By Nancy Bratrud
Preston, MN
Our MN State House Representative has occasionally asked the local newspaper to print a questionnaire for his constituents to consider and then reply to him about their views on issues he raises. Now I will ask our Representative to reply in the newspaper to an issue many constituents raise regarding medical insurance.
1. Why did you author a bill that creates a taxpayer funded co-insurance fund to prop up Minnesota health insurance companies if one policy holder unexpectedly requires very expensive medical treatment? This is presumably meant to protect health insurance companies from having to raise premiums on all their policy holders to cover what could be an unanticipated high cost for another policy holder? The fund is proposed to be run by a commission appointed by the state insurance commissioner (like a previous commission that was dissolved with implementation of the ACA) composed of representatives of the insurance companies and other insurance industry related individuals. I ask because this seems like a rule to put the chickens under the care of the foxes.
2. How much more expensive would this proposal be compared to providing funds directly to citizens of Minnesota who are suddenly faced with extraordinary medical expense over and above their insurance coverage? The nonpartisan state fiscal staff estimates the proposal could cost the state $384 million over the next biennium. Others have testified they calculate that cost to be closer to $600 million and ask if it is sustainable.
3. Would enrollment into Minnesota Care on an individual need status basis serve the state budget better as it would better serve the patient?
I understand other legislators might believe, since you are an experienced member of the insurance industry, you might well be an informed expert, but to the average insured citizen, it might seem as an insurance industry member you could be thought to have the appearance of a conflict of interest. Perhaps you, as our long term representative, can offer a clear, transparent explanation to inform your constituents and to regain trust before this bill is considered by the Senate.