An independent effort by licensed health insurance producers

If a health plan is sold on a public exchange, the licensed professionals who enroll people in it should be compensated like they are on every other plan.

State "public option" health plans in Nevada and New York now pay brokers reduced commission, or none at all, for the same licensed work those brokers are paid for on every other plan on the same shelf. Colorado wrote parity into statute. Washington's exchange requires it as a condition of selling the plans. We are asking legislators, state and federal, to close the gap in the states that didn't.

Nevada public option carriers paying zero broker commission (PY2026)
2 of 3
the third pays a sharply reduced schedule
Nevada public option enrollment vs. state projection
10,762 / 35,000
≈31% of target, Jan 2026 open enrollment (NPR)
Public option states that already require commission parity
2
Colorado by statute; Washington by exchange rule
NY Essential Plan commissions since Jan 1, 2026
$0
by the program's own 2026 Invitation
The fix is one sentence

What commission parity is

Commission parity means a carrier that sells a state-sponsored plan must compensate licensed producers for it on terms comparable to its other plans in the same market. It does not set a rate. It does not add a state subsidy. It simply says a state program cannot be built on unpaid licensed labor.

Two public option states already did this

Colorado created its public option (the "Colorado Option," HB21-1232, 2021), anticipated exactly what has since happened elsewhere, and closed the door in the statute itself:

"The commissions paid to insurance producers for the sale of the standardized plan must be comparable to the average commissions paid for the sale of other plans offered in the individual and small group markets." Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-16-1305(4)

Washington passed the nation's first public option law in 2019; its Cascade Select plans went on sale in 2021. Washington controls costs the hard way, by capping aggregate provider reimbursement tied to Medicare rates, and it protects distribution at the same time. The exchange's own plan certification guidance makes commission parity a condition of selling the plans:

"Issuers offering plans on the Exchange that are Cascade Care plans are required to pay commission for the sale of those plans at a level at least equivalent to those of other Exchange plans offered by the Issuer." Washington Health Benefit Exchange, QHP Guidance for Participation, § 3.2.1 (the guidance defines "Cascade Care" to include the Cascade Select public option plans)

Note what Washington's experience shows. The state's own legislative report on Cascade Select attributes its early enrollment struggles to provider participation and premiums, not to distribution, because distribution was never allowed to be cut. Parity is not a theory. In two of the four public option states it is how the program already works: one by statute, one by exchange rule. Nevada and New York are the outliers.

Why brokers matter here

Licensed producers are the only professionals in the individual market whose job is to sit with a consumer, compare every plan on the shelf, and be accountable, under a state license, for the advice. They are paid by commission built into premiums, at no separate cost to the consumer.

When one category of plan pays nothing, the state has not saved consumers money. It has removed professional help from the plans the state most wants people to find.

The federal angle

In July 2026, CMS closed a producer complaint about Nevada's zero-commission public option plans, writing that it found no violation of the federal rules it examined, while acknowledging the obvious:

"We understand this removes an incentive for brokers to sell these plans." CMS/CCIIO written determination, July 29, 2026

The state insurance regulator says it cannot compel commissions. The federal regulator points back to the state. When every regulator says "not my desk," the desk left is the legislature's: state and federal. That is why this site exists.

Case one

Nevada: the Battle Born State Plans

Nevada's public option statute (SB 420 of 2021, now NRS Chapter 695K) requires carriers that participate in Medicaid to bid on "Battle Born State Plans" priced below a statutory reference premium. The chapter contains no producer, commission, or compensation language at all, and that silence is where the problem lives.

What happened, from the public record

What we're asking the Nevada Legislature to do

Enact commission parity for the 2027 session, modeled on Colorado: a plan offered on the exchange must compensate a licensed producer on terms comparable to the carrier's other plans of the same metal level. One sentence in NRS Chapter 695K. No state money required.

Time-sensitive: the next chance to be heard

August 20, 2026: the Commerce and Labor interim committee's final meeting

The Joint Interim Standing Committee on Commerce and Labor holds the sixth and final meeting of the 2025-2026 interim on Thursday, August 20, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. Pacific. It is the last scheduled opportunity to put producer compensation in front of this committee before the 2027 session's bill drafts are settled.

This committee has spent the interim on exactly this subject, from every side but ours. On May 21 it heard a presentation on health insurance and affordability from the carriers' trade associations and heard from the Nevada Health Authority the same day. No agenda item all interim has touched producer compensation or the distribution side of the exchange. A two-minute comment asking for parity completes a record the committee has already opened.

Where. In person at Room 5, Nevada Legislature Hearing Rooms, 7120 Amigo Street, Las Vegas, videoconferenced to Room 3142, Legislative Building, 401 South Carson Street, Carson City. Carson City is the northern Nevada site; there is no Reno location, and testimony given in Carson City reaches the whole committee exactly as Las Vegas testimony does.

Three ways to participate:

  1. In person at either site: sign in at the table by the door, state and spell your name when called. Two-minute limit. Say who you are, what happened to your own practice, and the one ask: commission parity modeled on Colorado.
  2. By phone: dial (888) 475-4499 and enter the Meeting ID printed on the agenda, then press the pound key. Each meeting has its own Meeting ID; the August 20 agenda is expected to post on or about August 17 on the official meeting page, where the room assignments can also change until then. Check it before you go.
  3. In writing: email your comment to CLInterim@lcb.state.nv.us, or mail it to Research Division, 401 South Carson Street, Carson City, NV 89701. Written comments enter the same record. Send them before the meeting; a week ahead is better. Write in your own words about your own practice; identical form letters are weighed as one.

The two rules in the yellow box below apply with full force here: this is a livestreamed, archived public record. Speak only to your own experience, never to what any producer will or won't accept, and never include client information. Accessibility accommodations: accessibility@lcb.state.nv.us or (775) 684-6903.

Case two

New York: the Essential Plan

New York went further than Nevada: it prohibited commissions outright, in writing.

"Starting January 1, 2026, EP issuers must not pay commissions to Producers for new EP enrollment or the renewal of existing EP enrollments; and may not pay remuneration based on the volume of enrollment or the number of NYSOH applications submitted." NY State of Health, 2026 Essential Plan Invitation (p. 36), publicly posted May 5, 2025

Every Essential Plan issuer signed a model contract carrying the same term. In April 2026, four New York producers and Health Agents for America (HAFA) challenged the ban in New York state court (Index No. 155348/2026, Supreme Court, New York County). That litigation is pending as of this writing; no court has ruled on the merits. Whatever the outcome, it will take years. A one-sentence parity statute would have made the case unnecessary.

New York brokers: your experience under the Essential Plan ban is exactly the evidence your legislators need to hear, in your own words, from your own district.

The uncomfortable question

If the price only works by not paying the people who sell it, is the price real?

Public option statutes mandate premiums below a reference price. Premiums have three places to give: medical costs, margin, and administration. Broker commission sits in the administrative line, the only line with no statutory protection. The public record now shows that is exactly where the squeeze landed.

Nevada's own regulator requires carriers to show this math. The Nevada Division of Insurance's plan year 2027 rate filing guidance orders every carrier to:

"Provide detail, in the Actuarial Memorandum, on commission levels contributing to the plan-level administrative expense factor, including how the commission component was derived. Include information on commission structures and any variation by plan." Nevada Division of Insurance, PY2027 rate filing guidance

So the commission-by-plan variation is documented, carrier by carrier, in filings sitting at the Division today. Nevada law, like every state's, requires that rates not be inadequate. When a plan can meet its mandated price only by zeroing out its distribution, that is a fact regulators, actuaries, and legislators should be examining in the open, and it is a question brokers are entitled to ask at every rate hearing.

The consumer cost of a "free" cut

Cutting commission does not show up as a benefit cut or a premium line, so it looks free. It is not. It shows up as: no one to call at renewal when the network changes; no one accountable for a subsidy calculation; enrollment that misses projection by two-thirds; and a distribution system where the professionals steer, rationally and exactly as compensation design predicts, toward every plan except the one the state built. If a state believes in its public option, paying nothing to enroll people in it is a strange way to show it.

Take action

Contact your legislators, as yourself, about your own practice

You do not need permission, a trade association, or this site to talk to your own elected officials. A two-minute call or a short letter from a licensed constituent, describing your own book and your own clients in your own words, outweighs any form letter.

Two rules before you pick up the phone

Antitrust. Producers who compete with one another should not discuss, compare, agree on, or coordinate the commission rates or fees any of them will accept. Describe your own experience and what you want the law to require. Joint advocacy to legislators is protected; agreements among competitors about pricing or about refusing business are not, regardless of how justified the grievance is.

Client privacy. Legislative correspondence and public comment become public record. Never include a client's name, diagnosis, medication, claim details, or any identifying health information. Describe impacts in general terms.

What to say

  1. Identify yourself: a licensed producer, your license state, and, if you are their constituent, say so first. Constituent calls are logged differently.
  2. One sentence of fact: plans sold on our state exchange pay licensed producers reduced or zero compensation for the same work every other plan pays for.
  3. One sentence of impact from your own practice: what it has meant for you and for the people you can no longer afford to serve. Your experience, not anyone else's.
  4. One ask: support commission parity legislation modeled on Colorado's, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 10-16-1305(4), requiring comparable producer compensation on exchange plans of the same metal level.

Nevada Legislature: start here

These six legislators' offices have already received the federal correspondence on this issue, so the subject will not be new to their staff. If your own senator or assemblymember is not on this list, contact them first (find your senator or assemblymember), then copy the leadership offices below. The 2027 Regular Session convenes February 1, 2027; bill drafts are being decided now.

LegislatorOfficePhoneEmail
Sen. Nicole CannizzaroSenate Majority Leader, District 6 (Clark)Nevada Senate(775) 684-1475Nicole.Cannizzaro@sen.state.nv.us
Sen. Robin TitusSenate Minority Leader, District 17Nevada Senate(775) 684-1470Robin.Titus@sen.state.nv.us
Sen. Fabian DoñateDistrict 10 (Clark), health policy leadNevada Senate(775) 684-1427Fabian.Donate@sen.state.nv.us
Sen. Marilyn Dondero LoopPresident pro Tempore, District 8 (Clark)Nevada Senate(775) 684-1445Marilyn.DonderoLoop@sen.state.nv.us
Speaker Steve YeagerSpeaker of the Assembly, District 9 (Clark)Nevada Assembly(775) 684-8549Steve.Yeager@asm.state.nv.us
Asm. Daniele Monroe-MorenoDistrict 1 (Clark)Nevada Assembly(775) 684-8509Daniele.MonroeMoreno@asm.state.nv.us

Nevada's congressional delegation: Washington, DC

CMS's July 2026 determination means the federal rules, as CMS reads them, permit zero-commission exchange plans nationwide. That is a federal policy question, and these offices are already on the correspondence. Ask them to press HHS/CMS and Treasury on producer compensation standards for state innovation waiver programs, and to support federal parity language. Congressional offices take input by phone and through their own web contact forms (linked below).

MemberOfficePhoneContact
Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto309 Hart Senate Office Building(202) 224-3542cortezmasto.senate.gov
Sen. Jacky Rosen713 Hart Senate Office Building(202) 224-6244rosen.senate.gov
Rep. Dina TitusNV-012370 Rayburn House Office Building(202) 225-5965titus.house.gov
Rep. Mark AmodeiNV-02104 Cannon House Office Building(202) 225-6155amodei.house.gov
Rep. Susie LeeNV-03365 Cannon House Office Building(202) 225-3252susielee.house.gov
Rep. Steven HorsfordNV-04406 Cannon House Office Building(202) 225-9894horsford.house.gov

New York Legislature: the committees that own this

New York's Essential Plan commission ban is program policy, and the committees below own the insurance and health statutes that could override it. If you are a New York producer, start with your own state senator and Assembly member, then copy the chairs.

LegislatorRoleAlbany phoneEmail
Sen. Jamaal T. BaileyDistrict 36 (Bronx/Westchester)Chair, Senate Insurance Committee(518) 455-2061contact form
Asm. David I. WeprinDistrict 24 (Queens)Chair, Assembly Insurance Committee(518) 455-5806WeprinD@nyassembly.gov
Sen. Gustavo RiveraDistrict 33 (Bronx)Chair, Senate Health Committee(518) 455-3395grivera@nysenate.gov
Asm. Amy PaulinDistrict 88 (Westchester)Chair, Assembly Health Committee(518) 455-5585PaulinA@nyassembly.gov

Washington Legislature: protect what already works

Washington already requires parity, but through exchange certification guidance, which can be rewritten in any plan year. A statute cannot. If you are a Washington producer, tell your legislators the requirement works and ask them to codify it. Find yours with the district finder, then copy the health committee chairs. Washington legislators take email through official contact forms, linked below.

LegislatorRoleOlympia phoneContact
Sen. Annette ClevelandDistrict 49 (Vancouver)Chair, Senate Health & Long-Term Care Committee(360) 786-7696contact form
Rep. Dan BronoskeDistrict 28 (Lakewood)Chair, House Health Care & Wellness Committee(360) 786-7958contact form

Colorado brokers

Your parity statute is the model. Tell your legislators it works, and watch for any attempt to weaken it. Find them at leg.colorado.gov.

Your professional associations

If you would rather work through your association than contact offices alone, these are the published contacts. HAFA is the association currently litigating New York's Essential Plan commission ban.

AssociationContact personPhoneEmail / web
HAFA (Health Agents for America)NationalB. Ronnell Nolan, HIA, CHRS, President/CEO1-855-981-4232HAFA@HAFAmerica.org
NABIP NevadaContact the chapter office (2026-2027 officer roster in transition)(702) 586-3887nvsahu.org
NABIP New York StateMichael Leffler, Presidentnysahu.org (web form)
NABIP WashingtonJolene Bryant, President; Sue Wakamoto-Lee, Executive Director(714) 923-7224info@wahealthunderwriters.org
NAIFA NevadaTrish Bauman, Presidentnv.naifa.org
NAIFA New YorkPaul Sciacca, ChFC, President(518) 320-8444info@naifanewyork.org
NAIFA WashingtonHailey Allen, President(206) 228-9351office@naifawashington.org

And know who speaks for the carriers. Each state's health plans have a trade association of their own; legislators will hear from these organizations on the other side of this issue: the Nevada Association of Health Plans (DuAne Young, President, (775) 531-0512), the New York Health Plan Association (Eric Linzer, President & CEO, (518) 462-2293), and the Association of Washington Healthcare Plans ((360) 524-3060; leadership not published). AHIP, the national carrier association, has no state chapters; these state associations are its state-level counterparts.

Stay in the loop

Get updates as this moves

Bill numbers, hearing dates, comment deadlines, and what to do when each one lands, for Nevada, New York, and any state that follows. That's all this list is for.

Confidentiality: Your information is used only to send you updates about commission parity efforts. It will not be published, sold, shared with carriers, or disclosed to anyone else. Unsubscribe any time by replying to any update. Anything you share about your practice stays confidential, and please do not include client names or any client health information in the form.