Issue · Healthcare

Healthcare

Every healthcare bill, vote, and legislator stance in Arizona, automatically classified by Maddy, our AI policy reader.

Total bills
34
57th Legislature - Second Regular Session
Top supporter
Kevin Payne
81% support rate
Top opponent
Michael Way
24% support rate
Ranked legislators
10
5 support · 5 oppose
Key legislators

Who's moving healthcare in Arizona

Legislators moving healthcare in Arizona
Legislator Party Stance Support rate Decisive votes
Kevin Payne
Kevin Payne Senate · District 27
R
Strong +
81% 73
Hildy Angius
Hildy Angius Senate · District 30
R
Support
79% 78
T.J. Shope
T.J. Shope Senate · District 16
R
Support
79% 78
Tim Dunn
Tim Dunn Senate · District 25
R
Support
79% 78
Vince Leach
Vince Leach Senate · District 17
R
Support
79% 78
Michael Way
Michael Way House · District 15
R
Oppose
24% 82
Justin Olson
Justin Olson House · District 10
R
Oppose
27% 92
Khyl Powell
Khyl Powell House · District 14
R
Oppose
27% 92
Rachel Keshel
Rachel Keshel House · District 17
R
Oppose
28% 87
Alex Kolodin
Alex Kolodin House · District 3
R
Oppose
30% 90
Showing 31–34 of 34 bills

All healthcare bills

passed · Arizona · Senate Mar 16, 2026

SB 1114: appropriation; behavioral health patient brokering

SB 1114 appropriates $1,000,000 from Arizona's state general fund for fiscal year 2026-2027 to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office. The funds are specifically designated for investigations into "behavioral health patient brokering," an unethical practice where individuals or entities refer patients to treatment facilities for financial gain. This bill directly affects Maricopa County (which includes Phoenix) by providing resources to investigate these practices, without creating new regulations or altering existing laws. The appropriation is a one-time funding measure focused solely on enabling law enforcement investigations.
passed · Arizona · Senate Mar 10, 2026

SB 1244: court-ordered treatment; continuation

Arizona Senate Bill 1244 amends mental health statutes to streamline court-ordered treatment continuity for individuals with serious mental health conditions. It requires mental health agencies to conduct annual reviews 90 days before treatment expiration to assess whether continued court-ordered treatment is appropriate (Section 36-543). The bill creates a new "conversion" process (Section 36-543.01) allowing patients to transition to ongoing court-ordered treatment without a full new petition, while strengthening notification requirements for guardians and patients about treatment renewals or discharges (Sections 36-504.01, 36-542). These changes directly affect patients under court-ordered mental health treatment, their guardians, and mental health treatment agencies.
passed · Arizona · Senate Mar 10, 2026

SB 1629: behavioral health; contracts; network adequacy

SB 1629 requires Arizona managed care organizations (MCOs) to submit a detailed network adequacy study to the administration before terminating contracts with "high-volume" behavioral health service providers (those delivering ≥10% of a specific service or employing >10% of licensed providers) without cause. The study must analyze service provider-to-enrollee ratios, appointment wait times, patient volume, impacts on disabled members, and cumulative termination effects, with MCOs providing 90 days' written notice. The administration reviews these studies within 10 business days and must confirm network adequacy standards will be maintained before allowing termination. This bill directly affects MCOs and high-volume behavioral health providers by creating a review process to prevent disruptions in mental health services.
passed both · Arizona · Senate Feb 16, 2026

SB 1368: SNAP; allowed purchases; waiver.

SB 1368 requests a federal waiver to restrict Arizona SNAP recipients from using benefits to purchase sugary drinks, candy, and low-nutrition snacks. If approved, it would allow the state to define "non-eligible foods" (like soda and candy) while keeping all standard SNAP-eligible foods (fresh produce, dairy, lean meats, etc.) accessible. The bill explicitly states this change would not reduce benefit amounts or limit access to nutritious foods. It requires the state to provide clear guidance to recipients and retailers during implementation. The bill is currently pending federal approval and in early legislative stages.
Showing 31 to 34 of 34 bills
Previous 1 … 2 3 4