that is found not in the text of the statute itself, but rather in the surrounding provisions of the Act that define the key terms of the statute. As these provisions are indispensable to the interpretation and application of the statute, we cannot separate the references to ERISA in those provisions from such references in the statute itself. 37 . See Travelers, - U.S. at-, 115 S.Ct. at 1678. 38 . See, e.g., Alessi, 451 U.S. at 524, 101 S.Ct. at 1906 (discussing a state statute that banned pension benefit offsets based on workers compensation awards, and holding that the statute related to ERISA plans pursuant to § 514(a) because it "eliminate[d] one method for calculating ... benefits ... that is permitted by federal law"); see also FMC Corp., 498 U.S. at 60, 111 S.Ct. at 408 (<HOLDING>). 39 . See Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v.
holding that statute related to erisa plans pursuant to  514a because it prohibited plans from being structured in a manner requiring reimbursement in the event of a recovery from a third party holding that a statute relates to erisa plans for the purposes of preemption if it requires the plans to purchase the  benefits specified in the statute when they purchase a certain kind of common insurance policy holding that a termination of an erisa plans benefits must be based upon the plans terms and language holding that a state law requiring benefit plans to include minimum benefits related to erisa plans holding that a statute regulating only hospital rates did not relate to erisa plans merely because it had the net result of increasing insurers and selffunded plans costs of providing benefits