June 9, 2010| Posted in Articles, Front Page Slideshow, Health Care, In the News, In the News, News Media, Paul's Viewpoint
The Republican TV ads for November must already be filmed and ready to go. Republicans running for state offices have clearly decided to jump on the bandwagon of opposition to the national health care bill.
And so Republicans in the Legislature — led by gubernatorial candidate, Tom Emmer — walked away from $1.4 billion in health care investments that would have immediately shored up struggling hospitals and clinics and held down your health care premiums. This is cynical politics at its worst and Minnesotans should be outraged.
Here’s the background: Minnesota currently pays the cost of health care for about 82,000 of the poorest, most vulnerable Minnesotans without children using only state tax dollars. But this year, we are being given the opportunity to immediately move those individuals to Medicaid, which means that the federal government would pick up half of the cost of their health care. Taking advantage of the offer would be incredibly beneficial for Minnesota.
Indeed, the deal is so good for Minnesota that Gov. Tim Pawlenty (no fan of federal health care reform) initially offered to include the Medicaid option as
part of the final state budget agreement — until Republican legislators raised such a political ruckus that the governor retreated.
So what does the Republican?s decision to kill the opportunity mean?
First, thousands of health care jobs in Minnesota will be lost at a time when we can ill-afford more unemployment. Local hospitals and clinics will miss out
on dramatically improved reimbursement rates and will suffer millions of dollars in losses instead. And every one of us with private health insurance will experience higher premium increases in the future to make up for those losses.
Moreover, by refusing the new Medicaid option, a cash-strapped state of Minnesota will miss the chance to draw down $1.4 billion in federal funds, money that will now go to other states to help balance their state budgets. Passing up the federal help makes little sense for Minnesota which today only gets back about 76 cents for every federal tax dollar paid to Washington, D.C.
Moreover, we could draw down the $1.4 billion with an investment of $190 million state dollars. It boggles my mind that Republicans, who seemingly pride themselves on their business acumen, would have passed on the opportunity to get back $7.45 for every dollar invested.
But that’s not the worst of it. The same Republicans in the Minnesota House who vehemently oppose the Medicaid option today actually offered and supported an essentially identical proposal to move those 82,000 Minnesotans into Medicaid just one year ago!
So why did the Republican legislators flip-flop and reject the chance to preserve good jobs, hold your health care premiums down and get back some hard-earned federal tax dollars to Minnesota?
The answer is obvious: Electoral politics. The Republicans, from Tom Emmer on down, want to scare the people of Minnesota with the specter of “Obamacare” to gain votes in November.
Don’t buy into the fear-mongering. The Medicaid option is not government take-over of health care. It is simply a fuller utilization of a health care program that began in 1965 and is largely administered by private health insurance companies.
In other words, when a Republican legislator or candidate says he opposes “government take-over of health care”, what he’s really saying is that he wants to get rid of a program that already provides coverage for more than 500,000 Minnesotans each month; more than half of them are children and families, the remaining are seniors and people who have disabilities.
So next time you see Tom Emmer or a Republican legislative candidate, ask him why he doesn’t want Minnesota to get more of your hard-earned federal tax dollars back. Ask him why Republican legislators were overwhelmingly for the Medicaid option before they were against it. And ask him why he is unwilling to stand up for Minnesota hospitals and clinics and fight to preserve Minnesota jobs. And when you go to the polls in November, remember the answers.
February 19, 2010| Posted in Articles, Front Page Slideshow, In the News, In the News, News Media
Dems move to override Pawlenty’s GAMC veto
by Tom Scheck, Minnesota Public Radio
February 18, 2010
St. Paul, Minn. — Democrats say they will attempt to override Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s
veto of a bill that extends health insurance for more than 30,000 Minnesotans.
The House and Senate voted overwhelmingly to pass the legislation Thursday, but Pawlenty, who’s in Washington D.C, quickly vetoed the bill, setting up a showdown in the Minnesota House as Democrats try to convince a handful Republicans to reject Pawlenty’s veto.
DFL VOWS TO PASS BILL
Shortly after Gov. Pawlenty announced through a spokesman that he would veto the bill, three Democrats in the Minnesota House lined up outside reporters’ doors to say they won’t stand for it. Rep. Paul Thissen. DFL-Minneapolis, said Democrats, hospital officials and advocates for the poor will work to convince three Republicans to vote to override.
“They’re going to be hearing from their hospitals and their communities and I think for that reason we are going to pick up the votes to override this veto and we should,” Thissen said.
On Thursday, the House and Senate overwhelmingly passed a $284 million bill that would extend the General Assistance Medical Care program for another 16 months. Lawmakers were moving quickly because benefits for the 30,000 people on the program who live below the poverty line will run out on April 1st.
Pawlenty vetoed funding for the program last year, and he has proposed rolling those on GAMC into a different program known as MinnesotaCare. But Rep. Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul, said MinnesotaCare is too expensive for people currently enrolled in General Assistance Medical Care.
She said the plan passed by lawmakers would cost less than Pawlenty’s, and that it’s unfair to balance Minnesota’s budget on the backs of the state’s poorest and sickest residents.
“While we have a difficult budget to solve, I don’t think this is the population that should pay the price,” she said. “There are other Minnesotans that have the means to tighten their belts. But this population living under bridges, who have served our country, they’re in hard times and we’re taking away one of the last benefits that they have–their health care.”
WHILE PAWLENTY TRAVELS, DFL LOOKS FOR HOUSE VOTES
Pawlenty was in Washington D.C. when the bill passed. His spokesman, Brian McClung, released a statement saying Pawlenty will veto the bill from Washington. He said the bill spends too much and includes quote “no reform.” On Thursday, Pawlenty was on a call from Washington D.C. with reporters in Nevada criticizing President Obama’s upcoming trip to that state. He declined to say why he would veto the bill when this Minnesota reporter asked him about it.
Read more about Pawlenty’s Nevada conference call on Polinaut.
“We’re trying to limit this to the Nevada press but Brian McClung has outlined the reasons for that in a communication to you and if hasn’t he will shortly,” Pawlenty said.
“Can you identify what your main objections to it?” the reporter asked.
“It will be the ones that Brian [McClung] identifies for you when you get that information if you haven’t already.”
Pawlenty, who appears to be gearing up for a run for president in 2012, is scheduled to speak to a group of activists at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington Friday morning. While he’s in Washington D.C., Democrats and Republicans in Minnesota will frantically count heads to see if an override will happen.
In the state Senate, Democrats have enough votes to override a veto. The key question is the House where Democrats are three members short of an override. 38 House Republicans and all 87 Democrats voted for the bill on Thursday. It takes 90 votes to override a veto. House Minority Leader Kurt Zellers, R-Maple Grove, is confident Republicans will stick together and uphold the governor’s veto. He said he thinks any GAMC solution should be included in a plan to fix the state’s $1.2 billion budget deficit.
“We think it’s part of a bigger budget solution,” Zellers said. “This should be a part of it, the GAMC fix or a new program should be a part of that fix. We’re going to work together again, just like we did with this version of it to find a solution that not only the governor can agree to but the house and senate can agree to as well.”
But Democrats say they’ll remind Republicans that many of the hospitals in their districts stand to lose millions if an override doesn’t happen. The House was unsuccessful in its attempt to override Pawlenty’s veto of funding for GAMC last year.
The only successful override during Pawlenty’s time as governor was in 2008 on a transportation bill that raised several taxes to pay for transportation projects.
February 18, 2010| Posted in Articles, Current Issue - Frontpage, Front Page Slideshow
Paul Thissen earned the highest rating of any candidate for governor in either political party on the Legislative Report Card on Racial Equity. Thissen was the second-highest scoring legislator, overall.
The Organizing Apprenticeship Project, a Minnesota non-profit that advocates for racial equity, compiled the Report Card. Thissen was named a “champion for racial equity” because of his efforts to advocate for racial equity in the 2009 legislative session.
“Last session, because of the leadership of Paul Thissen, Minnesota made progress toward racial justice. Progress included requiring hiring equity for green jobs and advancing parity in the criminal justice system,” said Jermaine Toney of Organizing Apprenticeship Project. “Unfortunately, Governor Tim Pawlenty’s unilateral cuts to programs providing critical support for communities of color and low-income families undermined many of the good legislative accomplishments in the 2009 session.”
Thissen was thrilled with the rating, adding, “Minnesota is a changing state. We are more diverse, growing older, and competing in a global economy. As Legislators and leaders, we need to be vigilant about the impact that our decisions have on diverse Minnesota communities. It is rewarding to have that vigilance recognized by advocates for racial equity.”
For a complete copy of the 2009 Minnesota Legislative Report Card on Race Equity, please go to OAP’s website at www.oaproject.org
July 22, 2009| Posted in Articles, Front Page Slideshow
MARSHALL – Minnesota’s next governor will deal with a budget deficit and a recovering economy, but must do so with more vision than what’s been used in the past, said Rep. Paul Thissen, DFL-Minneapolis, and candidate for governor. A governor and his administration and Legislature can’t just make cuts in the budget and move money from one area to another to solve a budget crisis, said Thissen, who made a campaign stop in Marshall on Tuesday.
“Unless there is a broader discussion on who we want to be as a people,” Thissen said the budget and related issues won’t be resolved for the long term.
While he agrees with Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s statements that health care costs are increasing at an unsustainable rate, Thissen disagrees with Pawlenty’s approach.
Recent cuts in General Assistance Medical Care (GAMC) mean more people will be without insurance, because the cuts in the long run mean more expensive visits to emergency rooms, Thissen said.
The cuts also mean an increase in those with mental illnesses who will be without insurance, he said. That will also be more of a long-term cost to the state. At the least, the state must make sure those with mental health issues have insurance coverage for their medications, Thissen said.
“The dominant idea that the best way to succeed is for everybody to make it on their own, (needs to change),” Thissen said.
Minnesotans must consider the obligations they have to each other and then, talk more broadly about solutions and priorities, Thissen said.
To read the rest of the article, click here.
The Republican TV ads for November must already be filmed and ready to go. Republicans running for state offices have clearly decided to jump on the bandwagon of opposition to the national health care bill.
Follow Paul