Just a month ago a group of Republican senators was praised for calling for more respect and less personal denigration in Augusta. Next week, they and their colleagues in the Senate will have a chance to put those sentiments to the test as they consider a rewrite of state insurance regulations that were hastily passed by the House.
“There can, will and should be those occasions when our honestly held positions lead us to disagree and to vigorously debate the issues of the day,” the senators wrote in a column printed last month in several Maine newspapers. “It is how we manage that conflict that matters. And ‘how’ you do something is often as important as ‘what’ you do.”
Writing the column was a courageous act that earned the senators much-deserved accolades. Now they can turn those ideals into action.
The “how” of LD 1333 included a public hearing on the original bill — which was only four pages long — at which a 24-page amendment was presented to committee members. Another amendment was unveiled late Wednesday night, after the committee had voted on the previous version. The next day, the House, on a strictly party-line vote, approved the measure. It is clear that many of the Republicans who voted for it do not know the details of the bill. A bill to make whoopie pies the official state treat had more legislative review and debate than LD 1333.
Those who opposed the bill were called “bullies” and, essentially, liars by Republican leadership. This is the very “government by disrespect” that the eight senators condemned.
The “what” of LD 1333 is also troubling. Republicans are right that insurance costs in Maine are too high and that this prevents too many young people from buying health insurance. LD 1333 essentially lowers the cost of insurance for young people by raising the costs for the chronically ill, older residents and those who live in rural areas.
It does this by creating a separate pool for these people, which would be funded by a monthly $4 surcharge on all insurance holders. The bill also allows insurers, over time, to charge some policyholders up to five times more than others. The current limit in Maine is 1.5 times more and federal law allows a 3-1 gap.
The bill also allows insurance companies to push people toward treatment at distant facilities that have lower costs and, beginning in 2014, would allow Mainers to buy insurance from companies in a limited number of New England states.
All of these provisions are worthy of discussion. But that discussion has not happened. And, because of the extremely rushed process, the Bureau of Insurance has not had time to analyze the consequences of the amended bill. There will be benefits — lower premiums for young people and lower costs for business owners. But there are also negative consequences — limited benefits and high deductibles and co-pays are likely, given other states’ experiences with high-risk pools.
Responsible lawmakers should want to know whether the benefits outweigh the downsides before moving ahead with such sweeping changes.