I’m pleased to announce the first 2026 nomination for the MHF Defender Award! This is the Award’s third year, and we’re watching especially for legislators who target expensive health policies. For those who would like to review our process and criteria, I’ve linked 2025 Nominations and 2024 Nominations.

The Michigan House Insurance Committee heard House Bills 4703-04 on Wednesday, October 22, 2025. Only two people testified: the bill sponsor’s staff, and an organization that directly benefits from the bill.

This national organization, Centering Healthcare Institute, has 41 Michigan sites funded by state Medicaid. As is common in such partnerships, the goal is centralized control of care. Transformative, politically-charged language of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) dominates its mission statement.

It does not mention inherent rights, only conferred ones.

Nomination #1 for the MHF Defender Award

The bills’ new mandate would require group prenatal care to be covered by all Michigan health plans, including Medicaid.

Rep. John Fitzgerald’s question earns him the first nomination for the MHF Defender Award.

Just watch how the industry spokesman appears to avoid his question.

Legislators should ask deeper questions about this mandate.

How many states have required this benefit? For how long?
When the benefit is offered through Medicaid, what percentage of women participate?
What percentage participate when offered through private health insurance?
How do results compare to prenatal classes offered by Lamaze, hospitals, and other private options?
How do you compute the value of individual and local initiative lost to state intrusion into this market?

Even more important: Michigan cost questions.

How does the $45 covered fee compare to prices of other programs?
Based on previous use, what would be the cost to Michigan if this Medicaid mandate passed?
How do you plan to pay for that?
Would this Medicaid program replace other Medicaid-covered prenatal classes?
How much would this benefit mandate raise Michigan health insurance premiums?

View complete testimony on these bills from minute 5-13:43. (Full hearing: 21 min.)

More expensive healthcare

Michigan already has dozens of benefit mandates. Past estimates averaged 4% per benefit in added premium costs.

In addition, Centering Healthcare appears to be the only organization that qualifies under the bill’s requirements. That’s a legally-enabled monopoly. Such anti-competitive law drives healthcare prices higher, faster.

A striking parallel Senate bill on this issue reads like a quote from the Centering Healthcare website:

… “group prenatal care services” means a series of prenatal care visits provided in a group setting that are based on an evidence based model that may include health assessments, social and clinical support, and educational activities in a family-centered environment and peer-to-peer interaction that helps pregnant individuals support one another during their pregnancy and into early childhood.

Constitutional?

Constitutional lawsuits use the14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clause to challenge special interest laws that favor some over others.

“No State shall … deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Using law to take funds from all (Medicaid tax, private insurance premiums) to pay one vendor (Centering Healthcare) to support a few (pregnant women) appears to violate equal protection of the law in multiple ways. Taxpayers, would-be competitors, and insured persons who don’t use the benefit, all suffer unequal treatment under this benefit mandate.