If you paused and listened to some of the participants at the Minnesota Health Care Exchange task force meetings, you might hear an occasional utterance about the very persons the Exchange will be serving. For that, I am grateful. However, there were times I reached the conclusion the reason for the task force meetings was to protect the health care system status quo.
I know, I know. When you are dealing with such high level discussions (references made to flying at 50,000 feet several times during the meeting), it’s hard to see the little dots of needy people on the ground. Case in point, at the last meeting held in Rochester, MN, they reviewed the output of the State Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Information Technology (IT) interface required to enroll the “little dots” in the exchange. As I sat and listened and watched the presentation, I tried to imagine how some of my friends would manage through the health care selection process steps. Certainly, IT professionals program at the level of knowledge above most of us, but it is incumbent upon the task force to give directions within the RFP that includes how the general population will be able to understand and maneuver through the maze of options. Not to mention language options is indeed an oversight, so far. We will clearly need an enrollment process that provides clear precepts and examples for everyone to make the appropriate choice – rich and poor, big and small.
There were bright spots during the meeting. Certainly some members on the Task Force are driven by clear progressive values. The comments from TakeAction Minnesota members in attendance underscored the importance of the people of Minnesota, the realities of the consumers, and the visibility placed upon the Commissioner.
But the presentation on Adverse Selection and Encouraging Market Competition and Value was even more frightening than the IT presentation. The presentation was of pros and cons developed by a work group on that topic. I was struck by the protectionism of the insurance companies and providers, even while the pros and cons tactic would assume we were reminded about the consumers. Shall I even dare to discuss the tension around having some final recommendations in time for the start of the upcoming Legislature session? Do they understand the brevity of this situation? We are talking about health care for millions of Minnesotans across all communities of color and status. We must not allow a rush to judgment as it pertains to the Minnesota Health Care Exchange. We must allow those on the Task Force, whose perspective is not only high but broad, to make sure the end result is of the people and for the people.
Mr. Commissioner, I know your job is difficult. But the buck stops with you to make sure we, as Minnesotans, receive a Health Care Exchange that is fair, available to all Minnesotans, and maybe even changes the face of health care as we know it today.
Gene Nichols
Gene Nichols is a leader in TakeAction Minnesota’s Together For Health Campaign.
