The short 2014 Legislative Session is just days away and it promises to be full of controversy. Gun control, marijuana, the CRC, higher taxes, and health care reform, just to name a few of the topics expected to come up for discussion.
Those seeking to further restrict our 2nd Amendment rights are once again hard at work at the Capitol.
Advocates for legalizing marijuana are asking lawmakers to refer a measure to the ballot next fall.
The Governor is pushing forward with the Columbia River Crossing (CRC) project using an "Oregon Only"approach asking state taxpayers to back this nearly $3 billion bridge proposal that still has many unanswered questions such as how it would be paid for.
Look for several tax reform ideas - some starting with the "S" word (sales tax) to be debated next month. And there will be attempts to modify the so-called "Grand Bargain" tax restructuring from the Special Session last fall.
Each legislator is allowed two bills. I introduced House Bill 4059 to give us better oversight of state business regulations, licensing and fees. The other is House Bill 4060 a new and improved version of one I've been working on for several years. This measure would ensure that when people register to vote in Oregon in order to cast a ballot in state and local elections they provide the same identification required by federal law to vote in federal elections.
Health care will be another dominant topic next month. Many of you know that from the very beginning, I have been more than skeptical of the implementation of the new federal health care reform law at the state level. Here we are, nearly four years after Obamacare was adopted by Congress, and Oregonians are once again faced with an expensive and failing computer project coupled with a new public corporation called Cover Oregon. Anyone remember the DMV computer debacle in the 1990's? Or the failed OWIN statewide radio project that went $100 million over budget? What did we learn from these mistakes?
Hundreds of thousands of people were supposed to have access to good information about health insurance choices and be able to sign up for Obamacare-compliant health insurance coverage from private insurers. Instead, hundreds of additional state workers had to be hired to process paper applications. And so far, only 30,000 thousand have been processed for private sector insurance.
Complicating all this is the other part of Obamacare - expanding Medicaid (Oregon Health Plan) coverage to another 200,000 plus low-income families. Many of those already on Medicaid, and certain new recipients applying for the first time, are also being processed through Cover Oregon.
The federal law allowed states to set up their own Health Insurance Exchanges, supposedly in order to help individuals and small businesses do one-stop shopping for health coverage that meets federal standards. Otherwise, the feds would come in to a state and set up an exchange if a state chose not to set up their own. The Oregon Legislature decided to create a state-run exchange and many leaders on the project claimed it would become a model for other states to follow.
I became more involved starting in 2011 when I was appointed to Co-Chair the Joint Committee on Audits and Information Management and Technology (JCLAIMT). I also served as a member of the legislature's budget subcommittee on Human Services as well as the full budget committee.
In the spring of 2011, budget hearings were held at the capitol on the first chunk of what would soon become $300 million in federal grants for the start-up costs to build this massive website for the Oregon-run exchange. I made my opposition clear when I testified, "I'm just a little recalcitrant when it comes to the federal government inserting itself into our state processes."
I had also asked what would happen when Cover Oregon did not meet it's enrollment goals; would they come to the state asking for more funding or otherwise ask us to change the law to force additional enrollment? I recently asked the head of the agency tough questions to see if anyone is being held accountable.
During the 2011 hearings (and more in 2012) we were told the project, which became Cover Oregon, would stay "on budget" and that, after 2015, the program would pay for itself through fees on insurance policies. Those who built Cover Oregon have now, not shockingly, warned that they may need additional revenue from state taxpayers.
The JLCAIMT committee spent countless hours over the past two years digging into the weeds on all the technology challenges. I was not the only legislator asking the tough questions about whether this project was going to deliver on the promises made. Project managers have even admitted there were many red flags months before the launch date.
I am not an expert on this program but in order to help Oregonians trying to navigate the new system, I've included in this newsletter a few helpful things to consider. (see below)
I will also not pretend to have all the answers on how to solve the many problems facing our health care system in America. I have supported legislation designed to give patients more choices, to allow more competition in the private sector, to reduce the amount of government rules and requirements that often get in the way of access and affordability. This is an ongoing discussion in the state legislature and I'm open to your ideas.
As for Cover Oregon, I think Senator Joanne Verger (D-Coos Bay) said it well during one of the budget committee hearings during the 2012 legislative session: "The proof of the pudding is in the taste and it's going to be in the implementation, and how all of this process is going to work and hold up to the scrutiny of those who are watching it." I couldn't agree more.
Sincerely,
