Scott vetoes Vermont Legislature’s latest attempt at healthcare reform
[June 19, 2026]
By OLIVIA GIEGER/VTDigger
Gov. Phil Scott has vetoed S.190, a healthcare bill designed to
fast-track premium savings for two groups of insurance customers: public
school employees and people buying plans on Vermont’s Affordable Care
Act marketplace.
The bill was one of the few healthcare reform initiatives the
Legislature passed this session.
It would have sped up the state’s ability to begin using a cost-saving
tool called reference-based pricing, but only for those two groups of
insurance buyers.
In a Tuesday letter explaining his decision, Scott said he intends to
use executive action to instead push forward parts of an insurance
reform bill his administration put forward this session.
Scott cited fairness throughout the insurance marketplace as the primary
reason for his veto.
“Vermont will not solve its affordability crisis by directing savings to
some payers while excluding others,” he wrote in his Tuesday letter.
“Lasting progress will require structural reforms that expand
affordability, increase choices, and ensure savings are shared broadly
across the system.”

Rep. Alyssa Black, D-Essex Town, who chairs the House’s healthcare
committee and championed S.190, was incensed that the governor vetoed a
bill she said his administration had been integral to creating,
alongside her and other healthcare policy experts.
“It’s almost like he’s taking revenge. It felt vengeful,” she said. “How
he vetoes something that was the one final step in everything that we
have done collaboratively for two years, I cannot wrap my head around
it.”
Reference-based pricing ties insurers’ payments to hospitals to an
external benchmark — usually a percentage of the rates that Medicare
pays hospitals. In 2025, lawmakers set Vermont on a path to implement
reference-based pricing for all of the state’s hospitals. However, that
change requires the Green Mountain Care Board, the state’s main
healthcare regulator, to go through a rulemaking process, which would
not be finalized by the start of the coming hospital fiscal year in
October, delaying the pricing reform implementation.
Lawmakers aimed to expedite that with S.190. The bill proposed giving
the care board the ability to direct hospitals to implement
reference-based pricing for two health insurance groups: public school
employees and people who buy coverage on Vermont’s Affordable Care Act
marketplace.
Yet Scott wrote that targeting those specific insurance markets chafes
against the Green Mountain Care Board’s statutorily defined mission to
share cost savings equally among insurers and the insured.
Kaj Samsom, the commissioner of the Vermont Department of Financial
Regulation, which regulates insurers and closely followed the bill,
emphasized the point.
“To take such a significant hospital revenue reduction and focus it just
on a minority of Vermonters was problematic,” he told VTDigger in May,
before the bill was passed.
[to top of second column]
|
 The care board still has the
regulatory power to trim hospital budgets this summer — it just
won’t have the ability to direct those savings at specific insurance
buyers, as S.190 proposed.
“This care board has shown no hesitancy to find savings,” Samsom
said in May. “I guarantee you that with or without reference-based
pricing, the care board is going to drive down hospital revenue and
insurance like they always do, in the existing framework.”
Scott echoed Samsom’s rationale in his letter,
writing that the care board has called for $40 million in hospital
revenue reduction this fiscal year — following last year’s nearly
$100 million in total revenue reductions, which, in turn, led to
smaller commercial insurance rate increases.
“I urge the GMCB to follow-through with that policy and generate the
same level of savings it otherwise would have achieved while
ensuring those savings benefit all payers,” read Scott’s letter.
But Black said Scott’s plan wouldn’t generate meaningful savings for
insurance customers.
“We ran those numbers, and there would be no discernible effect on
premiums. None,” she said of the further hospital revenue cuts.
Spread evenly across premiums, those savings would be marginal, she
said.
Black said lawmakers chose to target teacher insurance because those
costs are borne by property tax payers. And with the loss this year
of some federal healthcare insurance subsidies, people who buy
Affordable Care Act marketplace plans have also faced increased
costs worth targeting, she said.
Instead, Scott expressed his intention to bring back reforms his
administration put forth in a different healthcare bill, H.585, that
did not become law. That bill sought to allow insurers to charge
different premiums based on age and the state’s small businesses to
form insurance buying pools, among other reforms. H.585 was widely
supported by Democratic lawmakers in the House before it died in the
Senate.
The state’s chief healthcare advocate, Mike Fisher, said he’s
disappointed the governor vetoed the reference-based pricing bill.
But he said the veto doesn’t derail the years-long work of reducing
hospital costs and health insurance premiums, which last year’s
reference-based pricing law still sets in motion.

“My main message needs to be: veto, not veto — it doesn’t change the
dynamic. We still have the most expensive insurance rates in the
country,” Fisher said. “The task of reducing prices to make sure
Vermonters aren’t priced out of the ability to get coverage is a
big, big job, and we can’t afford missing a year.”
All contents © copyright 2026 Associated Press. All rights reserved |