MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF HEALTH UNDERWRITERS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE            Contact: Kelly Loussedes, Vice President of Public Relations

July 1, 2010                                                           (703) 276-3835 or kloussedes@nahu.org

Michael A. Embry, RHU Elected Regional Vice President of the

National Association of Health Underwriters

(Arlington, VA) – Michael A. Embry, RHU, of Detroit Michigan, was recently elected regional vice president of the National Association of Health Underwriters’ (NAHU) Board of Trustees for 2010-2011. In this capacity, he will serve as the principal avenue of communications between the National Association and the state and local chapters in his region (MI, OH, IL, IN, KY and WV). Regional vice presidents hold a voting seat on the Board of Trustees and assure the interests of the members in their region are properly conveyed.

“We are very pleased to welcome Michael to the Board of Trustees,” said Janet Trautwein, executive vice president and CEO of NAHU. “He is a proven leader and we feel confident that he will serve the best interests of his region as we work towards implementation of health care reform that will benefit all Americans.”

Michael is currently a Vice President and Senior Account Director at Comerica Insurance Services, Inc., marketing employee benefit plans to small and mid size employer groups. He started the Group Benefits Division for Comerica in 1996 after having been in private practice for 12 years as the President of a successful Group Benefits practice.

Michael first joined the Metro Detroit Association of Health Underwriters in 1994, and has since served as President, Membership Chairperson and Legislative Chairperson. Michael has also been active with the Michigan Association of Health Underwriters’ State Board, serving as president, president-elect, treasurer and secretary. His most recently held positions were as the Legislative Chairperson for the Michigan Association of Health Underwriters as well as the Regional Chairperson for the National Association’s Political Action Committee.

In 2008, Michael was awarded the NAHU Distinguished Service Award and in 2009, the NAHU Legislative Achievement Award.

The National Association of Health Underwriters represents 100,000 professional health insurance agents and brokers who provide insurance for millions of Americans.  NAHU is headquartered in Arlington, VA.  For more information, please call Kelly Loussedes at 703-276-3835 or email kloussedes@nahu.org.

4/5/10 Gongwer News

Blues Bills, A Battle On Not?
Today at a Capitol press conference Senate and House health policy committee chairs Sen. Tom GEORGE (R-Texas Twp.) and Rep. Marc CORRIVEAU (D-Northville) announced individual health care market reforms. Fairly or not, in and around the Capitol the package is likely to be called the Blue Cross bills. 

In recent years, the Blue Cross label on legislation usually meant a legislative Armageddon. But that may not be the case this time around. The George news release today called the package a "bipartisan bicameral reform plan to make health insurance more affordable and accessible for Michigan residents." 

Health care industry sources told MIRS today that the package is bipartisan and bicameral. As for it being a "plan," both lawmakers admitted that there is still a lot of work to be done on the package. 

As for the measures making "health insurance more affordable and accessible;" that's subjective. But the same sources, some of which might have been expected to oppose the reforms, tell MIRS that -- as press conferences go -- the George and Corriveau one was actually pretty accurate. 

Nevertheless, this afternoon Attorney General Mike COX issued a news release in which he said he has "serious concerns" about a piece of the legislation introduced by Corriveau. 

"Just about a year ago we stopped an attempt by Blue Cross to kill oversight when they set rates on Michigan families," Cox said. "Today, we are once again looking at bills that would allow Blue Cross to raise rates with no Attorney General oversight on people already struggling to afford care. They should have introduced these bills on Groundhog Day, not April Fools' Day." 

The complaints Cox had with the legislation were that, as written, it would allow Blue Cross to offer new plans that eliminate the ability of the Attorney General's Office to question rate increases on Michigan residents who purchase their own insurance. In addition Cox claims the package would eliminate rate setting oversight for currently existing policies. 

So, does this signal that there will be a battle royal over the legislation? Not necessarily. 

At the news conference today MIRS asked George if he thought the prospective legislation could actually pass in this election year. 

"I think there's a good likelihood that this would pass," George said. "I think we have a very good framework to start with. I'm expecting that it's going to pass and become law." 

According to the sources MIRS contacted today under condition of anonymity, assuming the package continues to be re-crafted, George will probably be proved right. 

The statement, "The last thing we need right now is for Michigan's health industry to get into a fight" was repeated more than once today. In addition, all sides of the health care community are aware that any truly contentious measures in the Legislature could probably be scuttled pretty easily in a year like this one. 

Corriveau did say today that the current legislation would allow some rate increases if they were in line with a national trend, but otherwise the AG's powers would be preserved. 

But it seems likely that Cox's problems with the legislation would have to be resolved to his satisfaction - or passage would be severely endangered. 

On the other hand, legislative debacles are always possible. 

It also appears likely that people in Michigan's health care industry will be pouring over the package (which has already evolved considerably) during the next two weeks. So, the thinking is that whatever gets to the House and Senate floors will likely be well vetted and the results of a good deal of consensus. 

Does that mean the legislation would be meaningless? Not quite. 

"One of the things Senator George and I agree on is that health insurance isn't the same thing as health care," Corriveau said in reference to the package. "And I can say 'Yes, there are [real] reforms in here.'" 

At the news conference today both lawmakers fielded questions about whether the legislation would be needed in light of the federal health care reform bill, which has been signed into law. 

"Regardless of events in Washington, there are important things that we need to do in the state of Michigan to make health insurance more affordable and accessible and to make people healthier," George said. "These things are necessary and should not wait." 

The sources MIRS tapped today concurred. There is almost universal agreement that parts of the prospective package include needed legislation that should be enacted. 

However, much of the measures in the package (such as the consumer protections) are basically seen as redundancies of the federal legislation. In fact, one oft-heard question today was how much of the package would even be needed. But actually redundancy has rarely been a barrier to passage in the Legislature. 

The description of the package handed out at today's news conference included a disclaimer stating the document reflected compromises made prior to the final passage of Federal Health Care Reform. This appears to be yet another sign that the package is still a work in progress. Here is the document: 

Consumer Protections 
- Ends practice of cherry picking by requiring all carriers to offer guaranteed issue health plans regardless of ones health. 
- Coverage limits for pre-existing conditions is reduced from 12 to six months. 
- A carrier cannot limit or exclude coverage because of a pre-existing condition for those moving from group coverage to individual coverage. 
- Prohibits insurance plans from rescinding plans after an initial application. 
- Individuals up to age 26 can be covered under a parent's health care plan 
- Ends the practice of hiking up rates once an individual becomes ill. 
- Ends gender discrimination in the purchase of health insurance. 

Market Place Reforms 
- A revised, modified file and approve rate-filing process for commercial carriers, which ensures that 100 percent of the individual market will be subject to Insurance Commissioner oversight. 
- The MI-Health Board is created to help develop the Standard and Enhanced Guaranteed Issue Health Plans. The board will be composed of a variety of insurance carriers, health professionals and actuarial experts, as well as a consumer advocate who is a member of the general public. 

Affordability 
- Creation of the MI Catastrophic Protection Plan (MICAPP) to rein in the soaring cost of health care. 
- A Healthcare Affordability Fund will be established. Money in the fund will be used to subsidize the cost of the Standard and Enhanced guaranteed issue plans for Michigan residents with a household income up to 300% of the Federal Poverty Level. 

Making Michigan Healthier 
- Premiums encourage less smoking. 
- Premiums reward healthy body mass index (BMI).
- Premiums encourage compliance with screening and other healthy behaviors. 
- Will lower the number of uninsured. 

Bernero Hits Dillon On Health Care Comments
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Virg BERNERO took a swing at his primary opponent, House Speaker Andy DILLON(D-Redford Twp.), today in light of a MIRS story published Friday in which the Speaker said he was "not sure" on his position on the federal health care reform bill recently signed into law (See "Dillon 'Not Sure' On Health Care Reform Bill," 3/26/10). 

This morning, the Bernero campaign penciled in time with television and radio media, including making an appearance on WJR's Frank BECKMANN Show to club Dillon for his indecision on the issue. At 12:15 p.m., he crossed Capitol Avenue from his office at Lansing City Hall to the sidewalk leading up the state Capitol to hold court with print reporters. 

"How is it that Andy Dillon can't make up his mind about something this important," Bernero said. "It makes it hard to understand why Andy Dillon would be against that, or would not be able to make up his mind. His failure to support this historic reform is a slap in the face for these who need affordable health care." 

The media availability comes after Dillon was asked specifically by MIRS if he would have voted for the national health care reform bill. His response was, "I haven't read it. It's about 2,000 pages long. I'm not sure." 

Bernero confessed that he hasn't read the 2,000-page bill either, but said that he trusts the reports that he's read on the subject and the expertise of Michigan's Congressional delegation, led by U.S. Rep. John DINGELL (D-Dearborn) to have delivered a good product for Michigan and its residents. The bill, isn't perfect, he said, but trying to make "perfect" in Congress or the state Legislature is like "waiting for the Great Pumpkin. It isn't going to happen." 

"It's a solid good. I'm happy to support it the way it is," he said. "This is complex and as governor I want to work to implement it by getting together the best and brightest and figuring out how we can move forward as a state." 

Dillon's campaign spokesman Ken COLEMAN responded to the Bernero media blitz with the following statement: 

"Just to be clear, Andy has been on record supporting this dozens of times. He is also more concerned with how the state implements a 2,000-page law concerning a critical policy improvement than hollow rhetoric. 

"We find this type of criticism from the nation's Angriest Mayor disingenuous at best, given the strong belief we have that citizens are desperately wanting a thoughtful approach to making sure this law gets implemented to the benefit of millions of Michiganders." 

Bernero described the comment as the campaign trying to "send mixed signals." 

"At this point they are beginning to do some backpeddling that would rival that of a circus clown on a unicycle, but I guess that's politics," he said. 

Dillon made headlines last year with his proposal to combine all public employees into a single health pool as a way to cut costs and save the state and local governments $900 million over time. The plan is still be examined by a House subcommittee. 

Bernero didn't embrace the proposal when asked specifically by the media today, but did say the concept should be on the table as government looks for ways to cut costs. 

"We should work with our public employees and businesses to arrive at savings," Bernero said. "The approach he took, excluding the labor community is not the way to go. I believe the savings are overstated and if I were to pursue that, I'm not sure if it can be done, but it's one of the options that should be discussed." 

State Health Care Redux; Officials Hope This Time Is It

It's been more than two years since an effort to reform the state's individual health care insurance market with proposals largely backed by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan crashed and burned in a lame duck session of the Legislature. But with new legislation, worked on behind the scenes for nearly a year, and support from a bipartisan, bicameral group of legislators, the chairs of legislative Health Policy committees said Thursday they think this time they've got it right.

However, work on the new legislation (SB 1242 , SB 1243 , SB 1244  and SB 1245 ) comes on the heels of federal health care reform that has left many sifting through its implications. House bills will be formally introduced after the spring recess concludes.

And Attorney General Mike Cox, who steadfastly opposed the Blues legislation two years ago and who has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the federal reforms, expressed "serious concerns" with the new legislative package.

Some of the Michigan proposals mirror that of the federal government, including allowing people up to 26 years of age to stay on their parent's health insurance, but while reforms at the federal level will roll out over the next several years, backers of the legislation said the state can't wait.

"We have to work under that umbrella (of federal reform)," said one of the lead sponsors, Sen. Tom George (R-Kalamazoo). "Regardless of what happened in Washington, there is still a need to move forward in Michigan."

Mr. Cox and Mr. George are running for the Republican gubernatorial nomination.

The package calls for all insurance carriers to offer guaranteed-issue health plans regardless of a person's health and takes the value of the Blues' tax-exempt status, worth roughly $90 million, to create a fund that would subsidize a standard and enhanced version of these plans.

Subsidies from the fund would help cover the cost of insurance for residents living in households where the income is up to 300 percent of the federal poverty line, or $66,150 a year for a family of four.

What would be covered under the standard and enhanced plans would be determined by a new MI-Health Board, which would be comprised of insurance carriers, health professionals, actuarial experts and a consumer advocate. Rep. Marc Corriveau (D-Northville), the other lead sponsor of the package, said how quickly that board would have to act is something the committee process will determine.

A catastrophic protection plan, paid for by the insurance industry, also would be created to pay for medical claims between $80,000 and $800,000. Unlike the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association, which reimburses auto no-fault insurance companies for claims exceeding $460,000, policyholders would not see a separate fee on their insurance bill to pay for the new catastrophic pool.

While commercial insurance companies would see their rate approval review process time cut in half, the entire individual insurance market would be overseen by the state's insurance commissioner.

Insurance companies would provide premium incentives for people to quit smoking, have a healthy body mass index or engage in other healthier behaviors, while coverage limits for pre-existing conditions would be reduced from one year to six months.

"We know in Michigan we have poor health behaviors," Mr. George said.

Under the legislation, insurance companies also could not increase rates for people who get sick or limit or exclude coverage of a pre-existing condition if a person moved from group coverage to individual coverage.

The compromise proposal includes components of plans outlined by both chambers last year.

Those involved with the fierce debate two years ago were still weighing the new legislation, but Mr. Corriveau and Mr. George were more confident the proposal laid out will become law even if it sees some amendments.

"This bipartisan plan is a great example of what is possible when we recognize a problem, put politics aside and work together to find a solution," Mr. Corriveau said. "I am confident MI-Health will bring fairness, affordability and strong consumer protections to the citizens of Michigan."

In a statement, Mr. Cox said the legislation would eliminate consumer protections in the rate-setting process, although Mr. Corriveau said the attorney general would have the same amount of oversight the current law provides. Mr. Cox also criticized the package for not including some of his proposals for market reforms.

"Today we are once again looking at bills that would allow Blue Cross to raise rates with no attorney general oversight on people already struggling to afford care. They should have introduced these bills on Groundhog Day, not April Fools' Day," Mr. Cox said.

Rick Murdock, executive director of the Michigan Association of Health Plans, which represents HMOs and commercial insurers, said while his group doesn't have an official position on the package, he does believe there's better "good will" on this set of negotiations.

Taking the issue away from changes sought by the Blues to a format of dealing with the uninsured and making insurance coverage more affordable allows everyone to have a stake in that fight, he noted, as opposed to the debate two years ago, which was described as "toxic" (See Gongwer Michigan Report, December 18, 2008).

The federal health care reform has been a "game changer" for the industry, Mr. Murdock said, which is why the association is reviewing the state bills in the context of those recent changes. They hope to have a preliminary analysis of the bills completed as committees begin to meet after the legislative break.

In a statement, Mark Cook, Blues vice president of governmental affairs, said, "For three years, Blue Cross has supported reforms that ensure all health insurance companies doing business here are required to cover people with pre-existing conditions. We have worked with policymakers to create a fair and balanced system of regulation in Michigan to protect consumers. These efforts are worth continuing because they are the right thing to do for people."

But Mr. Cook, too, said given the federal changes, the bills would need some changes when it comes to taxation and regulation of insurance carriers.

Mr. Murdock said how this all ties in with the federal reforms will also be made clearer under the governor's new executive order creating a new council to oversee implementation of the changes (See Gongwer Michigan Report, March 31, 2010).

Gov.: Health Reform Not Unfunded Mandate For MI
The state will not have to pay the tab for national health care reform and will actually save a "pretty significant" amount of money, Gov. Jennifer GRANHOLM said at a press conference today. 

Expanding Medicaid to 375,000 more Michiganders is fully funded until 2017, she said, and after that the federal government will not cover less than 90 percent. Although the Governor did not have a dollar amount for the state's savings, she said it would come via better health care management for Medicaid recipients. 

"It's a very good deal for Michigan and our health care coverage," she said at Sparrow Hospital today. 

All of the Republican candidates for governor -- U.S. Rep. Pete HOEKSTRA (R-Holland), Attorney General Mike COX, Ann Arbor businessman Rick SNYDER, Sen. Tom GEORGE (R-Texas Twp.) and Oakland County Sheriff MikeBOUCHARD -- have claimed that the new law is an unfunded mandate for Michigan. 

Bouchard and George have alleged that Michigan will be on the hook for an additional $700 million in Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 for the Medicaid expansion. 

Granholm said there's an "awful lot of misinformation" about the law from Republicans, which she said preceded its passage. Like President Barack OBAMA did this week, Granholm stressed that the law is modeled on Republican presidential hopeful Mitt ROMNEY's Massachusetts plan. 

"I think it's elevated the level of fear across the country to a level that's not consistent with the facts," the Governor said. 

She was asked if Republicans have elevated the rhetoric to deny the President a win. Granholm said yes. 

"People understandably had concerns about (the law)," she said. "But the reality of those fears are not going to happen. There are no death panels -- none of that nonsense." 

MIRS asked if the Democrats would lose seats because of health care reform. While Granholm stressed she wasn't a "good political prognosticator," she said no. The Governor said that when citizens "have actual facts" that the law will extend coverage for children and give tax breaks to businesses and be a "job creator," she predicted it will be a "benefit for the Democratic side of the aisle." 

Cox has joined a lawsuit with 12 other attorneys general trying to repeal the new law. Granholm sent Cox a letter last week arguing that he doesn't have the right to file on behalf of the state (See "Gov Asks Cox To Pull Out Of Health Care Suit," 3/24/10). She also sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric HOLDER along with three other governors pledging her support against the AG's suit (See "Is Cox Healthcare Lawsuit Moot?" 3/26/10). 

Today, she claimed victory that "he agreed to back off," as that suit would have been a "violation of the attorney-client relationship." Cox said Tuesday on Fox News that he will file on behalf of Michigan's citizens and not the state government. 

The Governor said she and Cox have not talked, but have "exchanged letters." 

Granholm said that the national reform meets the goal she set in 2006 for universal health care coverage in Michigan through a state plan. But she did say she would have liked to have seen a "more robust public option," although she acknowledged that expanding Medicare and Medicaid were public options. 

Granholm stressed that the new law transitions to a preventative care model from treating illness on the back end, which will save money. 

"We're going to see a complete paradigm shift in how this shapes health care to focus on prevention of illness rather than just treating it on the back side," Granholm said. "It certainly will be helpful for those who want to seek affordable health care options and want to have control of their health care." 

Granholm today signed Executive Order 2010-4 establishing both a Health Insurance Reform Coordinating Council and an ombudsman. She said she hoped to "take down the temperature" by providing citizens with information. A new Web site is at www.michigan.gov/healthreform. 

The Governor said the council has "nothing to do" with Cox's lawsuit. 

Department of Community Health (DCH) Director Janet OLSZEWSKI will chair the council. The E.O. also creates an Office of Health Insurance Consumer Assistance within the Office of Financial and Insurance Regulation (OFIR). OFIR Commissioner Ken ROSS will serve as ombudsman. 

The council will be composed of the directors of the DCH Medical Services Administration; the Department of Human Services; the Department of Technology, Management and Budget; and the Office of the State Employer. The state budget director and state personnel director also will be on the council. 

The ombudsman is to help provide consumers with information regarding health care insurance, assist with the filing of complaints and to ensure compliance with laws and regulations relating to health care insurance. 

"After waging a long and hard fight for this historic legislation, we want to ensure that we are doing everything we can to help citizens benefit under the new law," Granholm said. 

Olszewski acknowledged it would be a "multi-year effort" for the council, although appointments will probably expire when the next governor takes over. 

The ombudsman position is required by federal law, but the council is not. MIRS asked if there was concern that a new Republican governor who opposed health care reform might disband the council. 

Granholm Press Secretary Liz BOYD said she didn't think so, as there are issues for the State as an employer. But she said it remains to be seen what the next administration will do. 

The Michigan Association of Health Plans (MAHP) today endorsed the council. 

"Addressing something as complex as health care inevitably means issues that cut across various departments. We applaud the governor for bringing together directors of key departments such as community health and human services with those who have responsibility for information technology and regulation of health plans," said RickMURDOCK, executive director of MAHP.

GONGWER NEWS 3/29/10

Tea Party Groups Launch Health Care Petition Drive
Tea Party-type groups are launching a petition drive to put on the November ballot a Constitutional amendment designed to allow Michigan to opt out of the federal health care reform measure President Barack OBAMA signed into law Tuesday. 

The proposed amendment, modeled after a Constitutional amendment introduced by Rep. Justin AMASH (R-Kentwood), states that neither the new federal law nor any other law or rule can force a Michigan citizen to participate in a health care system. 

Wendy DAY, president of Common Sense in Government (CSG), said the proposal is similar to one the Arizona legislature is putting on the ballot and comes after the Michigan Legislature was unable to get the same type of thing passed (See "Anti-Federal Health Care Amendment Fails," 3/16/10). Last week, the Senate fell two votes short of the two-thirds majority it needed to get SJR K on the ballot. 

"All of the polling shows that the people don't want this health care takeover," Day said. "Washington is not listening and Lansing is unable to protect us, so we're taking things into our own hands."

The effort is slated to launch 6:30 p.m. Monday at the Howell Freshman Campus Cafeteria, where the group, "Michigan Citizens for Healthcare Freedom" will be distributing petitions. The group is encouraging groups that can't make it to Howell to host their own launch parties.

In order to put a constitutional amendment on the November ballot, the group would need 380,126 valid signatures by mid July. Day said the Facebook page created to gin up interest already has 1,500 fans. The group's web site, which was created Monday, already has 600 folks willing to pass around petitions.

Day said the Michigan Citizens for Healthcare Freedom is in the process of rallying liberty groups across the state to pass around petitions for this effort. 

"This is the number one issue with folks right now," Day said. "It's going to bankrupt our state. It's infringing on our individual rights. It's so far-reaching.

"We want the federal government to know that we are not going to be subservient to this health care legislation they are imposing on us." 

The amendment prohibits laws that restrict a person's "freedom to choose his or her private health care system or plan." It prohibits laws that interfere with a person's right to pay directly for lawful medical services and it prohibits laws that impose a penalty or fine on those who choose to obtain or decline any health care coverage or to participate in any particular health care system or plan.

The effort will be the first true test in Michigan of the political power of the dozens of individual liberty groups that have sprung up across the state in the past year as part of "Tea Party" movement.

GONGWER NEWS 3/25/10

Granholm Orders Cox To Intervene In Favor Of Health Care Bill

Asserting her constitutional authority, and citing statutory authority that has the governor as the attorney general's client, Governor Jennifer Granholm has ordered Attorney General Mike Cox to intervene in the lawsuit he filed against the new federal health care law to defend that law. She did so in letter that blasts Mr. Cox for presuming to speak for the state in filing the action to try and overturn the law.

Mr. Cox filed for Michigan along with 12 other states in a lawsuit led by Florida and filed in U.S. District Court in Northern Florida challenging the constitutionality of the law signed Tuesday by President Barack Obama. Mr. Cox had said the new law unconstitutionally required U.S. residents to acquire health insurance.

The letter from Ms. Granholm specifically directs him to "intervene in the Florida litigation on behalf of the governor, the state of Michigan, and the Michigan Department of Community Health to uphold the recently enacted federal health care legislation and to protect and preserve the important protections afforded to our state and its citizens by the new law."

A spokesperson for Mr. Cox did not return a message seeking comment.

In her hand-delivered letter to Mr. Cox, Ms. Granholm said she did not question Mr. Cox's ability to advocate on positions he believed were consistent with his view of the United States and state constitutions.

"Your statutory authority does not, however, override the superior constitutional authority vested in the governor to determine the position to be taken by the executive branch of state government and certainly does not authorize you, as attorney general, to unilaterally, and without consultation, to determine and declare the policy position of the state of Michigan," Ms. Granholm said.

While Mr. Cox challenged the constitutionality of the new law, Ms. Granholm, Mr. Cox's predecessor as attorney general, said it has always been her position that the law is constitutional and will offer protections to both Michigan businesses and the some 1.2 million residents that do not have health insurance.

There is precedence for Michigan's attorney general to take both sides in a lawsuit. Former Attorney General Frank Kelley did so several times during his tenure in office.

Senate GOP: We Have Votes On Retirement Bills
Senate Republicans expressed confidence today that they can pass Thursday an early retirement package for state and public school employees. And that's even if some of its caucus members peel off.

Both Senate Appropriations Chair Ron JELINEK (R-Three Oaks) and Sen. Mark JANSEN (R-Gaines Twp.) told MIRS they think they have the votes. Jansen, who sponsored the state retirement bill (SB 1226), was doing a whip count at lunch.

Sens. Roger KAHN (R-Saginaw), Mike NOFS (R-Battle Creek), Randy RICHARDVILLE (R-Monroe) and Nancy CASSIS (R-Novi) are possible "no" votes, according to a well-placed source. 

However, even if the bills pass the Senate Thursday, there's the fact that the House has taken no action. Budget Director Bob EMERSON has met with House Democrats, who didn't like the early out, but they didn't like the idea of big budget cuts or revenue increases, either.

He said the administration will "walk away" if the House doesn't pass legislation by the week of April 12, when lawmakers come back from spring break. Gov. Jennifer GRANHOLMspokeswoman Liz BOYD described it as a "make or break week," noting that routine retirements have grinded to a halt as employees wait to see what the Legislature does. 

"I am worried," Jelinek said of inaction in the House. "This is all part of the budget. We don't want to have another year like last year. The Senate will have its budgets ready in May. We want to get the job done."

SB 1226 and SB 1227 moved from the committee this afternoon on mostly party-line 10-7 votes, with Kahn voting no. Sen. Martha G. SCOTT (D-Highland Park) was absent.

In another change, Senate Majority Leader Mike BISHOP (R-Rochester) appointed Sen. Jud GILBERT (R-Algonac), who sponsored the public school portion in SB 1227, to take the place of Sen. Valde GARCIA (R-Howell) on the Senate Appropriations Committee this week. Garcia had a military commitment.

MIRS has learned that leadership is having difficulty getting Garcia to come back for session Thursday, even though his vote is needed on the retirement package. When MIRS asked Bishop spokesman Matt MARSDEN if Gilbert would be taking over permanently on Approps, Marsden said, "The Senate Majority Leader has said that when members are absent, adjustments need to be made." 

The Senate bills are supported by the Granholm administration, although her plan offered a sweeter retirement deal than the Senate bills. Emerson was asked to try and round up four Democratic votes, but no one from that side of the aisle voted for the bills today in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

"Unfortunately, it seems like it will be pretty partisan," Jelinek told MIRS after committee. "It's interesting because the Governor proposed this whole thing. Bob Emerson supports it. The objection from Democrats is a purely partisan move to look good in the eyes of the people affected by it."

The issue for Democrats is that there is no sweetener (See "Senate Retirement Plan: All Stick, No Carrot," 3/23/10). Granholm's plan had a 1.75 percent multiplier and there's talk that it will be 1.6 in the final plan. 

In the Senate GOP plan, retirement-aged state and public employees would get the standard 1.5 percent rate. Instead employee contributions for retirement health care would be jacked up by 3 percent, retirement dental and vision coverage would be eliminated for those who don't retire after Oct. 1 and the number of years public employees can pay into a pension would be capped at 30 years.

"This is really sad," declared Sen. Irma CLARK-COLEMAN (D-Detroit), who said that the legislation means employees are "forced to retire."

Sen. Liz BRATER (D-Ann Arbor) said she has a philosophical problem with the legislation and worried it would affect employee morale.

"We have been balancing budgets on the backs of state employees," she said. "At some point, we're going to have to properly fund state government."

Even Sens. Mickey SWITALSKI (D-Roseville) and Jim BARCIA (D-Bay City), who would seem likely targets to cross over, expressed their firm opposition. Barcia said older employees are "terrified." Switalski said that bills favor high-end employees at the expense of lower-paid ones.

"It's not a bad bill," Jelinek said. "It's not a real punitive measure."

MIRS asked him about the Democrats' criticism that the bills were all stick and no carrot.

"There's not a big incentive to leave and there's not a big incentive to stay," he said. "We're trying to keep the schools solvent and this is one way to do this. Considering the economy out there today, asking employees to participate in retirement benefits isn't unrealistic." 

The bills would save state and local governments a combined $291 million next year and a combined $3.9 billion in savings by Fiscal Year (FY) 2020, under a pair of bills that moved out of a Senate panel this evening.

Senate Not Expecting Late Day Thursday 
Thursday is the final Senate session day before spring break, but multiple sources in the Senate GOP caucus tell MIRS they don't expect a late night.

All of the first-House budget bills passed today (see related story), leaving the retirement bills and the 3-percent pay hike for unionized employees as the only big issues on the table. There is a chance that the public employee health care reforms that are in the Reforms and Restructuring Committee could be discharged on the floor. The bills were set to move Tuesday, but the committee was canceled because session went past 4 p.m.

The wild card could be if the House moves on the Senate Pure Michigan funding package on Thursday and the Senate has to hang around to concur or send it to conference committee.

The House, on the other hand, which has not passed any budgets, looks primed to go late Thursday.

GONGWER NEWS 3/25/10 

Health Care Rebuttal Gets Quick Day In The Sun

Just days after Congress passed sweeping health care reform, House Republicans got a chance to debate why the right to independent health care should be part of Michigan's Constitution.

While it didn't amount to HJR Z  and HJR CC  being discharged from committee, legislative Republicans did orate on how the federal law overstepped the bounds of the Constitution by requiring citizens to purchase health care.

"Congress does not have the constitutional authority to require a person to purchase any good or service, whether it be government-approved health care, a home, or a car. The health care bill exceeds Congress' powers, violates the 10^th Amendment, and encroaches unconstitutionally on individual rights. We have a clear time to act because we have a period of time before this law goes into effect," said Rep. Justin Amash (R-Kentwood), one of the measure's sponsors.

But Rep. Coleman Young Jr. (D-Detroit) said the federal law will help thousands of Michigan residents have access to health care. He said the Constitution allows for the regulation of interstate commerce and the law fits into that framework.

The debate was quickly halted, however, when Democrats procedurally passed over the two measures for the day without discharging them to the floor.

3/3/10 MIRS NEWS
Unions: Senate GOP Health Reform Won't Save $
Unions today argued measures that would force public employees to pay more for health insurance were unfair and wouldn't save money.

The Senate Reforms and Restructuring Committee took testimony on health reform legislation (SB 1046, SB 1047 and SJR P) (See "Senate GOP Pops Own Health Reforms," 12/22/09).

Chair Mike BISHOP (R-Rochester) said that substitutes are being reviewed and they will be moved out next week if there's consensus.

It was SB 1046 sponsored by Sen. Mark JANSEN (R-Gaines Twp.) that netted the most attention. The substitute would require all public employees, including lawmakers, to contribute at least 20 percent of the cost of their health insurance benefits, or at least 10 percent if their medical benefit plan uses a high-deductible policy with a health savings account (HSA). The Senate Fiscal Agency (SFA) found that it will save $82 million for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011. 

"This is merely just a shift onto the backs of workers that doesn't control costs," said Michael KELLER of the AFL-CIO of Michigan.

He also noted that the 20 percent cost would be far easier to bear for teachers and superintendents than food service workers or bus drivers who make close to minimum wage. Ellen HOEKSTRA, representing the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE), said that the legislation assumes that cost-sharing isn't already taking place.

Olivet Community Schools Superintendent Dave CAMPBELL said that the bill puts the cost-saving burden "entirely on the backs of public employees." But he said he supports it, along with tax reform, possibly including the service tax.

"It's either on our backs or the kids' backs," Campbell said.

Sen. Jud GILBERT (R-Algonac) took issue with that perspective.   "Absent reforms, many employees will lose their jobs," he said.

Jansen testified that private sector employees in Michigan and other Great Lakes states contribute 21 percent for single coverage and 27 percent for family coverage on average, compared to public employees, who contribute on average 10 percent for single coverage and 15 percent for family coverage.  

SJR P sponsored by Jansen would amend the Michigan Constitution to establish uniform cost allocation requirements for health benefits for public employees, including state civil service and university employees. The SFA found that will save $543 million for FY 2011.

Senate Minority Leader Mike PRUSI (D-Ishpeming) wanted to know if there would be corresponding cuts to K-12 and revenue sharing.

"The political answer is no," Jansen said. “That's not my intention. We know the budget is in tough shape and the money isn't there. This will give locals a tool.”

SB 1047, sponsored by Sen. Alan SANBORN (R-Richmond), would allow local units of government to offer their employees the same health insurance benefits available to state employees. He noted that Gov. Jennifer GRANHOLM has issued a similar Executive Directive, but he said he believes this should be done legislatively.

3/2/10 MIRS NEWS

Michigan Opts Out Of Federal Health Care Under Resolutions
Today, the Senate Health Policy Committee heard testimony on a pair of resolutions designed to let Michigan opt out of any federal health care system. The measures are SJR K, sponsored by Sen. Wayne KUIPERS (R-Holland), and SJR R, sponsored by Sen. BrucePATTERSON (R-Canton).

Committee Chair Sen. Tom GEORGE (R-Texas Twp.) said today's hearing would be testimony only, however, he also said he expected to take a committee vote on the measures in the near future.

The timing seemed advantageous for proponents of the measures with the Capitol area filling up with anti-national health care tea party folks. And several tea-party citizens testified.

The only person to testify in opposition to the measures today was Marjory MITCHELL of Mich-U-Can, a group that advocates for universal health care. Other persons and entities (including the SEIU) handed in cards in opposition to the resolutions, but chose not to testify.

"There are many people in our state who desparately need health care and more and more are in need every day," Mitchell said. "More and more people die every year with a diagnosis of no insurance."

Michael EMBRY, with the insurance underwriters, testified that the health care bills in Washington D.C. fail to address the nation's most basic health care issue.

"The issue is the number of people in the system," Embry said. "Many people choose not to purchase health insurance, particularly the young (25-30-year-olds) . . . the 'invincibles.' The concept of insurance is to have a large poll of people lower the cost of coverage. We don't have that now.

"Unfortunately, the federal legislation that's being debated today doesn't create that situation," Embry said.

Kuipers promoted his resolution as being one that guarantees Michigan citizens the right to independent health care, measures that assure patients that they will be able to make their own health care choices.

He said health care is personal and individual decisions should be left to the patients, their doctors and their families. He said he's heard from many people who are scared that the federal government will force them into a Canadian-style, single-payer system that will lead to rationing and waiting lists.

"Government control of health care will lead to bureaucratic decisions based on costs and not based on the patient's interest," Kuipers said.

The current federal legislation being considered could include a "public option," essentially a government-run health insurer that will accept anyone. But Kuipers said, "It is no secret that the goal of many in Washington is for government takeover of health care."

"As representatives of the Michigan people, the best way to calm our residents' fears about being forced into a federal government-run system is to give them a chance to assert a right to independent health care in our state constitution," he said.