Smaller Government Is A Tough Sell
Louisiana citizens want a smaller state government, but that is easier said than done. Just ask Gov. Bobby Jindal and Paul Rainwater, the governor’s commissioner of administration.
One of the ways to reduce the size of government is to turn over state operations to private companies. And Jindal is a strong advocate of privatization. Some have even joked about him selling the state Capitol if it would reduce the employment rolls and save money.
The latest effort to privatize involves the Office of Group Benefits, which administers the state health insurance program for 225,000 state workers and retirees. And it hasn’t gone well so far.
A half-dozen individuals got together this week to complain about turning over health insurance operations to a private company. However, no one from the administration was there to hear their complaints or defend the governor’s plans.
None of the opponents of privatization should have been surprised. Jindal and Rainwater, who is also the governor’s chief budget architect, were out of town. However, you can be sure they didn’t want to be there anyway.
All you had to do was read the list of speakers to understand why.
Tough crowd
State Sen. Butch Gautreaux, D-Morgan City, has been an outspoken opponent of the plan since it surfaced. His Senate Retirement Committee held hearings during the legislative session, even though this isn’t strictly a retirement issue.
“The reason they’re not here is because they cannot give a reasonable explanation why they’re doing what they’re doing,” Gautreaux said.
Other opponents included Frank Jobert, executive director of the Retired State Employees Association; Steve Monaghan, president of the Louisiana Federation of Teachers; Tommy Teague, former chief executive officer of the Office of Group Benefits; and Jean Armstrong, president of the League of Women Voters of Baton Rouge.
Three or four other major employee groups are also against privatization of health insurance.
Rainwater told Gannett News this week’s panel was stacked against him.
“The fact is, nothing will happen until 2012,” he said. “There will be a lot of opportunities to discuss this. I’m sure there will be a lot of public forums that are more constructive.”
Here is what Jindal and Rainwater want to do:
A private HMO already handles health insurance coverage for all but about 62,000 employees and retirees. They are under a Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plan. OGB administers their plan, and Jindal thinks the state should get out of the health insurance business.
Rainwater said Louisiana and Utah are the only states that manage their own insurance policies.
Opponents are afraid they will end up getting less health care coverage at higher prices because a private company has to make a profit and the state doesn’t.
Anyone in the same circumstances can understand their concerns. They like the way their claims are now being handled.
State Sen. Dan “Blade” Morrish, R-Jennings, said it’s a big issue with state workers and retirees. He is chairman of the Senate Insurance Committee.
“My e-mail has been blowing up with messages from constituents all across the state,” Morrish told Gannett News. “I’m very concerned about it because people all across the state are affected.”
Rainwater said that is because of the scare tactics of the opposition.
The only approval Jindal needs to proceed with privatization is an OK from the money committees in the state House and Senate. And the governor had a lot of input on the makeup of those committees.
Rainwater, who spoke in Alexandria on Tuesday, explained why the governor is so big about privatizing state operations.
“We have scarce resources, so we need to create efficiencies,” he said. And he listed some things that have already been accomplished.
The state’s work force has dropped from 90,000 to slightly more than 77,000, he said. Services have been consolidated, and state departments have been restructured.
Jindal tried to sell some state prisons during the last session, but legislators rejected the idea.
“In the state of Louisiana, we’ve got a large prison system, and we’ve got to find a way to downsize it,” Rainwater told the Alexandria Rotary Club.
Results touted
Look at the bottom line, Rainwater said.
“Louisiana is outperforming most states in the country,” he said in his defense of efforts to privatize.
Something tells me if Jindal and Rainwater are convinced privatization of the health insurance program will reduce the size of government and save money, it’s going to happen. A smaller, less-expensive government is what most people in this state want.
Opponents of this latest plan can only hope Rainwater will live up to his promises.
“Retirees don’t have anything to worry about,” he said. “It saddens me that people who oppose the change are trying to scare people. This is not something we’re going to do if it doesn’t make sense.”
Jim Beam, the retired editor of the Lake Charles American Press, has covered people and politics for more than five decades. Contact him at 494-4025 or jbeam@americanpress.com.
Opposition is a direct result of election year politicking; see http://jeffsadow.blogspot.com/2011/08/politics-not-facts-lie-behind-opposing.html.
I could give one red rat’s behind less if its an election year, Professor Sadow. My opposition is a direct result of not seeing one SHRED of evidence that explains why I should support the decision.
The agency takes no money from coffers. It turns a vast surplus (what was our deficit-as a state-last year? OGB had a quarter of that in SURPLUS alone!), and contracts out to companies like BCBS to administer the program, limiting liability, as well as making it very difficult for Mr. Rainewater to explain to me how the state is in the Insurance Business. In reality, the state oversees the program in the best interest of those its covers, & private groups win the contracts to actually administer the programs from a provision of service standpoint.
I find your statement about “opposition” to be incredibly myopic. The numbers covered & served-quite well-by OGB are staggering. That’s enough to swing an election. Democrats aren’t fueling this debate. The Administration is. It’s a wrong-headed move to try to mess with people’s insurance & health care without providing reasons why we should & factual evidence of how the private sector could do it better. Nevermind that these people already have stagnant income amounts for more than 2 calendar years with the suspension of merit pay increases of any amount.
Your contention in retrospect is awfully hypocritical. Anyone that challenges this move must therefore be motivated by partisan political leanings. Spoken like a true partisan political commentator.
It really is sad to believe the only way to improve government is to outsource it, or in a politically correct manner “privatize it”! We already know that Tommy Teague, former chief executive officer of the Office of Group Benefits has done a great job in managing and providing the kind of leadership necessary to turn OMG around and set aside $500 million. No one is complaining about the benefits, claims processes, healthcare costs, etc. So, why target OMG.
If you accept the argument that “privatization” it good for all things, then you must accept the concept that the governors office should be abolished as well and let the House and Senate leaders hire a good mananagement team to oversee state business.
That’s a bit of a straw man argument, don’t you think? 48 states don’t run their own insurance plans; moving to the same formulation 96 percent of the country operates in isn’t exactly embracing anarchy.
Conformity isn’t always the answer. Can you tell me what the average civil servant employed by those 48 other states pay for their health care without their version of OGB? Or what level of service they pay?
Also, is there heavy union presence in other states amongst their civil servants (like a Wisconsin, for example) that may provide health care?
There are a ton of variables that you aren’t touching on. You’re pushing an Administration-fueled agenda without being honest about how this sausage is going to be made. They’ve fired two people over this, and they haven’t provided a scrap of evidence as to how someone in the private sector is going to run it better than OGB has.
You guarantee me a $750,000,000.00 in this economic climate, with zero reduction in services, and I’ll sign up tomorrow. Or whenever the next open enrollment plan starts, LOL.
The fact is that you can’t. Yet, in a time when we’re talking about state agencies that are bloated and running in the red, causing the Legislature & the citzenry-nevermind the Administration-huge headaches, we have one Agency that’s an absolute model of efficiency & how to make things work.
Our response to that is to sell it for a short-term sugar-high. Ignoring the potential ramifications of what will happen to TENS OF THOUSANDS of citizens in the short & long-term.
Jim, do you have a single bit of factual evidence that the Administration has shown to you, the Legislature, the voting public, much less those that will be affected that there is a problem and an inefficiency with OGB as it now stands?
Or does close to a BILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS (that he refuses to allow OGB to refund a 3rd of head off insurance premium increases for state employees coming down the pipe) render moot any protestations from your end about “inefficiencies” coming out of OGB?
Show me how its being poorly run. Show me how someone can do it better. Show me what are the advantages. They ran a study on it and then they got caught up in a soap opera over trying to refuse to relesae it. That’s because they know the study shows that OUR INSURANCE COSTS WILL RISE.
Whomever buys this entity will pocket the $750,000,000.00 surplus OGB brings to the table as pure profit. From there, you, Jindal, Rainwater, nor ANYONE ELSE has shown that they can guarantee that we won’t see costs increase, nor services reduced by private insurers.
Where are your articles about LUBA, the National Flood Insurance Program, or Citizen’s Insurance? Oh, wait, you mean there are actually SUCCESS stories out there about local & federal government entering into the insurance business & actually creating a healthier, low-cost option for its tax-paying, voting electorate/citizenry, while at the same time not stifling competition in the marketplace? Heck, with the NFIP, Citizen’s & LUBA, all of those entities created a market, as there was hardly any activity at all in those areas when they cobbled together what they could.
Bottom line is that unless you can show me some substantive proof that my insurance won’t go up & money won’t be taken out of my pocket, as well as guaranteeing me that my benefits won’t be reduced, then you have just sent a spam e-mail out to however many folks are on your mailing list.
There is ZERO Administration evidence that what they’re doing will help the citizens & employees that this will affect. Again, the Administration has actually FOUGHT AGAINST providing evidence they themselves generated, because the evidence is stacked against them.
This is privitization for the sake of privitization. We don’t throw folks out of the NFIP just because we’re tired of being in the flood insurance business. It could jeopardize hundreds of thousands of people. For the same reasons, we shouldn’t just privatize OGB for the sake of privatization.
P.S.–>I’m not even TOUCHING the “follow the money” angle. Your house of cards is already blown over with the fact that Rainwater, Jindal & Co can’t produce a shred of factual evidence that privatizing OGB is what’s best for Louisiana & those OGB serves.