Category Archives: Legislature

Two governors: Hutchinson and Beebe

Govs. Asa Hutchinson and Mike Beebe

Govs. Asa Hutchinson and Mike Beebe

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

No two individuals are alike. This past week was a reminder of how that’s the case with Gov. Asa Hutchinson and his predecessor, Gov. Mike Beebe.

Hutchinson called legislators to Little Rock to raise $50 million to make the state eligible for $200 million in federal highway funds each of the next five years. His bill did that by relying largely on surplus funds and interest income, which some legislators thought was the wrong way and/or not enough. It was over in three days, and while it was probably inevitable that the governor’s bill would pass, it wasn’t always easy.

This was the second special session this spring. This first was to pass Arkansas Works, the program that uses federal Medicaid dollars to purchase private health insurance for adults with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level.

Hutchinson has been in office about 16 months and has called three special sessions. In eight years, Beebe called only three special sessions, though two were in his last 15 months in office.

That’s one big difference. Another is this past session included 15 items. That’s not particularly large by historical standards; then-Gov. Bill Clinton once called a special session with 285. However, Beebe’s three sessions combined had only 17 items.

The other big difference is in Hutchinson’s and Beebe’s approach. Beebe, who became governor after a long legislative career, didn’t call lawmakers to Little Rock until the bills were written and the votes counted. Everything was largely done behind closed doors, and then legislators voted and went home.

In contrast, during this past highway session, the actual bill wasn’t filed until legislators were arriving in Little Rock, leading Sen. Bryan King, R-Green Forest, to tell the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, “There have been as many Bigfoot sightings in the past 20 years as there have been of the final draft of the governor’s highway bill over the last week.” The bill failed to pass the Senate Transportation Committee, which meant the sponsor, Sen. Bart Hester, R-Cave Springs, had to move it to another, friendlier one.

Eventually it passed, and Hutchinson signed it into law on the session’s third day, which is as quickly as he’s allowed under the Arkansas Constitution.

Is one governor’s approach better than the other? Let’s just say they’re different. It’s probably true that the highway session was messier under Hutchinson than it would have been under Beebe – in public. Under Beebe, the messiness would have happened earlier, in private.

You could make the case that Beebe’s way is more efficient and that Hutchinson’s is more transparent. Under Beebe, legislators came to Little Rock for very specific purposes and then left, which is good in that it meant they weren’t debating a bunch of bills that were better left for a regular session. With Hutchinson, the process was more open and visible – the debate occurring on the Senate floor and in committee hearings in addition to back rooms.

Meanwhile, the two governors have operated under different circumstances. Beebe led a Legislature that was full of not particularly committed Democrats when he entered office who were replaced by Republicans by the time he left. Hutchinson leads a fractious Republican caucus with a Democratic minority that’s trying to figure out how to assert itself. For a variety of reasons, maybe Beebe had to work things out beforehand, and maybe Hutchinson can’t.

There was some grumbling among legislators about this session’s disorganization. When I asked Hutchinson why, unlike Beebe, he didn’t have all his ducks in a row, he said lawmakers needed the pressure of a session.

“What’s the objective in life?” he asked. “Is it to accomplish significant legislative action, or is to to get things done in a cookie-cutter fashion where the outcome is known before you start? While you like to do all your homework in advance, the fact is, if I would have insisted upon, ‘Everybody sign on to the highway plan before we start,’ we’d never got it done.”

I took that as a defense of his own approach, not a criticism of Beebe’s. They govern in different circumstances, and no two individuals are alike.

Return of the Democrats?

Conner Eldridge is running as a Democrat for the U.S. Senate seat held by Republican Sen. John Boozman.

Conner Eldridge is running as a Democrat for the U.S. Senate seat held by Republican Sen. John Boozman.

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

The last eight years have been really bad for Arkansas Democrats. The last few months have been a little better.

Democrats controlled Arkansas politics for 140 years. As late as 2008, the party controlled five of the state’s six congressional offices, all seven statewide constitutional offices, 27 of the 35 state Senate seats, and 75 of the 100 state House seats.

But they have fallen far, fast. After President Obama’s election, Arkansas did what much of the rest of the South had already done and became a Republican state.

Now, Republicans occupy all the state’s congressional offices, all seven statewide constitutional offices, 64 state House seats and 24 state Senate seats. In the last two U.S. Senate races, Democratic incumbents won only 37 percent of the vote in 2010 and 39 percent in 2014. Almost twice as many Arkansans voted in the March 1 Republican presidential primary (410,920) as voted in the Democratic primary (221,010). Democrats could not field a candidate in three of the four congressional races and do not have enough candidates in state legislative races to win back a majority, even if they win every race they are contesting.

In 1960, New York transplant Winthrop Rockefeller hosted a “Party for Two Parties” at Winrock Farms in hopes of building the almost nonexistent Republican Party into a viable contender. At times these past eight years, I’ve wondered if we’re going to need another one of those parties.

But Arkansas Democrats have had at least three bright spots lately.

One, they’ve got a young, energetic U.S. Senate candidate, former U.S. Attorney Conner Eldridge. He’ll have a tough time unseating the Republican, Sen. John Boozman. But he’s running an aggressive campaign.

Second, the presidential race is shaping up about as well as Democrats could hope: former Arkansas first lady Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump. He’s brought new people to the Republicans but also split the party, which will not completely unite behind him. President Obama won 37 percent of the vote in Arkansas in 2012. That’s consistent with the percentages those incumbent senators won in 2010 and 2014, so it’s not certain Clinton will do better. But at least Trump gives Democrats a target.

Finally, Democrats at the state level, who sometimes have been behaving as if they hope things will just get back to “normal,” have been acting a little more like a vigorous minority lately.

I’ll try to make this brief. In the fiscal session that just ended at the State Capitol, the big issue was Arkansas Works, the program that uses federal Medicaid dollars to purchase private health insurance for a quarter of a million Arkansans. It had passed by large majorities in a recent special session, but it fell just short of the three-fourths needed in both the House and Senate for funding during the fiscal session. Under the Arkansas Constitution, nine senators can kill funding for any program, and this time, 10 Republicans were determined to stop Arkansas Works.

However, the Arkansas Constitution also contains a provision requiring that the first item that must be passed in a session is the general appropriations, which funds expenditures such as legislators’ reimbursements. Democrats in the House decided to hold that up until Arkansas Works was passed.

After much maneuvering by Gov. Asa Hutchinson, Arkansas Works was funded. Because he practically staked his governorship on it, it’s debatable how much of an effect the Democrats’ effort had. But at the very least, it was a reminder that 35 House Democrats can throw as much of a monkey wrench in the proceedings as 10 Republican senators can.

As a party, Democrats tend to support more government activity to help lower income people, so Arkansas Works would seem to be an appropriate issue for them to fight for, or at least stand with the big guy doing the fighting. Now they are coalescing behind another issue they think is a good fit, more funding for pre-K education.

That’s a better strategy than waiting for their majority to return, which isn’t going to happen any time soon. Two parties are better than one, and if you’re going to be a minority, you might as well be a vigorous one, Rockefeller would say.

Related: How Conner Eldridge thinks he can win.

The real goal of the private option: Changing U.S. health care

CapitolBy Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Arkansas is the land of the Hogs. When it comes to health care reform, it’s also offered itself up as a guinea pig.

Here’s why. The American health care system was a mess long before President Obama was elected. Costs were skyrocketing, and people were denied insurance based on pre-existing conditions, or they lost their insurance if they got sick. It’s long been unjust and unsustainable.

Along came the Affordable Care Act, which created Obamacare. Among its provisions was expanding Medicaid coverage for Americans with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level. Medicaid is a federal-state partnership that serves the poor, the aged and the disabled.

When the Supreme Court said states could choose if they participated in that expansion, many Republican-led states said no. In 2013, a group of Arkansas Republican legislators along with Gov. Mike Beebe’s administration instead said, “We’ll take that money, but instead of expanding Medicaid, we’ll purchase private health insurance.” The Obama administration agreed, and thus was created the “private option.”

It’s been a huge controversy that split Republicans between those who support it and those who see it as an unsustainable expansion of Obamacare.

Why would some Republicans support it? For one, a quarter of a million Arkansans now have health insurance because of it. Taking it away would be a state-changing event – for them, of course, but also for hospitals who would have to provide a lot of free care, and for the state, which would lose a lot of federal government money.

However, there’s another reason some Republicans support the idea: They’re trying to reform the entire health care system – which, as noted previously, has been messed up a long time.

Many Republicans have long advocated a “premium assistance” model for certain needy populations – basically, giving them money for insurance instead of putting them on a government program. But as state Sen. David Sanders, R-Little Rock, explained, the idea hasn’t been tried. If they could demonstrate in Arkansas that the idea could work, then they could change the entire national health care system starting in Arkansas.

What have been the results? There are more people on the program than were anticipated, and it hasn’t been managed well by the Department of Human Services. Coverage has been bought with taxpayer dollars for people without Arkansas addresses or, in some cases, a pulse. But a lot of poor people are covered, hospitals are saving money on uncompensated care, and costs per beneficiary have been lower than expected. The addition of a quarter of a million poor people to the insurance market has attracted providers to Arkansas, increasing competition and the choices available to us all.

As the experiment has continued, new elements have been included. Supporters hope to help people transition into self-sufficiency rather than trapping them in a big government program.
Hutchinson’s Arkansas Works program, which is the private option with a new name and some new wrinkles, includes work training referrals and a $19 per month contribution from better-off beneficiaries. He’d like to do more, but the Obama administration won’t let him. But next year, there will be a new administration.

So Arkansas has offered itself up as sort of the guinea pig in this experiment to see if the premium assistance model works. Since then, a number of other states have followed Arkansas’ lead and tried their own experiments. During hearings this past year, Arkansas legislators heard about some of those results, which could lead to changes here. States are the laboratories of democracy, and laboratories work best when they share what they learn.

Lawmakers hope the changes Arkansas has demonstrated could have other far-reaching effects. Sanders thinks the premium assistance model could be used effectively with the Veterans Administration – which, goodness knows, needs help. Rep. Charlie Collins, R-Fayetteville, thinks that, long-term, the model would work even for the biggest government health care program, Medicare.

There are those who say none of this will fix the health care system. Opponents from the right say government messes everything up. Opponents on the left say health care should not be a profit-earning enterprise, so the United States should do as other Western countries have done and just put the government in charge of paying the bills.

Sanders said something on which everyone should agree: This is an ongoing process. Health care isn’t going to be reformed. It’s going to be reforming, always. It must be.

Related: The debt, the private option and the painter

The larger debate: How Arkansas works

arkansasFlagBy Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

This debate at the Capitol over health care is difficult to write about day to day because things change quickly. So let’s talk about what it might mean for the future.

First, the background. Legislators are debating the private option, which uses federal Medicaid dollars to purchase private health insurance for Arkansans with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level. It came about as a result of the Affordable Care Act, which created Obamacare. As of the end of January, 267,590 adults were eligible. It has helped Arkansas reduce its number of uninsured adults and gotten hospitals paid more often for their services – probably saving some of them, in fact.

However, some Republican legislators say it’s an unsustainable expansion of Obamacare leading to more government dependence and a bigger national debt. Gov. Asa Hutchinson is trying to make the program more agreeable to them by requiring more from recipients while changing the name to Arkansas Works. For many, it’s still not agreeable enough.

During the recent legislative session, Arkansas Works passed, but just short of the three-fourths majority needed for any kind of state spending. Arkansas Works is part of the larger Medicaid budget, which also funds nursing homes and other programs. So at least five members of the House and two in the Senate who voted against Arkansas Works must now vote to fund the entire Medicaid budget, including Arkansas Works.

This has been a huge debate. There’s been talk about how close to the cliff the state would get. The opponents haven’t wanted to fund Medicaid with Arkansas Works, and the supporters haven’t wanted to fund Medicaid without it.

The three-fourths requirement for funding is a high bar. It means that any nine senators can block anything.

So in the future, will they? If some nine senators don’t support the Common Core next year, will they threaten to withhold funding for public schools? What if nine senators want to spend more money on programs for poor people and threaten to withhold their votes for something else?

In fact, the Arkansas Constitution gives one-fourth of either House the ability to shut down the entire state government. It requires that, before anything else is funded, funding must be secured for general appropriations, which includes legislative reimbursements and such. So it’s possible for that one-fourth minority to refuse to fund general appropriations, and then nothing happens. In fact, as part of the political brinksmanship being played at the Capitol, House Democrats did just that while saying that Arkansas Works must be settled first.

Nine senators can exert their will over potentially the other 126 legislators. That’s a powerful weapon. But it’s perfectly legal and constitutional.

Is it the wave of the future? If so, it would require a complete change in the culture of the Capitol, which is a remarkably collegial place where legislators generally like each other, regardless of party. Arkansas Democrats and Arkansas Republicans, after all, are much more alike than Massachusetts Democrats and Alabama Republicans. In a body dominated by Republicans, the Senate chair of the powerful Joint Budget Committee is the universally popular Sen. Larry Teague, a Democrat from Nashville. That kind of thing wouldn’t happen in Congress. Moreover, legislators don’t want to be seen as obstructionist because they want to pass their own legislation.

Legally, nine senators can block anything, but culturally, they would pay a heavy price if they did. When cultures shift, the law remains. On the other hand, laws are always interpreted through the lens of culture.

Ultimately, Arkansas Works probably will be funded. On Tuesday, supporters pushed through the Joint Budget Committee an amendment that would end the program at the end of the year. The governor has said he will veto the amendment but not the bill, and the Legislature won’t be able to override. Voila! Arkansas Works passes without anyone having to convince two of those senators to go on the record voting for it.

Where will this lead? The Legislature is supposed to fund with a three-fourths majority, not a simple majority. It might get Arkansas Works funded, but it probably will draw a legal challenge.

Got all that? While the debate today is about Arkansas Works, the larger debate is about how Arkansas works.

Related: Arkansas Works and the private option: What’s all the fuss about?

Why governor thinks the private option is the best option

Gov. Asa Hutchinson

Gov. Asa Hutchinson

By Steve Brawner
© 2016 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

The question came to mind as Gov. Asa Hutchinson addressed reporters Tuesday: “Governor, when you were a young man fighting to make the Republican Party more than a tiny minority concentrated in the state’s northwest corner, did you ever think it would eventually dominate state politics, and you would lead it, and your most important priority, for a time, would be saving a government health care program?”

The question was not asked. It wasn’t the time or place. Hutchinson makes himself available to reporters and respectfully tries to answer questions. But he’s not a soul-barer.

At issue is Arkansas Works, Hutchinson’s version of the private option. That’s the program created in 2013 after the Supreme Court ruled states under Obamacare could choose whether or not to expand Medicaid coverage to adults with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level. Arkansas bucked the trend of other Republican states by accepting the money, but instead of expanding Medicaid, it used it to buy private insurance for that population. As of the end of January, 267,590 Arkansans were eligible.

In the recent special session, Arkansas Works passed 70-30 in the House and 25-10 in the Senate, with support from majorities of Republicans and Democrats in each chamber. But while those votes made it the law of the land, it still must be funded during the Legislature’s current fiscal session. Those majorities fell a little short of the 75 percent needed in each chamber to fund the Department of Human Services’ Medical Services Division, which includes Arkansas Works and other Medicaid programs, including nursing home care.

Opponents, all Republicans, say the private option/Arkansas Works is another health care entitlement for able-bodied adults that neither the state nor an indebted nation can afford. The talk around the Capitol has been whether they will successfully hold up the entire Medical Services Division budget to stop Arkansas Works.

Going into Thursday, the program had enough votes in the House for funding, but none of the 10 Senate opponents had publicly said they were budging. On Thursday, a plan was hatched where legislators would fund Medicaid without Arkansas Works, but Hutchinson would veto just that part of it, and legislators wouldn’t override the veto. But that idea failed, at least temporarily, to advance out of the Joint Budget Committee. So we’re still stuck.

It’s too much to say Hutchinson’s governorship depends on this government health care program, but it is really important to him – important enough that he’s never going to allow 10 senators to stop him. Over the next five years, Arkansas Works is projected to bring $9 billion into the state’s health care economy at the same time the state will lose $5 billion because of other aspects of Obamacare. The state has 19 hospitals that are considered financially vulnerable. Dropping the program would add $1 billion to the amount of uncompensated care they and other providers would provide their uninsured patients.

It also would have a $757 million impact on the state budget, which was one reason why Hutchinson spoke before reporters Tuesday. He wants to call legislators back into special session after this current one to increase funding for highways. The state needs to find about $50 million a year to become eligible for $200 million in federal funding. Hutchinson said that without Medicaid dollars, the state can’t find the matching money for those highway dollars – without raising taxes, which he won’t do.

Like all Republicans, Hutchinson takes pains to declare he opposes Obamacare, even as he depends on Obamacare money. He’s been accused by some of being hypocritical.

He says he’s playing the cards he was dealt. He’d prefer the federal government send those Medicaid dollars to the states as a block grant – still federal government money, by the way – and let the states use that money as they choose without all the strings attached.

Currently, the federal government under President Obama won’t do that. However, you may have noticed we’re in the middle of a presidential election. Maybe the next president will be more open to that idea. That being the case, Arkansas had better stay in the game, Hutchinson says.

That means putting his office on the line, and grappling with members of the party he helped build, so he can save a government health care program that depends on an idea he doesn’t support. Does that make sense? In politics, sometimes yeah.

Related: Arkansas Works and the private option: What’s all the fuss about?