Sen. Pam Helming has a simple request of her fellow New York state lawmakers – tell people the projected costs of bills that would expand insurance coverage requirements.

Last week, senators passed legislation that shines a light on why Helming’s bill (S.8619) is so desperately needed. Senators approved S.4497 to remove an existing restriction on infertility preservation services that would make more of those services something required to be covered by insurers in New York state. As is the case with most insurance coverage bills that come before the state Legislature, supporters have good reasons for the bill.

The cost of freezing eggs is too high for most couples fighting infertility to pursue the process, so expanding insurance coverage means more people could experience the joy of having a family.

Here’s the rub. Removing the restriction comes at a cost – $3 million to the state budget for the coverage state-backed insurances must now cover and about $20 million statewide. That information wasn’t included in the memorandum for S.4497 – and it’s information that should have been included for not only lawmakers voting on the proposal but the general public if they’re interested in following along with how their elected officials are spending your money.

New York was also No. 1 for employee-plus-one coverage, with an average cost of $19,431, and No. 5 for family coverage, at $27,188, according to a federal survey cited by the Empire Center. The Empire Center noted state-specific factors for increasing costs include coverage mandates that require insurers to pay for certain services regardless of whether plans consider them to be medically necessary – or to limit or eliminate cost-sharing for certain types of claims.

At a time when Gov. Kathy Hochul is publicly pushing for measures to make New York state more affordable, the state Legislature is taking action to make health insurance coverage less affordable. This isn’t just a Democratic Party problem – several Republicans voted in support of S.4497. These bills expanding insurance coverage requirements often are not party line votes. One reason for that, in our opinion, is too often the end costs aren’t known – or aren’t talked about – before the legislature votes.

That’s one reason we support Helming’s S.8619. It would require the cost of these bills to be included in the legislative memorandum for any expansion of health insurance coverage requirements. That should be standard practice in the first place and not require new legislation to be passed. Where else in the nation do we pass laws with no concern for cost? Of course, New York doesn’t want you to see how its climate policies affect your utility bills, so why would it want you to see how its constant expansion of insurance coverage is affecting your health insurance bill?

We have the answer to our own question. Keeping the state’s hand in the costs that take money out of your bank account means the state can blast those robber barons who own utility or health insurance companies while at the same time ignoring its role in the state’s affordability crisis. They get your cake and eat it too while getting to blame the missing cake on someone else. It’s a heck of a racket.