Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the Senate on February 27, 2007, to create a plan that would subsidize the acquisition of health insurance by uninsured individuals who earn up to 200 percent of the federal poverty level. The bill would create an "insurance exchange" (or "connector") where individuals, and employees of small employers (fewer than 50 workers) that meet certain conditions could buy various approved health coverage plans from various providers. All plans in this "Michigan Helping Ensure Affordable and Reliable Treatment" (MI HEART) system would have to be approved by a central board and would have to include “wellness” provisions creating incentives for healthy behavior. At least one plan would have to offer catastrophic coverage only with a high deductible. The plans would be exempt from some of the coverage mandates that have been imposed on regular health insurance over the years. The bill does not include any individual insurance, mandates, employer mandates or provider taxes. A “MI HEART” fund would be created to receive premium payments and money from other sources to be used to pay for the plan’s subsidies. Establishment of the program is contingent on securing federal matching funds

The vote was 33 in favor, 0 opposed and 5 not voting

(Senate Roll Call 406 at Senate Journal 102)

Click here to view bill details.

I employ 51 people. Sounds like the first thing I need to do is fire 2 so I can get into the subsidized health care plan.

Cut the wages of the ones that make too much.

the PROPER ROLE OF GOVERNMENT to have the government be in the insurance business. it may REGULATE it's business, but only insofar as it is NECESSARY to keep them honest. it may NOT DIRECT it's business. mandating universal insurance is DIRECTING BUSINESS. the legislator who wrote this bill should be fired.

Another attempt by the state to get more Michiganders hooked on welfare. No wonder the state's circling the bowl.

Where is it stated in either the State or Federal Constitution's that government is allowed to get into the "Insurance Business?" These people take an oath to both Constitutions and then treat them as a Chinese menu - chosing which they chose to adhere to and what they presume they can ignore. I hope everyone out there votes for Congressman Ron Paul for President. He always carries a pocket U.S. Constitution on him, and is the only candidate who truly believes in upholding his Oath of Office. As a Congressman, Ron Paul always votes against legislation that runs counter to the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

January 9, 2008 Senator George’s Jan. 9, 2007 floor statement is as follows: I rise to comment on a proposed constitutional amendment which would require the state to provide comprehensive health insurance to all its residents. The proponents of this initiative have held press conferences throughout the state, including one in my district yesterday, where they were joined by my neighboring Senator, the Senator from the 19th District. The group proposes an amendment to our State Constitution requiring us to enact laws to ensure that affordable and comprehensive health care coverage is available to everyone in Michigan. The proposal apparently would make the state provide health insurance to those who are currently uninsured. This proposal, colleagues, is flawed because it fails to include a funding mechanism. It fails to say how the state would pay to expand health insurance to this group. The cost could be determined by simple math. If there exist one million Michigan residents without insurance, as the proponents say, and the cost of insurance, as called for in the measure, is, say, $3,000-$4,000 per year, than the cost to the state could be as much as $3-$4 billion per year. The Battle Creek Enquirer reported that Victoria Kovari, a campaign spokeswomen for the group, said that she was confident Michigan residents would support the initiative despite the need for new taxes to implement it. I read that the Governor and the Lieutenant Governor are endorsing this measure. I also have read elsewhere that the Governor has said she is not supportive of raising any new taxes on the citizens of Michigan. If so, how can these two positions be reconciled? How can we provide comprehensive health care insurance to a million Michigan residents without a huge tax increase? I don’t believe that it can be done. If it is important that the Legislature make comprehensive health insurance available to all, then why don’t the legislative proponents of this cause introduce such legislation so the rest of us can see how it would work? Rather than hide behind a ballot proposal, which requires no fiscal analysis, I challenge the legislative supporters of this measure to avail themselves of the resources of their elected offices and introduce such legislation so that we can all see it and ask the Senate Fiscal Agency for an analysis of the cost. The proponents have argued, and I heard the voice of one of my colleagues on a local radio station stating, that there is enough money in the system to cover the uninsured. Well, let us see then what your proposal is and where the money will come from and how you would do it. I would note that the Governor’s own Michigan First Health Plan would fail to meet the ballot proposal’s requirement of a comprehensive plan. You will recall that her Michigan First plan includes a limited annual benefit. It is not comprehensive, and it is not intended to cover all of the uninsured. So the Governor’s own plan, which the administration has been working on now for over two years and which remains unfunded, would not meet the standard called for in the proposal. So I would ask the Governor as well how would she modify her Michigan First plan so that it provides the comprehensive coverage for all the uninsured as the ballot proposal calls for and how it would be paid for. The ballot proposal then is flawed. It lacks any concrete plan or funding mechanism. It is merely a feel-good statement. Its legislative proponents are using it as a campaign tool when they already have the ability to introduce their own plans for universal health coverage in Michigan at any time but have chosen not to do so. I challenge them and the Governor to show us their plan for universal coverage. Let us all in on your secret plan.

This is what Tom George was talking about in the previous post. BTW, there is big money behind this thing. It reeks of Soros, Stryker, et al: Text of ballot language: "The State legislature shall pass laws to make sure that every Michigan resident has affordable and comprehensive health care coverage through a fair and cost-effective financing system. The Legislature is required to pass a plan that, through public or private measures, controls health care costs and provides for medically necessary preventive, primary, acute and chronic health care needs."

If you are going to have universal health care, where is the care going to be for the mentally ill? And, Jenny, where is the provisions for suing the state should a doctor or nurse or hospital screw up? I'm not interested in anything that has the stigma of welfare attached to it.

Contrast it's cynically tactical use of dishonest weasel-words like "affordable," "comprehensive" and "cost control" with this "Medical Choice for Arizona" initiative language: "The right of citizens to enter into private contracts with health care providers for health care services shall not be infringed. No law shall be enacted requiring any citizen, or any class of citizens, to participate in any state sponsored health care system or plan."

We need jobs, and price controls in the health care system. The reason private insurance keeps going up is because the cost of medicine and medical equipment keeps going up. Why is it so much more expensive in the US than in other countries such as Canada for prescription drugs and other treatments? You see, the cost of medical care is what needs to be reigned in. The whole health care bureaucracy is bloated way out of control. The industry itself should be blamed for this, and like oil companies, should be subject to some kind of windfall profits tax, with the proceeds for that going to help finance health insurance for those who may otherwise not get it. This is not socialization, but an effort to wake up the health care industry to the need to either keep their costs down, or start having to pay this sort of tax. I know it is a new tax, and many people won't like it, but some taxes are necessary, and when there is a windfall, it should be subject to a tax. What I'm proposing is a way for funding to be available so people can get their insurance without having to necessarily resort to Medicaid. This is meant to be a way to help people who may otherwise not have private insurance to be able to get it.

How about you and your legislature doing much more to try to bring real jobs back to Michigan, and help create a diversified economy that isn't so dependent on one industry. Can you do that, moleface, so we can have a brighter future so we don't have to go on Medicaid or made to feel like some kind of welfare trash?