Rising Costs Bring Adversaries In Health-care Debate To Table

The Charleston Gazette, February 8, 2006

Opening the first of a series of hearings on Gov. Joe Manchin’s proposals to expand access to basic health coverage, representatives of business and labor told the House Health and Human Resources Committee that soaring health-care costs have forced both sides to the table.

“Labor and the Chamber [of Commerce] were natural enemies for a long time, but to look to the future, we’ve got to change, and I welcome that change,” state AFL-CIO executive director Kenny Perdue told the committee.

Both Perdue and West Virginia Chamber of Commerce President Steve Roberts said neither companies nor workers can continue to absorb the costs that uninsured patients place on the health care system.

Roberts said health insurance premiums have increased 73 percent nationally since 2000, and said the cost-shift for uncompensated care now accounts for about one-third of the cost of private health insurance coverage.

He said West Virginia’s cost-shift is among the highest in the nation, adding nearly $1,800 a year to each insured worker’s premiums. “Eliminating the cost-shift is something we very much need to talk about, and it’s something that’s easier said than done,” he said.

He said the chamber supports Manchin’s proposals — which would allow clinics to offer basic primary care services for monthly fees, and to set up a low-cost bare-bones health coverage plan — but also supports efforts that go beyond. “We’re hopeful there are ways to get everyone covered without having to go to what some would view as extreme changes,” Roberts said.

In addition to the governor’s proposals, the House had proposed creating a panel of health care experts mandated to come up with ways to provide health coverage for the state’s 245,000 uninsured residents by 2010. The Senate removed that “universal health insurance” provision from the bill (HB4021) last week.

House Health and Human Resources Chairman Don Perdue, D-Wayne, said one of the goals of the hearings is to come up with a workable alternative to the proposal the Senate rejected.

“A lot of it depends on how much air we can get under this issue with the next couple of weeks of testimony, and how much we can convince the Senate that this issue has value,” he said. “It’s a huge issue, and it’s hard to get our hands around it.”