said. 'However I greatly respect the overarching view that the governor can give to these measures and her vetting this and finding it to be something that should be reconsidered. I won't lean on my own judgement, my own opinion.'
In its original form, the bill contained three provisions regulating the MCO bidding and selection process. It required the executive branch to create policies that prohibit the destruction of records covered under the Kansas Open Records Act, adopt tiebreaking procedures and 'to be transparent with the Legislature during each step of the procurement process to the fullest extent permitted by state law.'
Later, lawmakers added a fourth provision requiring a new appeals process. Currently aggrieved bidders go through judicial review. Under the new law, an appeals committee made up of legislative leadership — and headed by the senate president — will take up review.
Rep. Susan Wikle, a Lawrence Democrat, said her primary issue with the bill was the modification of the appeals process. Democrats initially were left out of the newly established legislative panel but were later included, Wikle said.
She said she had unanswered questions about the interplay between the existing judicial review process and the new panel's function, but after she found answers, she reached the conclusion that the bill was an 'overreach.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
11 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Peter Thiel's political hiatus is over. Here's where his money's flowing now.
Peter Thiel's vacation from politics is over. The conservative tech billionaire made his first publicly disclosed political contribution in two and a half years in February, giving $852,200 to House Speaker Mike Johnson's joint fundraising committee. That group, called "Grow the Majority," then distributed almost 90% of that money to other campaigns. All told, Thiel's money has now made its way into the coffers of the Republican National Committee, House Republicans' main campaign arm, over a dozen state parties, and nearly 30 GOP House members. It's a significant shift for Thiel. After spending tens of millions of dollars to support Blake Masters and now-Vice President JD Vance during the 2022 midterms, the PayPal and Palantir cofounder came away from the experience apparently disillusioned with politics. In 2024, he even gave an interview to The Atlantic in part to lock himself into not donating to any candidate that year. "By talking to you, it makes it hard for me to change my mind," he told the interviewer. "My husband doesn't want me to give them any more money, and he's right." Vance even publicly urged Thiel to "get off the sidelines" and spend money to back Trump in the 2024 race, but no public donations ever emerged, despite his past financial support for Trump. Thiel also said last year that he would support Trump, and he predicted that the election wouldn't be close. "I've decided not to donate any money politically, but I'm supporting them in every other way possible," he said at the time. A spokesperson for Thiel did not respond to a request for comment about why the tech billionaire changed his mind. During a recent interview with The New York Times' Ross Douthat, Thiel said that he was "schizophrenic" about political giving. "I think it's incredibly important, and it's incredibly toxic," Thiel said. "So I go back and forth." Here's where Thiel's money went: $310,100 to the National Republican Congressional Committee, the main campaign arm for House Republicans; $54,600 to the Republican National Committee; $10,000 apiece to GOP state parties in 14 states, including Alaska, Florida, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin; $7,000 apiece to 29 House Republicans, most of whom represent competitive districts; $7,000 apiece to committees set up for the eventual GOP nominee in 12 other competitive House districts.
CNBC
11 minutes ago
- CNBC
Under Trump, Uncle Sam is becoming an active investor at a scale not seen outside war or major crises
The Trump administration has taken direct stakes in companies on a scale rarely seen in the U.S. outside wartime or economic crisis, pushing a Republican Party that traditionally championed free-market capitalism to embrace state intervention in industries viewed as important for national security. Japan's Nippon Steel agreed to give President Donald Trump a "golden share" in U.S. Steel as a condition for the two companies' controversial merger. Trump now personally wields sweeping veto power over major business decisions made by the nation's third-largest steel producer. "You know who has the golden share? I do," Trump said at a summit on artificial intelligence and energy in Pittsburgh on July 15. The president's golden share in U.S. Steel is similar to nationalizing a company but without any of the benefits that a company normally receives, such as direct investment by the government, said Sarah Bauerle Danzman, an expert on foreign investment and national security at the Atlantic Council, a think tank focused on international affairs. But the Trump administration demonstrated earlier this month that it is also willing to buy directly into publicly traded corporations. The Department of Defense agreed to purchase a $400 million equity stake in rare-earth miner MP Materials, making the Pentagon the company's largest shareholder. This level of support by the federal government for a mining company is unprecedented, said Gracelin Baskaran, an expert on critical minerals at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "This is the biggest public-private cooperation that the mining industry has ever had here in the United States," Baskaran said. "Historically, DOD has never done equity in a mining company or a mining project." Trump's unique hold over the Republican Party gives him the ability to intervene in companies on a scale that would be difficult politically for a Democratic president, Danzman said. "The Democrat would have been accused of being a communist and a lot of other Republicans probably would not have felt comfortable moving in this particular direction because of their greater commitment to market principles," Danzman said. Trump is expanding the range of what is possible in the U.S. in terms of state intervention in markets, she said. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. More interventions could be on the horizon as the Trump administration develops a policy to support U.S. companies in strategic industries against state-backed competition from China. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in April that the U.S. government might need to make an "equity investment in each of these companies that's taking on China in critical minerals." The Pentagon's investment in MP Materials is a model for future public-private partnerships, CEO James Litinsky said. "It's a new way forward to accelerate free markets, to get the supply chain on shore that we want," Litinsky told CNBC. The U.S. government is helping the mining industry fight "Chinese mercantilism," the CEO said. Meanwhile, the golden share in U.S. Steel is a potential model for foreign direct investment "transactions that really affect our national security but where it's going to be great for our economic growth," Sen. Dave McCormick, R-Pa., said in a May interview with CNBC. "Having taken a stake in US Steel and MP, we're now left to wonder where this administration will find its next investment," Don Bilson, an analyst at Gordon Haskett, wrote in a note to clients earlier this month. Trump proposed in January that the U.S. should take a 50% stake in social media app TikTok as part of a joint venture. China's ByteDance is required under a recently passed law to divest TikTok or the platform will be banned in the U.S. Trump extended ByteDance's compliance deadline until Sept. 17. The U.S. has a long history of intervening in industries, particularly where national defense is concerned, said Mark Wilson, a historian at the University of North Carolina, Charlotte, who studies the military-industrial complex. But past interventions were often temporary and typically happened during war, economic crisis or took the form of bailouts to prevent a major player in a critical industry from going bankrupt. The U.S. government bought a majority stake in General Motors to prevent the automaker from collapsing in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, ultimately selling off its shares at a loss to the taxpayer. In the 1970s, defense giant Lockheed and automaker Chrysler received government bailouts. During World War I, President Woodrow Wilson nationalized the railroads, but he returned them to private ownership after the conflict. The Roosevelt administration made sweeping interventions during the Great Depression and World War II, from establishing the Tennessee Valley Authority to making big investments in the nation's manufacturing capacity. The U.S. is not fighting an economic crisis or war today, but the return of great power competition with Russia and China and the supply chain disruptions of the Covid-19 pandemic have led to more nationalistic economic policies, said UNC's Wilson. The U.S. has increasingly recognized that China's economic model is based on manufacturing overcapacity that dumps products "onto global markets in ways that make it hard for other markets to compete," Danzman said. The threat posed by China's dominance of the rare-earth supply chain became apparent in April when Beijing imposed export restrictions against the U.S., Baskaran said. Within weeks, automakers warned they would have to halt production due to a rare-earth shortage, forcing the U.S. back to the negotiating table with Beijing, she said. "The historical moment we're in does seem to be one where there is this reassessment of assumptions of the previous generation about the efficacy of markets and free trade to solve all our problems in national security," Wilson said. The question is whether state intervention can solve the failure of the free market to address national security concerns in industries like rare earths, Danzman said. "When you step in to try to address one of these market failures with this kind of government intervention, you can have a cascade of new market failures," she said. "You're distorting the market more."
NBC News
40 minutes ago
- NBC News
Kicking the can down the road on tariffs won't work for this Maryland manufacturer
Checkbook Chronicles Independent Can Company has raised prices twice this year already after Trump imposed 25% duties on steel in March, and then doubled them in June. July 26, 2025, 7:15 AM EDT By Emily Lorsch When Rick Huether strolls the floors of his four manufacturing plants — two in Maryland and two in Ohio — employees' typical greetings such as, 'Hey, how's the family?' have been increasingly replaced with, 'Hey Rick, should I be looking for a job somewhere else?' Huether, the CEO of Independent Can Company, has had to raise prices on customers twice this year and it's the third time since President Donald Trump's first term. 'It's frustrating,' Huether said of the Trump administration's ever-evolving tariff agenda, which now includes 50% import taxes on the foreign-made steel his company relies on. 'I can't run my business the way I want to run it.' Huether, a Republican, said he shares the administration's goal of reinvigorating American industry. 'We want to bring as much manufacturing back to this country as you can. And as a family, we made a strategic commitment to being the specialty can maker in America with American workers,' he said. 'We want to be here.' But according to Huether, Trump has made that harder to do. He said he has never voted for the president because he dislikes how he treats people and communicates, and his trade policies have caused headaches for his business operations. 'Chaos is our nemesis,' Huether said, echoing a concern many small business owners have voiced for months amid Trump's erratic tariff rollout: 'We can't plan when we don't have a vision of what's going on for the next two or three years.' Business highlights Independent Can Company's wares might already be in your cupboard. The Belcamp, Maryland-based family business, in operation since 1929, makes the packaging for everything from Wegmans' brand of Virginia peanuts to the Santa Claus tins filled with chocolates or popcorn that hit grocery shelves around the holidays. The company manufactures cans and other containers for popular consumer brands including Swiss Miss, Zippo and Titleist. One of its newest customers is the lip balm maker Burt's Bees. Independent Can Company — whose annual sales have averaged $130 million in recent years — used to have more than 30 domestic competitors in specialty can making, Huether estimated, many of which were family-owned businesses. Today there are just a couple left, he said. The company employs about 400 people across its four plants. A fifth, in Iowa, closed in 2024 due to what Huether described as a combination of clients' shifting packaging needs and Trump's first-term steel tariffs. He secured some exemptions from those levies at the time but still had to raise prices in 2018 by anywhere from 8-16%, depending on the product. Independent Can Company's manufacturing process relies on a highly specialized material called tinplate, a very thin-gauge, flat-rolled steel with an electro-coated surface of tin. Developed as a corrosion-resistant material safe for food packaging, tinplate supplies are limited — the product makes up only about 2% of global steel production, Huether estimated, and it's only roughly 1% of the steel produced in the U.S. Up until about 2007, Independent Can Company bought most of its tinplate domestically but now sources most of it overseas — the majority from Germany, along with Taiwan and South Korea — due to foreign suppliers' quality, service and price. The business adopted more efficient production systems starting in the 1990s, which included a new printing line in 2000 that uses a larger sheet size, boosting efficiency. The issue: steel coils large enough for that system aren't available domestically right now, partly because American steel companies haven't kept up with manufacturers' needs, Huether said. In addition, the materials Independent Can Company uses are about twice as expensive in the U.S. than in Asia and about 20% more expensive than in Europe, Huether estimated. Tariff impacts The cost squeeze is weighing on Independent Can Company as it struggles to rebound from a rough two years, amid pandemic-related supply-chain issues and cost swings. Those challenges left the company with a lot of expensive steel that it had to sell at a loss. But after tens of millions in capital investments, including in automation, Independent Can Company is finally settling into a new normal that Huether expects to put the company back on surer footing this year, tariffs notwithstanding. Still, access to affordable tinplate is non-negotiable and remains a wild card. That material alone represents 50-75% of its products' prices, Huether estimated. With tariff exemptions removed in March, Independent Can Company began paying Trump's 25% levies on all its imported tinplate, a steep new expense that Huether said forced the business to hike prices on some products by 8-16%. After the duties were raised to 50% in June, the company imposed another round of 8-16% increases. 'This adjustment is necessary to ensure that we can continue to provide you with the high-quality products and service you have come to expect,' Huether informed clients in a statement on the company's website earlier this year. 'We've really absorbed the amount of the tariffs that we can absorb,' he told NBC News. 'It's going to be passed through.' Bringing the shine back to 'Made in America' Huether is relieved that Independent Can Company hasn't lost business yet since the price hikes, but that worry is ever-present. There's a risk that some companies will switch to cheaper packaging, he said, including options that may not be as safe or recyclable. But it's hard to know how things will shake out… 'You instantly go to: Well, is this going to happen, or is it a tactic to get somebody to do something else? Is it real or not?' he said. In the meantime, Huether doubts whether rewriting U.S. trade policy can bring back American manufacturing overnight, or even in a few years. Huether believes in expanding vocational training in schools and eliminating the stigma often associated with certain career paths. 'We do not have the skills in this country to manage it,' he said, nodding to a reality that companies and analysts across a range of industrial sectors have underscored since the trade war began. 'It takes one to five years to get a full manufacturing plant up and running,' Huether said. 'We need time to do this.' What's more, 'We need predictability and consistency,' he added. 'We need to understand what the rules are. If the rules are constantly changing, we don't know how to play the game.' Emily Lorsch Emily Lorsch is a producer at NBC News covering business and the economy.
