Health Plan Act clears hurdle despite insurance industry opposition

Photo: MNHS.org

Republicans and Democrats squared off in committee on Monday as the Minnesota Health Act got its first hearing. The ideological divide centered on DFLers who argued that health care should be a public good available to all and Republicans who asserted that the market, and to a small extent the government safety net, should determine the future of health care in Minnesota.

But folks of every ideological bent agreed: The current system does not work.

“We don’t have a health care system; we have a patchwork mess,” said Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville. His bill, the Minnesota Health Act, would create a single health insurance pool available to each Minnesotan. This “single-payer system” would replace the status quo, with the state of Minnesota charged with administering the system.

Sen. John Marty: Health care is a "patchwork mess."

The bill was heard in the Senate Health, Housing and Family Security Committee.

“The purpose of this health care system is to provide health care needs, control costs and improve health,” said Marty. “This means treating health care as a community good like police, fire and schools.”

Marty spoke of a litany of advantages the system might bring about. Entrepreneurs could more easily develop new businesses and products without worrying about a 40-hour-a-week job just to keep insurance. It would lift a burden off small businesses. It would lower administrative costs for hospitals, which wouldn’t need to deal with dozens of health plans. It would ensure more equitable medical services in rural areas where it currently isn’t profitable to insure people.

But testimony from corporate interests and the insurance industry did not acknowledge any such advantages in store for them.

Julie Brunner of the Minnesota Council of Health Plans, an insurance industry group, said it opposes the plan, which would eliminate the need for the health insurance industry. “Senate File 118 throws out the current system; it throws out the good with the bad.”

Beth McMullin of the Minnesota Business Partnership said her group opposed the bill. The MBP represents Minnesota’s largest corporations, including HealthPartners, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Federated Insurance and UnitedHealth.

“The Business Partnership opposes a single-system such as this,” said McMullin. “Health Care reform should ensure a market-based system.”

Stacia Smith of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce said, “The Chamber opposes a government-run single payer system and is open to market-based, competitive means of reform.”

Despite those concerns, the bill passed the committee, 8-5, down party lines.

On voting for the bill, Sen. Linda Berglin, DFL-Minneapolis, said, “I do support value-based [market-based] purchasing of health care, but I don’t think it works if you have more and more people each year who don’t have the ability to afford to purchase it.”

Sen. John Doll, DFL-Burnsville, made one of the more memorable closing remarks, noting that market-based proponents haven’t offered an effective alternative:

I think there is an argument to be made that there are other systems that are working, and aren’t necessarily in the marketplace. … Over 100,000 people die every year due to lack of health insurance. That’s a plane crashing every week. If we had a plane crash in America every week and everyone died, we would up in arms. We would demand that the industry change. And yet we don’t think we need to make major significant changes to our health care system. … I haven’t heard about a better system from opponents other than we need to let the marketplace make those decisions.