CMA releases 2026 Legislative Wrap-Up: Shaping the Future of Health Care

Claims reimbursement protections, clinical AI safeguards and patient safety measures advanced, while administrative burden and Medi-Cal access remain concerns.

For Los Angeles physicians, decisions made in Sacramento affect how care is delivered, how practices are paid and whether patients can maintain access to their physicians. California’s 2026 legislative session produced new protections for claims reimbursement and clinical AI, alongside setbacks on prior authorization and automatic downcoding.

The newly released 2026 Legislative Wrap-Up documents those outcomes against a backdrop of continuing state budget pressures. For LACMA+CMA members, the report shows the practical value of physician advocacy—and where sustained engagement is still needed.

Protecting reimbursement and reducing administrative burden

Signed into law, SB 1049 addresses a frustrating claims practice: requesting additional documentation, then denying payment because a filing deadline has passed.

The law gives providers at least 90 days to submit a corrected claim following a denial or overpayment notice involving a correctable error. It also prohibits health plans and insurers from denying those corrected claims based on other filing deadlines.

Prior authorization reform has produced mixed results across two legislative years. Of the four bills introduced in last year’s package, SB 306 was signed, AB 510 was held in committee and AB 512 was vetoed. The remaining measure, AB 539, returned this year and passed the Legislature before being vetoed.

AB 539 would have required approved prior authorizations to remain valid for at least one year, or for the duration requested by the treating provider if shorter. The one-year requirement would not have applied when an enrollee changed plans.

Another practice priority, AB 2431, which would have restricted automatic downcoding and required physician oversight of AI used for that purpose, was held in committee.

Establishing safeguards for clinical AI

Signed into law, SB 503 requires developers of AI clinical decision support systems to make reasonable efforts to identify and mitigate bias. Developers must also provide documentation explaining intended uses, limitations and foreseeable risks. Organizations using these systems must regularly monitor them and take reasonable, proportionate steps to address bias.

Other AI proposals had different outcomes:

• AB 2575: Physician disclosure provisions were removed following advocacy. The amended bill passed the Legislature but was vetoed by the Governor.

• AB 1018: A separate automated decision systems proposal containing disclosure requirements opposed by physician advocates did not advance from the Senate floor.

• SB 903: A proposal regulating AI in psychotherapy services was vetoed. Opposition remained over restrictions affecting AI triage and screening tools.

• SB 1146: A proposal requiring disclosures for AI-generated or significantly altered imagery, audio or video in health-related advertising was held in committee.

• 
  

Together, these measures reflect an ongoing challenge: protecting patients as AI develops while keeping requirements workable for physicians.

Advancing patient safety

Physicians’ concerns about e-bike injuries helped drive AB 2346, which was signed into law. It establishes a statewide 10 mph sidewalk speed limit, gives local governments greater flexibility to set limits on bike paths and multi-use trails, and requires sellers and distributors to provide safety information.

Beginning in 2029, all e-bikes sold in California must have front and rear lights, and Class 2 e-bikes must have speedometers. The report anticipates another round of e-bike legislation in about a year, informed by results from ongoing pilot projects.

Advocacy also stopped AB 2497, a proposed expansion of physical therapists’ scope of practice, and blocked expanded naturopathic prescribing and procedural authority proposed through SB 1333 and later amendments to SB 1303.

Watching Medi-Cal access

The state maintained targeted Medi-Cal rate increases for primary care, maternal care and non-specialty mental health services. However, the report warns that moving undocumented enrollees from managed care to fee-for-service could reduce access and make physician participation more difficult.

For Los Angeles practices serving these patients, implementation deserves close attention. The legislative session has ended, but the work of protecting access, reimbursement and clinical judgment continues—and remains a central reason to stay engaged through LACMA+CMA.

Read the legislative overview and access the full 2026 Legislative Wrap-Up. The full report is available to members.