Senate committee advances bill requiring dentists'affirmative consent before insurers''network leasing

The Senate Health and Human Services Committee moved House Bill 10-70 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation and placed the bill on the consent calendar after a day of testimony both for and against the measure.

Sponsor Senator Frizzell said the bill targets a practice known as "network leasing," in which an insurer that has contracted with a dentist allows another plan to use that provider network under different terms. "An insurance carrier needs to ask a dentist if they want to be leased before leasing them out," Frizzell said, arguing that affirmative consent and clearer communication will protect dentists and patients.

Co-prime sponsor Senator Judah said the bill does not prohibit leasing but requires transparency so dentists and patients can make informed decisions about coverage and costs.

Supporters included multiple practicing dentists and the Colorado Dental Association, who told the committee that network leasing can hide contract terms, create mismatches in reimbursement and billing, and lead to unexpected out-of-pocket costs for patients. "Network leasing as it's currently practiced undermines the dentist's ability to provide quality care by introducing hidden contracts, reduced reimbursements, and confusion that harms both providers and, more importantly, our patients," said Dr. Sarah Parsons, a general dentist in Highlands Ranch. Dr. Jillian Horkin, who practices in Montrose, said her office suffered more than $30,000 in losses when a carrier failed to process an opt-out request and patients received confusing coverage information.

Dr. Lindsey Compton, a private practice owner in Arvada, described the bill's affirmative-consent (opt-in) approach and noted the legislation includes an exemption for same-brand license programs. "This bill has an opt-in policy for network leasing. This is the affirmative consent," Compton said, and cited Oregon as a comparable jurisdiction that sponsors and witnesses pointed to during testimony.

Opponents included the American Council of Life Insurers and the National Association of Dental Plans. Melissa Young of ACLI testified that an opt-in requirement could shrink provider networks, increase out-of-pocket costs, and create operational burdens as carriers update systems and follow up with individual providers. "By allowing dentists to essentially drop out of networks, patients could face more out-of-pocket expenses and reduced access," Young said. Bianca Baloli of the National Association of Dental Plans said the opt-in framework risks providers unintentionally falling out of network due to missed or delayed responses and argued the current system broadens access for many consumers.

Committee questioning touched on whether Colorado would be following a national trend; witnesses and sponsors debated whether industry model language and state actions influence broader adoption. Senator Bright asked whether the measure aligns with national efforts; Dr. Compton said some national policies and state precedents inform industry practice.

After testimony and brief discussion, the committee voted to advance HB 10-70. The motion passed unanimously and the bill was placed on the consent calendar for further consideration.

The committee recorded no amendments during the hearing; next procedural steps are consideration by the Committee of the Whole and then scheduling for a floor action if the bill proceeds.