Mediaboss Marketing

mark pazniokas :: ctmirror.org

Rep. Sean Scanlon, D-Guiford, right, and Sen. Matthew Lesser, D-Middletown, have been authored several drafts of the public option bill.

Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, fresh off election wins, are laying out a key goal of the 2021 legislative session two months in advance: passing a public option health insurance plan.

The measure failed in 2019 and was shelved this year when the state suspended its regular session amid the coronavirus pandemic. But Democratic lawmakers say that with COVID-19 cases on the rise and hundreds of thousands out of work, the need to expand government-run health coverage is more pressing now.

At the exact moment when people in Connecticut need health insurance more than ever, we are seeing an increase a huge and disturbing increase in the number of our residents who lack access to affordable, quality health care, said Sen. Matthew Lesser, D-Middletown, a co-chair of the Insurance and Real Estate Committee. A new legislature has been elected that ran on this issue, that has talked about this issue, and that has made promises to the American people in Connecticut that we are going to deliver real reform.

As they have in the past, officials with the states insurance companies expressed opposition to the concept of a public option.

Assuming this is the same version of government-run health care pushed by the comptroller in years past, the health insurers in the state will adamantly oppose it, said Susan Halpin,executive director for the Connecticut Association of Health Plans, which lobbies on behalf of insurers.Its a proposal thats failed before with good reason. It establishes a false promise thats already proven unsustainable in the limited form it exists today.

In an early draft of the 2019 bill, legislators had hoped to open the states health plan to nonprofits and small companies those with 50 or fewer employees and form an advisory council to guide the development of a public option. Comptroller Kevin Lembo said at the time that his office would partner with insurers under an umbrella contract to provide plans outside of the states risk pool. The legislation also would have allowed the state to form ConnectHealth, a program offering low-cost coverage to people without employer-sponsored insurance.

Later that year, legislators unveiled a sweeping overhaul of that bill. The second version would have established the Connecticut Option a state-sponsored plan available to individuals and small businesses funded by reviving the individual mandate, a requirement that people obtain health coverage or face a financial penalty. Legislators also suggested raising money for the program by levying a 1-cent-per-milligram tax on opioid manufacturers. The revised bill, which also included the restoration of cuts to the states Medicaid program and approval to import drugs from Canada, was watered down before passing the House. It did not win approval in the Senate.

The latest proposal, rolled out in March, would have allowed small businesses, nonprofits and labor unions to join the state-operated Connecticut Partnership plan, which already is available to municipalities, and it would have created a third option for individuals on Access Health CT, Connecticuts insurance exchange. Two carriers currently offer individual plans on the exchange. A week after the March 5 release of that concept, the Capitol closed for deep cleaning. Lawmakers did not return for the regular session.

On Thursday, Lembo joined lawmakers in pledging a resurrection of the public option bill. He revealed few details about what the newest version would look like but said officials would again try to use the states purchasing power to negotiate an insurance plan for individuals.

We are very likely to see a leveraging of the state employee pool using that pricing and those 220,000 lives that are in there to get better deals and offer more opportunities, Lembo said. So, leveraging it through partnership, leveraging it through the state employee plan, but setting up different benefit designs for these populations that are affordable and accessible for them, not necessarily the one product that were offering now just to state employees.

The backstop is the state of Connecticut. Im not going to run away from that, he added. But you set your premiums according to the risk profile of the people who are coming in.

Despite President-elect Joseph Bidens support for a public option, Democrats said Thursday that they dont want to wait for the gridlock in Washington, D.C. to subside before making progress. Uncertainty surrounding the balance of power in the U.S. Senate means Bidens health reform agenda may not be successful, they said.

There is not a majority in the United States Senate to support President Biden in his effort to make health care more affordable, which means its going to fall to the states states to act, said Rep. Sean Scanlon, D-Guilford, a co-chair of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee. Even though we have a new president theres still going to be paralysis there. Thats why its up to us here in Connecticut, because our constituents simply cant wait any longer for the politics of Washington to work in their favor. They need the politics of Hartford to work in their favor.

Republican legislative leaders, who did not participate in the Democrats announcement Thursday, signaled that they would not support a public option bill.

The Democrat proposal of a public option, I fear, will not accomplish our shared goal of reducing costs and increasing accessibility and will simultaneously threaten thousands of good paying jobs, Senate Minority Leader Kevin Kelly, R-Stratford, said. The Democrat plan aims to move insurance jobs under the scope of government, put government in charge of health care with little regulation or requirements to even abide by the Affordable Care Act, and compete with a private industry using taxpayer dollars as a backstop. If claims exceed premiums, taxpayers will be the ones on the hook.

Rep. Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, said the proposal would threaten jobs in the insurance sector and harm the pandemic recovery we all hope for.

I appreciate Democrats passion in pursuing affordable health care unfortunately, theyve been campaigning for 20 years on the promise of doing something about it but have instead continued to implement more taxes, more consumer-paid assessments, and more regulations that have driven premiums upward, he said. I look forward to learning more about their unwritten proposal.

The Partnership Plan has run multi-million dollar deficits over the past few years, Halpin said. At the same time, it sets the state up to compete with its own signature industry on an un-level playing field. When you peel back the layers of the onion, the proposal just doesnt work and it does more harm than good.

Link:
Public option health insurance in CT is a key priority for Democrats in 2021 - The CT Mirror

Our commenting has been temporarily disabled.

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to ourTerms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sentvia e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

Read the original here:
Letter to the editor: Democrats started division - TribLIVE

House Democrats are planning to renew their efforts to obtain President TrumpDonald John TrumpBiden has spoken with some GOP senators, chief of staff says Trump told advisers he could announce 2024 bid shortly after certification of Biden win: report Ivy League cancels winter sports amid US COVID-19 pandemic surge MORE's federal tax returns after he leaves office next year.

Based on the principle of the issue, not the politics of it, yes, you have to stay with the case," House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard NealRichard Edmund NealOn The Money: Biden, Democratic leaders push for lame-duck coronavirus deal | Business groups shudder at Sanders as Labor secretary | Congress could pass retirement bill as soon as this year Top Democrat: Congress could pass retirement bill as soon as this year Momentum grows for bipartisan retirement bill in divided Congress MORE (D-Mass.) told The Wall Street Journal this week.

Rep. Bill PascrellWilliam (Bill) James PascrellOffice of Special Counsel investigating use of White House for Trump campaign 'war room' Democrats express concerns about IRS readiness for next year's filing season Obama hits trail to help Biden, protect legacy MORE (D-N.J.), a senior Ways and Means Committee member who has been a leading advocate for obtaining Trump's tax returns, told the Journal that lawmakers "have an obligation to examine this and follow the money."

In April 2019, Neal requested Trump's personal and business tax returns from 2013 through 2018 from the IRS. He cited a provision in the federal tax code that states that the Treasury secretary "shall furnish" tax returns requested by the chairpeople of Congress's tax committees.

Neal has said that the Ways and Means Committee wants Trump's tax returns because the panel is conducting oversight and considering legislative proposals relating to how the IRS enforces tax laws against presidents.

The Trump administration rejected Neal's request and subsequent subpoenas, arguing that House Democrats lack a legitimate legislative purpose for obtaining Trump's tax returns. The Ways and Means Committee then filed a lawsuit, which has yet to be resolved.

President-elect Joe BidenJoe BidenBiden has spoken with some GOP senators, chief of staff says Trump told advisers he could announce 2024 bid shortly after certification of Biden win: report Obama 'troubled' by GOP attempts to cast doubt on election results: 'That's a dangerous path' MORE's administration could choose to respond to Neal's requests by providing the Ways and Means Committee with Trump's tax returns. House Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiHow Biden might use executive power to advance economic agenda Overnight Health Care: Schumer, Pelosi want Heroes Act as 'starting point' in new COVID-19 relief talks | Labs warn of possible delays in test results amid surge in demand | Federal government partners with pharmacies for coronavirus vaccine distribution On The Money: Biden, Democratic leaders push for lame-duck coronavirus deal | Business groups shudder at Sanders as Labor secretary | Congress could pass retirement bill as soon as this year MORE (D-Calif.) predicted in August that Neal would be able to obtain Trump's tax returns under a Biden administration.

A spokesperson for Biden told the Journal that"President-elect Biden has made clear that he will have an independent Department of Justice, free of improper political influence, and that they'll be tasked with following the letter of the law in any decision they make."

Earlier this month, the Ways and Means Committeemoved todrop its appealof a judge's order that requires the panel to give notice if it requests Trump's New York tax returns under a state law.

Neal has never requested Trump's state tax returns. A committee spokesperson said that the panel dropped the appeal on the advice of counsel and was going to focus on its case over obtaining Trump's federal tax returns.

Read the rest here:
House Democrats to renew effort to obtain Trump's tax returns next year | TheHill - The Hill

Editor,

Thank you, Ann Adams, for your Nov. 11 letter to the editor, which again identified the Democrat position on American politics.

First, you identify the Democrat narrative that the election is decided, decided by some pollsters and media calling the election for the Democrat candidate.

Then you identify that joy in Mudville is back real joy because the Democrat candidate has won.

Then you go on to note that we can go on to rebuild our democracy by single handedly and staunchly supporting the new Democrat president at every turn, even if we have to turn on some in the Democratic Party who are not all in.

Is this reality? Im not sure?

I thought voters determined elections, not the media or pollsters, and when voters vote only living legal United States citizens count.

It seems to me that until the process is done and the citizen votes are tabulated, authenticated and perhaps adjudicated, will we have an actual official president elect.

As far as building our democracy is concerned, its already been done by a group of people in the 18th century and the result is a constitutional republic spelled out in the Constitution of the United States of America.

The Constitution begins We the People and it includes all those people whom you didnt really mention in your letter, i.e. the 72 plus million people who voted for the other candidate in the election, unless youre figuring on marching them all to the gulags of social and mainstream shaming media.

Jim Henderson

Freeland

Visit link:
Letter: Letter revealing of Democrats' divisive position - South Whidbey Record

After indecisive results last week, two Georgia races that will decide the fate of the Senate are headed to runoffs in January. POLITICOs Elena Schneider breaks down how both parties plan to win and how Trumps refusal to concede could shape the campaigns.

Rodriguez noted that the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee was on target to spend $50 million on their Flip Everything campaign aimed at state legislatures. In a valiant effort to put on a happy face, she said, The spin that we've seen now is Democrats saying, 'Well, you can't lose something you didn't have,' but they did lose a lot of money in the process to have this showing in 2020.

Beyond desperate spin, Mutnick identified a few more genuine grounds for modest optimism among Democrats about the decennial redistricting process. One is the trend toward less partisan redistricting, as was evidenced in Virginia by voters backing a referendum to turn the process over to an independent commission.

Since long-term demographic changes generally favor Democrats, they will likely do fine in any process that isnt nakedly partisan (though some Democrats in Virginia, where the Legislature is now Democratic, were looking forward to doing unto others as was previously done unto to them.) Also, Mutnick said, Democrats have generally gained when courts have intervened in redistrictings: I think its possible that we have more court-drawn maps this cycle than we did in 2010.

One welcome victim of the 2020 elections: The overly simplistic assumption that Hispanic voters can be lumped for political purposes in a mostly predictable bloc.

I think the first thing is we need to rethink what is the Latino vote, because Cubans in Miami don't have the same interests as Mexican Americans in Arizona, don't have the same interests as Puerto Ricans in central Florida, Rodriguez said. While Hispanics plainly helped shift Arizona at the presidential level in Democrat Joe Bidens favor, it is also clear that Trumps anti-socialism message resonated with many voters beyond Cuban Americans in South Florida.

Long term, Rodriguez and Rayasam agreed, is much more targeted and locally oriented appeals to Hispanic voters by both parties, and an understanding by Democrats especially that they cant be taken for granted.

Each panelist also identified a person, or an idea, that we will be hearing more of in the years ahead.

Mutnicks idea was litigation, and the person shell be watching is Democratic lawyer Marc Elias, who was general counsel to Hillary Clintons 2016 campaign. The 51-year-old Elias has taken the lead on challenging maps that Democrats argue are drawn with the aim of diluting the power of progressive voters, including minorities.

His knowledge of election law is profound, Mutnick said. And he's dedicated to helping achieve what Democrats feel to be fair maps. So to the extent that he can pursue that legal avenue throughout the next decade, that's going to be huge in different states for Democrats and getting maps that are more favorable to them.

Dixon sees in Tallahassee a Florida version of the progressive vs. establishment battles that have played out in Washington. The equivalent there of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is an Orlando-area state representative named Anna Eskamani, a 30-year-old Iranian American.

She's very progressive, kind of goes after her own party on Twitter, is kind of expected to at least consider running for governor in 2022 even though she's relatively young, Dixon said. She's become a force within the progressive side of the Florida Democratic Party. And I would suspect that it's going to be a name that gets a little more national attention within the next year or two, especially going into the 2022 cycle where she's expected to try to try to make some noise.

For her part, Rayasam sees Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican who is widely expected to run and win reelection in 2022, as having some national potential. He has won both his governors races by huge margins, she notes. He's pretty popular here. There hasn't been a Democrat that's been able to really even touch or get close to him. And I think we're going to see I'm curious to see what he does with his popularity here in Texas, whether he translates that into national ambitions.

Rodriguez closed the conversation with what may be the safest bet: Continued interest in shaping state politics, as the narrow balance of power at the national level raises the stakes everywhere. Politics and money at the state level is the long-term trend to watch, Rodriguez said. I think there's a recognition that to make inroads at the national level, you've got to look down the ballot.

As progressive groups finish licking wounds from 2020, many will likely regroup for a new battle, Rodriguez said: I think a lot of these organizations are going to try and do what they didn't accomplish this year.

The rest is here:
The election-night fiasco in the states that will haunt Democrats for a decade - POLITICO