Engagement this month
This month, Lobbyit and NEA leadership met with representatives from CMS (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) CCIIO (Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight). CCIIO directly oversees rulemaking around short-term limited duration insurance, making this an incredibly valuable meeting with policymakers in the regulatory space. The meeting was attended by a large number of agency staff from CCIIO, including Deputy Administrator Peter Nelson, the Director of CCIIO.
The team opened by outlining NEA’s mission, emphasizing its advocacy for small and mid size businesses and its role in providing a comprehensive benefits platform. We noted that NEA works with thousands of independent health insurance agents nationwide, giving the organization strong visibility into how coverage options are functioning at the state level.
The conversation then focused on short term, limited duration insurance and recent CCIIO guidance. Peter Nelson asked what we are seeing on the ground beyond formal policy statements. Mike Kleingartner shared that roughly 15 to 16 states are currently allowing three year short term plans, and expressed some surprise that major carriers have reentered the market even without final federal rulemaking. When asked about potential expansion under a regulatory framework similar to the first Trump administration, we estimated that close to 30 states could ultimately adopt these plans, primarily conservative led states.
Peter emphasized CCIIO’s limited authority absent legislation and noted that additional expansion beyond the prior rule of 36 months would likely require formal rulemaking, instead of the non-enforcement policy in place. The discussion also addressed persistent criticism of short term plans as “junk.” CCIIO agreed that better data and clearer communication about plan quality are essential to counter opposition narratives and inform future policy decisions.
The meeting was constructive and emphasized the importance of continued engagement. While CCIIO could not outright commit to a formal rulemaking timeline, there was clear interest in monitoring state activity and assessing whether additional regulatory action is warranted in the new year. In the meantime, we plan to engage with relevant congressional contacts to share feedback from the discussion, particularly around state level uptake, plan quality, and the need for clearer data and messaging to inform any future legislative or regulatory efforts.
Work on the Hill
While December is traditionally a quieter month in Washington as Congress works to clear must-pass items before adjournment and policymakers shift attention toward the holidays, this past month still produced several meaningful policy developments that will shape the early months of the new year. Most notably, Congress completed work on the FY2026 National Defense Authorization Act, continuing its work of enacting annual defense policy even amid broader legislative debates. The NDAA authorized roughly $900 billion in defense and national security spending and reflected bipartisan agreement on the need to sustain U.S. military readiness, invest in advanced capabilities, and maintain congressional oversight of major strategic decisions. The final legislation placed limits on reductions in U.S. troop levels overseas without congressional approval, included continued though scaled-back security assistance for Ukraine, expanded authorities related to outbound investment screening tied to national security, and reinforced funding priorities for emerging technologies such as space systems and advanced research. While appropriations negotiations remain unresolved and will carry into 2026, passage of the NDAA provided a measure of stability and predictability for the defense sector and reaffirmed Congress’s role in shaping national security policy.
December also featured important executive branch activity that signaled broader strategic priorities. The administration released an updated National Security Strategy that emphasized economic readiness, border and homeland security, and a more restrained approach to overseas commitments compared to prior frameworks. The document underscored a focus on strengthening domestic industrial capacity, reorienting foreign policy toward what the administration views as direct national interests, and recalibrating relationships with allies and competitors alike. Although the National Security Strategy itself does not carry the force of law, it serves as a guiding document for agency actions and legislative proposals, and its themes are likely to influence budget decisions, regulatory activity, and diplomatic engagement in the year ahead.
Technology policy also advanced in December through executive action, particularly around artificial intelligence. The administration issued an executive order aimed at promoting American leadership in AI development while limiting what it characterized as fragmented or burdensome regulatory approaches. The move reflects growing federal concern that inconsistent state rules or overly restrictive frameworks could slow innovation and weaken U.S. competitiveness. While Congress has yet to coalesce around comprehensive AI legislation, the executive action set a clear tone heading into 2026, suggesting that federal policymakers will continue to prioritize a national standard for innovation, security considerations, and global competition in shaping technology governance.
Immigration enforcement emerged as another notable issue late in the month, with reports that federal authorities were preparing a large-scale recruitment effort to significantly expand enforcement capacity. The plan drew attention to the administration’s aggressive posture on immigration and deportation, and it reignited debate over enforcement priorities, resource allocation, and civil liberties. Although no major immigration legislation moved through Congress in December, the heightened focus on enforcement signals that immigration will remain a central and potentially contentious policy area as lawmakers return to Washington in January.
Beyond these headline items, December served as a period of positioning rather than sweeping legislative change. Committees wrapped up oversight work, agencies finalized or paused regulatory actions, and stakeholders across sectors assessed the implications of the NDAA and new executive directives. At the same time, unresolved issues such as federal funding levels, regulatory reform, and trade and economic policy remain on the agenda, setting up a busy start to the new year.
Looking ahead to January, attention will quickly turn to appropriations negotiations to avert funding lapses and provide longer-term budget certainty. Congress is expected to jump right back into funding discussions as we approach the deadline set by the continuing resolution on January 30th. While December itself reflected the customary slowdown in DC, the policy decisions finalized before the recess laid important groundwork, ensuring that 2026 will begin with a full slate of regulatory issues and legislative work in the year ahead.
New STLDI legislation introduced
This month, Rep. Max Miller introduced two bills aimed at expanding affordable health care options for individuals and small businesses, with one proposal specifically addressing short-term, limited-duration insurance (STLDI). The STLDI bill would reestablish and broaden access to longer-term short-term health plans, providing an alternative to traditional major medical coverage in the individual market.
Miller’s bill would extend the maximum permissible duration of these plans, restoring the ability to offer coverage for up to 36 months, similar to policies available prior to the Biden-era restrictions. The proposal aims to increase choice and affordability, particularly for consumers who are priced out of comprehensive ACA-compliant plans or who want more flexible, lower-cost coverage options. By lengthening the allowable term of STLDI plans, the legislation seeks to provide more predictable coverage continuity and mitigate gaps in insurance for individuals and business owners unable to shoulder high premiums. The bill also provides a definition of STLDI that may help formal rulemaking in the future, unlike Rep. Buddy Carter’s bill introduced earlier in 2025 that failed to provide a definition of its own.
This legislative effort complements ongoing discussions at the CMS and CCIIO about how to define and regulate short-term plans. It presents an opportunity for Congressional offices to provide input and clarify the role of STLDI in the broader health insurance landscape, and for us to continue our efforts to engage in shaping an STLDI framework that prioritizes both access and choice.
USCIS shortens foreign employee renewal period
In early December, the Trump administration announced a significant tightening of employment authorization rules for certain foreign workers, sharply reducing the length of time many non-citizens can legally work in the US before having to renew their permits. US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) said that refugees, asylees and several other categories of foreign nationals will now be required to reapply for work authorization at least every 18 months, with some required to renew every 12 months or even more frequently. Previously, these groups often received longer authorization periods, which reduced administrative burdens for both workers and employers.
USCIS leadership framed the change as part of a broader effort to strengthen immigration enforcement and enhance national security. Director Joseph Edlow argued that shortening authorization periods will allow the agency to conduct more frequent vetting of foreign workers and better assess potential security risks. The move follows other recent actions, including pausing the review of certain green card and citizenship applications from 19 countries and requiring re-interviews of immigrants from those nations.
The change also builds on a Department of Homeland Security decision in November to roll back a rule that had allowed foreign workers to remain employed in the US while awaiting renewal of their work permits. Taken together, these steps signal a more restrictive and compliance-focused approach to employment-based immigration. For employers, the policy increases the likelihood of workforce disruptions, higher administrative costs and more frequent interactions with USCIS, particularly for businesses that rely on refugee and asylee labor.
DOT eliminates CDL training providers
DOT Secretary Sean Duffy announced in early December a major crackdown on “unqualified drivers” in the trucking industry, removing nearly 3,000 commercial driver’s license training providers from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration registry. These providers were deemed non-compliant with federal standards, which are designed to ensure trainees meet the Administration’s readiness requirements. Over 4,000 additional providers had previously been put on notice for similar violations.
The FMCSA website confirms that more than 3,000 providers were removed from the registry between May 30 and November 4, some voluntarily and some involuntarily, though it was unclear if Duffy’s announcement added more. The action targets providers accused of manipulating training data, failing to meet curriculum or instructor qualifications, not maintaining accurate records, or refusing to provide required documentation for federal audits or investigations. Duffy characterized the move as part of a broader effort to eliminate unsafe and illegal practices in the trucking industry, criticizing the Biden administration for allowing unqualified drivers on U.S. roads.
The crackdown builds on earlier measures aimed at increasing safety, including limiting non-U.S. citizens from obtaining or renewing CDLs following fatal crashes involving immigrant drivers, though that effort was recently paused by a federal appeals court. It also follows actions by Secretary of State Marco Rubio in August to halt employment visas for truck drivers and reinforce English proficiency standards.
These measures signal a sustained push by the DOT to strengthen oversight of the commercial driving pipeline, improve training and recordkeeping compliance, and reduce the number of drivers considered insufficiently prepared for road safety. For the industry at large, the move underscores that federal enforcement will be aggressive and that adherence to established training standards is now a top priority.
NLRB nominees confirmed, reaching quorum
This month, the Senate confirmed several of President Trump’s nominees in an en bloc vote, giving the National Labor Relations Board enough members to form a quorum and filling most senior posts at the Labor Department. James Murphy, a longtime NLRB staffer, and Boeing chief labor counsel Scott Mayer will join the board overseeing private-sector labor disputes, solidifying Republican control after the agency lacked enough members to rule on cases since Trump removed Democratic appointee Gwynne Wilcox earlier this year. Crystal Carey will join as NLRB general counsel following initial concerns from Sen. Josh Hawley about her opposition to a Biden-era decision on captive-audience meetings.
The confirmations also filled key DOL positions. These appointments follow a similar October package that installed leaders at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, OSHA, Mine Safety and Health Administration, and the Office of Disability Employment Policy. Overall, the confirmations ensure the Trump administration has full staffing to advance its labor priorities and implement regulatory and apprenticeship programs in the new year.
National Employers Association