Pennsylvania lawmakers are weighing new legislation that would impose transparency and accountability requirements on insurers, hospitals and clinics that use artificial intelligence (AI) in their operations.
House Bill 1925, introduced on Oct. 6, aims to ensure that AI systems used in insurance and healthcare do not violate the state's anti-discrimination laws and that human oversight remains central to decision-making. Under the bill, final determinations involving individuals, such as claims, coverage or medical assessments, must be made by a human reviewer based on an individualized assessment.
Rep. Arvind Venkat, a Democrat from Allegheny County and practicing physician, said the measure responds to the rapid adoption of AI tools across the health sector.
The bill, he added, seeks to ensure AI is used responsibly and not in ways that perpetuate harmful biases in clinical or insurance decisions, according to a report from BestWire.
If enacted, insurers would be required to attest to the Pennsylvania Department of Insurance that their AI systems comply with existing anti-discrimination laws and to provide documentation showing how this determination was made. Healthcare providers would be required to make similar attestations to the state Department of Human Services.
The legislation has bipartisan support and adds to growing national discussions over how to regulate AI in industries that rely heavily on data-driven decision-making.
Industry trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) said a federal framework for AI governance would be preferable, arguing it would ensure consistent protections nationwide while reducing administrative burdens and compliance costs. In a policy paper, AHIP called for a “high-level, risk-based” regulatory approach that provides flexibility as AI evolves, while protecting intellectual property by limiting unnecessary disclosures.
The Pennsylvania proposal aligns with emerging trends in AI oversight globally. The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority has similarly emphasized proportional, risk-based AI regulation, focusing on fairness, data governance, transparency, and the role of human oversight, according to the report.
For insurers, the legislation could signal a shift toward greater scrutiny of algorithmic tools used in underwriting, claims assessment, and pricing. While the bill promotes consumer confidence and ethical use of technology, it may also lead to additional compliance costs and documentation requirements. Carriers using AI-driven analytics will likely need to strengthen internal governance frameworks, invest in explainable AI systems, and ensure audit trails that demonstrate non-discriminatory outcomes.
Other states have begun pursuing similar initiatives. In California, the Department of Insurance is drafting guidance on AI use in underwriting and claims, while New York’s Department of Financial Services has launched a working group to study algorithmic bias in insurance models. These efforts, combined with Pennsylvania’s proposal, suggest a growing patchwork of state-level AI governance aimed at ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability across the insurance landscape.
