LANSING – House Speaker Andy Dillon’s call for a single health insurance pool for all government employees made headlines last July, but in the 12 months since then, questions about how much such a plan would save have overcome efforts to move the proposal forward.
Besides the annual budget, there has been no single piece of legislation that has gotten more attention and more hearings in recent years before a legislative committee than Dillon’s HB 5345. When the proposal was first announced, Dillon (D-Redford Twp.) said his research showed it could save up to $900 million and the startling nature of a Democratic speaker of the House proposing the idea triggered a sensation.
Rep. Phil Pavlov (R-St. Clair), the ranking Republican on the special committee Dillon formed to weigh the issue and sponsor of a related bill on the subject, said the pushback to the initiative was never outmatched by Mr. Dillon’s efforts to advance the bill.
“There’s a difference between being able to propose something than (actually) getting something done,” Pavlov said.
Unions, largely afraid that the plan would eliminate collective bargaining rights, questioned the $900 million figure and were backed up with research conducted by Public Policy Associates on their behalf showing the savings were questionable and the plan could actually cost the state some coin.
As Dillon’s white paper eventually made its way into legislation, the Public Employee Healthcare Reform Committee was formed and the 13-member panel immediately got to work, holding about a dozen hearings on the proposal.
The public pace of the proposal began to wane. Lawmakers were caught up in wanting to know how much a single health care pool could save the state and local units of government, and they wanted specifics.
If it wasn’t an election year, Dillon told Gongwer News Service he would have tried to move the bill in the House in June.
“I’m aware of the implications that comes along with that,” he said of taking a vote now on the legislation.
Asked if that comment was in the context of his gubernatorial bid, Dillon said the answer is unclear as to what moving the bill would mean to the gubernatorial race. But he said the bill being such an important reform, he hoped it wouldn’t be a political issue.
Pavlov’s bill, legislation requiring locals to give the state information on what they currently spend on health care (HB 5671 ), is the only bill to come out of the specially created committee and that bill has been dormant on the floor since December.
Pavlov said he, like others, was excited at the potential savings promised, but wanted to see what they could actually quantify. He said since the bill has gone nowhere in more than six months, it’s obvious Democratic leadership in the House wasn’t really interested in putting an exact figure on the pooling proposal.
“We missed a great opportunity to learn about what municipal governments are doing in the area of health care,” he said. “If we couldn’t start at that point, how would we ever quantify the savings?”
Some political observers have remarked that Dillon announced the pooling measure as a precursor to a gubernatorial bid, on which he finally embarked earlier this year.
Pavlov said he didn’t believe Dillon announced the plan only to increase his name identification among voters, but lamented the lack of a successful pushback to the criticism.
Dillon said when he announced the pooling proposal it was not yet in bill form. He acknowledged that at first he was criticized for moving too quickly, but now he’s being criticized for moving too slowly. But he noted the 2008 energy reform legislation took two years to build a coalition and get the changes into law.
Dillon said he will need to rely on “significant” Republican support for the pooling bill, but when he whipped the vote in January, there were Democrats on board. Dillon said improvements to the bill made in May, which included allowing the local bargaining units to bargain over whether to participate in the pool, would hopefully bring more Democrats on board.
“I’m committed to getting it done,” he said.
While he’d prefer that happen sooner rather than later, Dillon didn’t give a timetable for action, saying it was more important to make sure the votes are there in the House so the bill doesn’t die. Should it ever pass the House, Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop (R-Rochester) has strongly indicated the Senate would pass it.
Told of Pavlov’s comments about needing concrete data on local health care spending to move forward, Dillon said they didn’t move his bill because it was his understanding health insurance providers would give the state that information should the need arise.
The largest voice of opposition to the pooling proposal has been the Michigan Education Association, which has fought all year with the Legislature over changes to education standards related to the federal “Race to the Top” program, as well as a retirement program for public school employees.
While the group’s most ardent opposition to the plan came early on, Doug Pratt, spokesperson for the MEA, said they continue to emphasize to lawmakers there are no quick fixes in the budget and Dillon’s proposal is too complex to simply ram through.
“The biggest reason you haven’t seen it go anywhere in a year is because lawmakers see the numbers aren’t there,” Pratt said. “You look at the people who would be affected by this legislation who are asking legitimate questions and aren’t getting any answers.”
Pavlov said he thinks there was some effort to get more agreement on the pooling bill when Dillon, after the work of several workgroups, proposed some amendments to the committee. But Dillon didn’t present a revised version of the bill in June before lawmakers broke for the August election.
Pratt didn’t weigh into the question of whether Dillon is better off postponing a vote on the legislation until after the election is over, but said the proposal certainly has been a huge issue in terms of gubernatorial politics and where groups like the MEA stand. The MEA has endorsed Dillon’s rival for the Democratic nomination, Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero.
While Mr. Pratt said they don’t want to see the legislation revisited in the coming months, Pavlov said he does hope it gains some steam once again.
But he also said he doesn’t have a good sense on where the pooling measure is headed, either after the legislative summer break or during lame duck.
“I can’t get a good read on it,” Pavlov said.
This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com
a>>
