Mass. ballot question 2: Breaking down the impacts of a change that could overhaul dental insurance
In Massachusetts, medical insurers must spend 88 percent of the premiums they collect on patient care, but there currently is no requirement for dental insurance.
Many dentists and orthodontists across the state are supporting Question 2—which aims to regulate dental insurance.
“This is so overdue,” said Boston orthodontist Dr. Patricia Brown, DMD, MPH of the Yes on 2 Campaign.
For more than a decade, Dr. Brown and Dr. Mouhab Rizkallah have been fighting to regulate dental insurance companies.
“So a yes vote simply expands an existing consumer protection law that already exists for medical insurance and expands it to dental insurance,” said Dr. Rizkallah.
Dr. Rizkallah is a Somerville orthodontist and authored Question 2. He wants to require dental insurance companies to spend at least 83 percent of premiums on dental expenses in order to cut out what he says is incredible corporate waste within the industry.
“Those payments will be watched now,” said Dr. Rizkallah.
Dr. Rizkallah gave Boston 25 News the 2019 990 tax form from Delta Dental which he says shows the company gifted themselves $291 million in commissions and bonuses, while only paying out $177 million in patient care.
“Question 2 stops those types of wasteful corporate giveaways and many like them and gives them back to patients so that patients actually have more funds so that they are not paying so much out-of-pocket for the care that they need and want,” said Dr. Rizkallah.
The No on 2 side disputes that claim.
“Look, The Boston Globe took a look at the exact forms that they are referencing when they make those erroneous claims, and they came to some very different figures in terms of that,” said Doug Rubin, a spokesperson for the No on 2 Campaign.
Rubin tells Boston 25 News that this proposal would actually increase costs for Massachusetts families and employers and eventual force thousands of people to lose access to dental care.
“We had a nationally-recognized firm take a look at this issue, and in a scenario where an insurance company broke even and reduced overhead expenses by 10 percent, they would have to raise premiums by 38 percent in order to meet the thresholds of this ballot question,” Rubin said.
The Yes on 2 side claims that data was not verified.
But No on 2 proponents also say the Massachusetts legislature actually repealed a similar law in 2011, because it provided no real benefits for consumers
“No other state in the country has it. Obamacare decided not to include it. Governor Baker decided that this wasn’t good for Massachusetts and said he was going to vote no on it. So there are a lot of credible people who have looked at this issue and decided it wasn’t right for Massachusetts,” Rubin said.
Meantime, the doctors say they have a long list of supporters of Question 2, from the American Dental Association to the American Academy of Pediatrics.
“That’s why we’re fighting this and that’s why we’re doing this,” said Dr. Brown. “It’s all about patient care.”
And if it passes in Massachusetts, Dr. Rizkallah hopes it can serve as a model for the nation.
“This is about our commitment to patients nationally,” said Dr. Rizkallah. “I want, as the author of this question, I want my ten fingers not only to touch my patients, but I want my mind and my hands to impact a nation of patients.”
The No on 2 side believes it’s a losing proposal.
“We measured these kind of ideas on three issues, three areas, what impact it would have on cost, what impact that would have on care, what impact it would have on quality. And unfortunately for Massachusetts consumers, this fails on all three of those measure,” Rubin said.
Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts.
Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW
