| ||||||||||||||||
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Attack Ads in our Community
Many members in our communities received attack ads in their mailbox this week, aimed at local House members regarding votes on a health care bill this past session. I want to address this issue directly, and assure people that I strongly support access to quality and affordable healthcare. I am sympathetic to the fact that 1 in 5 Mainers are either uninsured or under-insured. The legislative committee that handled this bill (LD 290, An Act To Allow Maine Residents To Purchase Health Insurance from Out-of-state Insurers) held a long public hearing and work session, and many important issues were brought up (see list below). No other state allows this, and for good reason. At the public hearing the insurance agents testified no company would even offer this insurance nor would any state agree to it. Here are some of the reasons given:
· Cherry-picking based on age, health status, location, etc.
· Maine insurers would be more, not less, likely to leave the state
· Consumer protections would be lost
· Consumers would have no one to go to appeal claim denials
· Pre-existing health problems
· Maine-based medical providers would not be covered
· Patients could end up being sued for payment, as well as Maine doctors
· Many providers would not be covered, period, because the Maine requirements wouldn’t apply
· If the company went belly-up, there is no backup plan
· Other states won’t let their general fund and insurance assessment dollars be used to benefit Mainers, meaning we would pay higher premiums than in-state consumers
My number one reason for opposing the bill is that an out of state insurer would be allowed to refuse coverage to an applicant based on their health status. Most policy experts and those in the health care community did not support the bill. While it sounds good on paper, in reality, it does more harm than good. When experts consider health reform proposals, they typically ask two questions: Does the reform address health care cost drivers? And does the reform result in accessible, quality, affordable and secure health coverage? LD 290 accomplished neither. There is no question that should a proposal like this pass; many young, healthy adults could find a good policy out of state. Once that person gets sick though, they could face denial letter after denial letter and be totally on their own when they need coverage most. This doesn't even take into account the many insurance companies that deny applicants for absurd reasons, like being a woman of child-bearing age.
If this bill had passed, there would be minimal oversight on the private insurance industry. Many consumers and businesses could easily become victims of deceptive marketing and other unfair trade practices. The Bureau of Insurance would have no authority to deal with any of the bad seeds that exist in the insurance industry. On top of all of this, we did not get any comment from any out-of-state insurance company expressing interest in selling health insurance across state lines.
I am hopeful that our State and Nation will soon work out a solution for true health care reform that guarantees quality care for all of our citizens, at a reasonable price.
Sincerely,
State Rep. Melissa Walsh Innes, District 107 (Yarmouth), 318-8742
Submission to The Notes for October: Saving Money in our Communities
The Maine legislature has overwhelmingly voted to pass numerous bills (electronic-waste, cell phones, mercury containing thermostats and light bulbs) to ensure that products that contain toxic materials are safely collected, recycled and turned into new products, preventing waste, protecting public health and promoting the sustainable use and reuse of materials. These laws have become model policy and have been duplicated around the country. In the case of Maine’s computer and television recycling law, 24 states have followed Maine’s lead. These laws direct producers to fund the collection and recycling of their products at the end of the product’s useful life, promoting the sustainable reuse of materials and preventing the release of hazardous chemicals into the environment. In addition, they reduce costs for local governments and taxpayers and create jobs through the collection and recycling of formerly discarded products.
Local governments can't afford to manage the growing wave of consumer product waste. As more and more products are deemed “hazardous” the state's response has been to ban them from disposal. Unfortunately, the state-mandated bans must be enforced by local governments. And they don’t have the money to do it. It’s the classic unfunded mandate—a government directive without the resources to enforce it. The intentions were good, but the responsibility is misplaced onto local governments. To help with this issue, I am pleased to report that the Legislative Council has given approval to include my bill, “An Act to Provide Leadership, Tax Fairness and Responsible Recycling for Consumer Products” in the upcoming short session of the 124th Legislature. This bill builds off the success of these product stewardship laws and establishes a process to systematically evaluate products for their impact on health, the environment, and local taxpayers through managing the products at the end of their useful life and sets out to create public/private partnerships to collect, reuse and recycle consumer products – starting with products that contain hazardous materials.
Right now, in Yarmouth and our surrounding communities, taxpayers foot the bill for the removal of paints, stains, aerosol cans, adhesives, pool chemicals, furniture polish, weed killers, roofing tar……the list is long. Here are some quick facts: Today, while most consumer products can be recycled, the vast majority ends up in the trash. Each person in the United States creates 4.5 pounds of garbage a day. That is twice what we each generated thirty years ago. Manufactured products and associated packaging make up 75% of what we throw away. Although 80% of what we throw away can be recycled, we only recycle just over a third, so the vast majority of products – and the resources they represent - are thrown away and wasted. Many consumer products contain toxic materials, which threaten our health and the environment when disposed of in incinerators or landfills. Hundreds of products make our lives easier, until we don’t need them anymore. Then, if they’re not disposed of responsibly, the acids, toxic chemicals, mercury and other heavy metals they contain become a danger to our health and the environment.
Maine now needs a framework to systematically expand product stewardship partnerships with manufacturers to increase the collection and recycling of consumer products. The bill would: Direct DEP to systematically evaluate which products are most ripe for product stewardship recycling systems and create rules to develop the systems, and each proposed recycling system would be subject to public review through comment periods, public hearings and oversight through the Board of Environmental Protection (BEP). I hope you will join me in supporting this bill as it works its way through the committee and legislative process, starting in January. If you would like more information about this bill, or any other legislative issue, please contact me at melissawalshinnes@gmail.com or 846-4302. Now through the end of December, on Monday afternoons from 3-4, I will be at the Royal Bean coffee/tea house on Main Street. Please come by if you’d like to introduce yourself or talk about any issue. If you’d like to receive my monthly updates and information sharing messages, please send me your name and e-mail to be added to the Yarmouth listing. Thank you, and please enjoy the upcoming holidays in our wonderful town.