As the clock ticks toward a December 31 deadline, a major House subcommittee is considering 15 bills aimed at expanding access to telehealth services. This legislative push is crucial as pandemic-era flexibilities face expiration, potentially affecting countless patients who have come to rely on virtual care.
The American Telemedicine Association has dubbed 2024 the “Super Bowl” of telehealth regulation, advocating for the permanent establishment of Medicare flexibilities introduced during COVID-19. According to FierceHealthcare, this regulatory showdown is critical for the future of telehealth.
The Push for Permanency
Healthcare systems and providers are urging lawmakers to secure permanent Medicare coverage for telehealth services. The absence of legislative action could result in a significant loss of access, particularly for vulnerable populations. Lee Schwamm, M.D., from Yale New Haven Health System, emphasized the need for permanent solutions, stating that telehealth allows for patient-centered care, especially when in-person visits pose challenges.
Prior to the pandemic, telehealth was often a cash-only service, inaccessible to many. However, the integration of virtual and in-person care has become a new standard, as highlighted by Eve Cunningham, M.D., from Providence health system. Telehealth now represents about 20% of ambulatory care visits at Providence, and its services extend to rural and underserved urban areas.
Legislative Proposals
Two significant bills, the CONNECT for Health Act and the Telehealth Modernization Act, aim to solidify telehealth flexibilities. These proposals seek to remove geographic restrictions, expand provider eligibility, and extend audio-only telehealth coverage. The American Hospital Association supports these measures, citing telehealth’s potential to address clinician shortages and enhance patient care.
Debate Over Costs and Quality
While telehealth has shown promise in improving chronic disease management and reducing emergency visits, concerns about increased healthcare spending remain. A previous extension was estimated to raise Medicare costs by over $2 billion. However, experts like Ateev Mehrotra, M.D., argue that the value of telehealth should guide policy decisions, despite modest spending increases.
Payment parity is another contentious issue. Some advocate for lower reimbursement rates for telehealth, while others, like Schwamm, caution against significant pay cuts that could discourage virtual care. The ongoing debate highlights the need for a balanced approach to telehealth reimbursement.
Fred Riccardi from the Medicare Rights Center urged for greater oversight before expanding Medicare coverage for telehealth. The organization emphasizes policies that increase access, promote health equity, and ensure high-quality care.
Conclusion
As lawmakers deliberate these legislative moves, the future of telehealth hangs in the balance. The decisions made in the coming months will shape the landscape of healthcare delivery, determining whether telehealth remains a core function or reverts to a limited service.
More Articles
Getting licensed or staying ahead in your career can be a journey—but it doesn’t have to be overwhelming. Grab your favorite coffee or tea, take a moment to relax, and browse through our articles. Whether you’re just starting out or renewing your expertise, we’ve got tips, insights, and advice to keep you moving forward. Here’s to your success—one sip and one step at a time!
The commercial real estate sector closed out 2025 with renewed stability, as the Real Estate Roundtable’s latest sentiment index shows rising confidence and improving market fundamentals. Executives report better access to capital, stronger performance in residential, retail, and hospitality, and early signs of recovery in the office market. With financing loosening and asset values climbing, the outlook for 2026 is increasingly optimistic, creating fresh opportunities for both seasoned professionals and newcomers preparing to enter the field.
The CFPB is proposing changes to how lenders evaluate “disparate impact” under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, potentially tightening the scrutiny on credit decisions that unintentionally disadvantage protected groups. These updates could reshape underwriting models, lending criteria, and compliance requirements — ultimately influencing mortgage approvals, buyer qualifications, and day‑to‑day real estate activity.
Florida’s insurance crisis has become the defining issue heading into 2026, with Republicans touting recent market improvements while Democrats argue families are still being crushed by soaring premiums. From billion‑dollar auto insurance refunds to condo markets destabilized by post‑Surfside rate spikes, the state’s political divide is shaping the future of real estate, insurance, and affordability for millions.
October 2025 brought a wave of major regulatory updates across insurance, finance, and compliance. From stricter oversight on retail insurers and new FCA rules on ESG and travel insurance, to EIOPA’s EU‑wide consultations and refreshed corporate governance standards, regulators signaled higher expectations and faster change ahead. For professionals—and those pursuing licenses—these shifts directly impact risk management, product design, and consumer outcomes, making regulatory awareness a critical competitive advantage.
After nearly two years of sluggish activity, commercial real estate lending is finally accelerating—fast. New data from CBRE shows loan closings jumped 112% year‑over‑year in Q3 2025, reaching their highest level since 2018. With interest rates stabilizing and credit spreads tightening, investors are returning, banks are re‑entering the market, and multifamily financing is dominating once again. The long‑stalled deal flow is thawing, signaling renewed momentum heading into 2026.
Farmers Insurance is lifting its cap on new homeowner policies in California after two years of limiting growth, signaling a shift in the state’s strained insurance market. The expansion comes with a proposed 6.99 percent rate increase that still needs regulatory approval. Supporters call it a turning point driven by new wildfire‑risk rules, while consumer advocates warn the reforms contain loopholes and could lead to higher costs for homeowners.
