This column originally ran in the Duluth News Tribune
Minnesotans can’t afford to fall again for Democrats’ health care promises
Minnesota Democrats are again making bold promises about their health care plans. They promise more affordable care, more choices, and guaranteed coverage.
Stop me if that sounds familiar.
These were the same promises made about Obamacare, the very policy that took away choices and caused huge premium increases. Last fall, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton’s administration even acknowledged that Minnesota’s individual health care market was on the brink of collapse.
Despite the very recent health care failures, a week ago today, on these same News Tribune Opinion pages, Lt. Gov. Tina Smith made the Democrats’ case for their newest government-run health care idea — and she used the same incredible promises. The new plan? Significantly expanding the eligibility for MinnesotaCare, a public program subsidized to provide health coverage for the working poor. They call it MinnesotaCare Buy-In.
(The “Lieutenant Governor’s View” column was headlined, “Minnesotans deserve cheaper, better health insurance.”)
Under the plan, any Minnesotan could receive subsidized coverage, regardless of income. People from outside Minnesota could move here and gain subsidized coverage. The lieutenant governor claimed this would cost just $13 million, which was the amount the governor called for in his 2018-19 budget recommendation last March. In reality, though, the legislation depends on a reserve fund of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.
In addition, the Democrats haven’t answered basic questions about their buy-in plan.
One, can they guarantee the federal government would allow federal money to pay for non-eligible people? If we expand beyond the working poor, there’s no guarantee the federal government would fund them. And if they won’t, working families would have to pick up the tab.
Two, can rural hospitals survive on lower reimbursement rates? Right now, hospitals receive full reimbursement from privately insured individuals and less than half for those on public programs. If we shift to a model where few hospital patients are privately insured, how can those hospitals stay afloat?
Three, will premiums increase for everyone else? Private insurance cross-subsidizes public programs. If more people are on subsidized care, then everyone else will see premium spikes to make up the difference. Will the increases be higher than last year?
And four, will doctors and nurses see significant salary and benefit cuts? The only way the math works is if those on the front lines accept pay reductions.
Last session, Republicans spent much of our time and energy cleaning up the Obamacare mess. Republican policies worked: We stabilized the individual market, dramatically reversed premium spikes, and passed emergency relief to help families who needed it most.
I look forward to future hearings about ideas to improve our health care system. In fact, we gave the MinnesotaCare Buy-In idea considerable committee time during a hearing on Feb. 28.
But as we debate the next steps, supporters of expanding government-run health care should be honest and realistic about their plan.
The last time we tried the Democrats’ approach, we were promised that, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” and that everyone would save $2,500 a year on health care.
Minnesotans won’t fall for that again. It’s not enough for health care policy to sound good and feel good — it actually has to work.
_________
Sen. Michelle Benson, R-Ham Lake, is chairwoman of the Minnesota Senate’s Health and Human Services Finance and Policy Committee.