Bruce Murphy
Murphy’s Law

The Anti-Health Care Governor?

Even as Scott Walker throws people off health care, he opposes federal programs that would increase coverage and lower costs.

By - Nov 21st, 2012 10:39 am
Sign-up for the Urban Milwaukee daily email
Gov. Scott Walker

Gov. Scott Walker

If you were looking for a demonstration of how unwilling Gov. Scott Walker is to compromise on the issues, look no further than his opposition to fashioning a state-designed health insurance exchange to implement Obamacare.

Nearly every major interest group in the state wanted him to do this, from labor unions to the Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce and National Federation of Independent Businesses. All the major medical groups favored this, including the Wisconsin Hospital Association, Wisconsin Medical Society and Wisconsin Association of Health Plans.

The issue seems like a no-brainer. The health insurance exchanges are expected to lower the typically prohibitive costs for small businesses and for individuals who lack group health insurance by maximizing their market power, creating a new pool of customers who would make their purchases through the state-run exchange.

But the structure of these exchanges could vary from state to state. “Some states have one or two carriers that provide 60 percent of all insurance coverage,” says Phil Dougherty, senior executive officer of the Wisconsin Association of Health Plans.  “In Wisconsin it would take 18 or 19 plans to get up to 60 percent of coverage. Our strength is the number of health plans.”

For that reason, Dougherty told the Associated Press, his group supports a state-run rather than federally facilitated exchange. “We think that would put Wisconsin in the best position to preserve and build on the strengths of a strong, competitive market.”

Walker claims there could be added costs for Wisconsin with a state-organized program but couldn’t detail any costs when asked by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Experts note the exchanges are self-funded, through an assessment on the insurance companies.

Why would Walker go against the wishes of major business and health care groups in Wisconsin on this issue? Politically, he may be positioning himself as a candidate who can win the Republican primary for President in 2016, where opposition to Obamacare would be rewarded. Policy-wise, Walker has been erratic in his approach to health care.

Soon after he was elected, Walker chose Dennis Smith to run the state Department of Health Services. As a member of the administration of President George W. Bush and later as a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, Smith had a draconian view of government subsidized health care.  He wrote a piece urging states to drop out of Medicaid, and was well-known nationally as a critic of Obamacare.

Meanwhile, Walker faced a situation that has confronted every governor for two decades: in the last 20 years the Medicaid rolls have increased about 10 times faster than the state’s population. Like other governors, Walker was forced to increase health care spending, but he also looked for ways to restrict eligibility. Last year, the Walker administration proposed a change in Medicaid that would have slashed coverage for low-income recipients while sparing the elderly and disabled.  A single parent with two children and an income of, say, $28,000 a year, would have seen the annual premiums rise from $120 to $1,390. If the parent failed to keep up with the premiums, the family would be dropped from the program. The non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated some 65,000 people would be pushed out of the program.

As it turned out, the Obama administration did not approve the proposal, instead requiring that coverage for children must be continued, which reduced the number dropped from the program to 17,000.

Meanwhile, the waiting list for the state’s BadgerCare Plus Core Program, which covers only adults, in particular adults without dependent children, has continued to increase while coverage has declined. By June, there was a waiting list of 130,000 people for this program. As a result, Legal Action of Wisconsin sued the state Department of Health on behalf of two Milwaukee women who had been on the waiting list for more than two years.

The Walker administration has argued there is no money in the budget to expand coverage of BadgerCare Plus Core, which at the time covered 26,000 people. But Jon Peacock, research director for the Wisconsin Council on Children and Families, says the legislature had allocated enough money to cover 34,000 people.

The number of people covered continues to drop, Peacock says. “As of the end of October, there were 15, 909 people covered.” Meanwhile, Peacock says the waiting list continues to grow and now numbers 143,000 people.

Even as his administration has reduced health care coverage, Walker has done everything possible to oppose Obamacare, though it has tremendous potential to extend health care coverage to more people while lowering health care costs for Wisconsin. A study by the Urban Institute found that on balance (with all added costs and savings included) Obamacare would lower costs for Wisconsin by about $3.5 billion from 2014 to 2019.

Major reasons that costs will be reduced include: (1) health care exchanges will reduce costs of insurance for individuals and small businesses; (2) extending coverage to those without insurance will reduce their use of expensive emergency room care and increase their use of preventive care; (3)provisions that require insurance companies to lower their administrative costs will lower overall costs; (4) As private insurance becomes more affordable, some people now covered by Badgercare could transition to private insurance.

And even while lowering costs, Obamacare would extend coverage to an estimated 340,000 Wisconsinites who now lack insurance.

A Legislative Study Committee was convened in 2010, with representatives of health care organizations in Wisconsin, to begin planning for the implementation of Obamacare. As soon as Walker was elected and the Republicans took control of the legislature, the committee was disbanded.

“We were actually a meeting or two away from recommending an exchange and what the exchange might have looked like,” says state Sen. Jon Erpenbach (D-Middleton). “And they disbanded the committee. It’s frustrating.”

Walker also turned down $38 million from the federal government to help implement the health insurance exchanges. As with high speed rail, Erpenbach notes, that money is likely to go to other states, like Minnesota, whose implementation grant was increased.

“It’s money to do the groundwork for a state-run exchange,” says state Rep. Jon Richards (D-Milwaukee). “It could pay for computer systems, enrollment systems, that would allow people to go online and see your options and make a choice.”

Peacock predicts a federally-run health insurance exchange will not work as well: “I don’t think they’ll be able to fashion it to meet every state’s unique needs. They have to dovetail federal computers with state computers. The health insurance exchange will be less effective here than the Massachusetts one or those in the states that worked proactively on this.”

Robert DeVita, CEO of the Common Ground Health Care Cooperative based in Milwaukee, which was created to help small businesses get insurance coverage, says the Massachusetts health insurance exchange is a marvel: “You can go online and get information. It’s like buying airline tickets from Travelocity or Expedia. Businesses and individuals love it.”

The fact that more than a dozen states have chosen not to create their own health insurance exchanges could hamper the implementation of Obamacare, Peacock says.  “I don’t think Congress envisioned this many states saying we won’t do our own exchanges. It’s a huge amount of work for the federal government.”

DeVita looks at health care problems from a business standpoint. “I sit on a panel that judges business plans at the UWM School of Business. We see some wonderful ideas, but the biggest impediment to these entrepreneurs starting a new company is the cost of health insurance. They can’t afford to leave their current job where they now get coverage.”

Clarification: An earlier version of this story, while it was factual, was quite misleading: it left out the fact that health care spending under Walker actually increased. My apologies for the omission.

14 thoughts on “Murphy’s Law: The Anti-Health Care Governor?”

  1. Tyrell Track Master says:

    He’s an amazing guy, that Walker.

  2. Al says:

    To me, is seems clear that Governor Walker’s motive is not to save Wisconsin money, but to do his part to set Obamacare up for failure. Here’s to hoping the feds are able to pull together a working exchange system for uncooperative states.

  3. Chuck Peirce says:

    So much for all the talk about letting the States control more of their own destiny instead of the big bad Feds.

    It wouldn’t be the first time Ryan is running for a yet higher office. As far as I can tell, that is all he has ever done.

    Walker really hurts my brain when you force me to think about what he does.

    Meanwhile, Bruce, it is starting to be that time again to count our blessings. Do you have any plans to get in the Christmas spirit and look on the bright side?

  4. Matt says:

    On what planet would it be better to have this state government run anything as opposed to this federal government? Its an idiotic suggestion based on, what is it based on?

    Should we have a bunch of anti-healthcare, anti=government self serving unindicted co-conspirators run our health care system. or the evil democrats? Well we made our choice in November, and we have really high SAT scores (for now).

    Walker was presented with a chance to “lead” and he punted. Too hard or something. Watch Christie do the opposite and end our moronic governor’s presidential dreams. First real problem presented to him (that he didn’t create) and he acknowledges his deficiencies. Tell the guys who bought him their stock has peaked– he punted on second down.

  5. Perhaps Walker’s decision reflects a realistic assessment of his administration’s managerial capabilities in undertaking the challenging task of setting up an exchange. Also, it is generally not considered good practice to lead an effort one does not believe in.

  6. Bill Werner says:

    Thank you, Bruce, for a comprehensive, readable account of the efforts by Walker and his buddies to sabotage advances in health care coverage in Wisconsin.

  7. bruf says:

    To Bruce Thompson: Scott Walker has been elected twice. That is no reason to let him off the health care hook, even if he is less than competent at it. At the beginning of his tenure, he demonstrated with the Talgo veto that he is not concerned with the economic welfare of Wisconsin citizens, only with his credentials as a nay-sayer.

  8. bruf, I understand your point, but let me try an analogy: let’s say I have a very challenging issue with my house (maybe mysterious water seepage or an environmental problem). I learn that there are only two firms authorized to solve it–one local and the other national.

    So, believing in buying local, I call the local one first, only to be told the problem cannot be solved, that they don’t want to do it, and they don’t know why they were on the list in the first place. Furthermore I notice that the local firm has had some other problems. For example, they set up a bank but forgot to record who they were lending to. And a number of their management people have gotten into legal trouble.

    Then I call the national firm. After expressing dismay about the local firm’s attitude and assuring me they would have helped the local firm if it changes its mind, they tell me they have spent the last two years thinking about the best ways to solve my problem. They have also studied a successful solution that happened to take place in Massachusetts.

    Who should I go with? Should I insist the local firm take my case given its attitude?

  9. John O'Neill Sr. says:

    I don’t think that this dolt is planning on running for reelection. I think that he actually thinks that he is a viable Presidential candidate in 2016. Every decision, therefore, that he makes will not be based on what is best for Wisconsin but rather calculated on what will please potential Tea Party supporters.
    PS: I also think that he learned absolutely nothing from the 2012 results, just as he learned nothing during his time at Marquette.
    PPS: “good old Wisconsin beer and brats” my ass!

  10. Paul Trotter says:

    Frankly- it might work out better for Walker and Smith to stay out of this. It’s like asking a Bear fan to cheer for the Packers and do it daily. It’s not in their DNA to cooperate with the Feds.

  11. Erik Trimberger says:

    Many believe abstractly that government is largely inefficient and wasteful, but then they are in favor of many of the things that government does to help society that is under the surface.
    President Obama gave the Republicans a big head start in defining Obamacare. A majority say they are against Obamacare as a whole, but when it is broken down into all the helpful things then a majority say they support the planks.
    By 2016, as the program has been phased in and people see how Obamacare helps them, support should go up; making it far less of a appealing target that it started being when passed.
    As for Walker, a smart thing he has been doing is generally avoiding the extreme social positions on reproductive rights that just tanked many Republicans in other states; instead focusing on more favorable battles such as union rights.

  12. Erik Trimberger says:

    Republicans are so sensitive to the economic effect of taxes, but not cost-of-living hikes like increased health care premiums– seems hypocritical.

  13. Walker added 1.5 billion dollars to the healthcare budget. He cannot print money like Obama can. He needs to ask all the liberals in state to pay more.

  14. Paul Trotter says:

    @Wisconservative- walker can however set his priorities – we don’t need all the roads he’s proposing. Cut off the road building funds and there ya go. Money for healthcare but oh what a hissy fit the road builders would have – not to mention the operating engineers who also endorsed Walker. Hey Walker – thanks for keeping your hands off of my O care. For once you realized you had no clue. Let the Feds show you the way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>