Category Archives: Legislature

Reforming health care reform

By Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

During the next two years, the most important number in Arkansas health care may be 1332.

That’s a section of the Affordable Care Act, the one that created Obamacare, that, starting in 2017, may allow Arkansas significant flexibility in implementing the law – potentially even letting it nullify some of its more controversial elements, including the mandate that individuals buy health insurance. Or maybe not.

Legislators serving on two panels these past two weeks heard testimony regarding Section 1332. Cheryl Smith Gardner is directing the state’s changeover from a federal exchange to a state exchange, which is where small businesses and individuals buy insurance. She once was a researcher for the conservative Heritage Foundation. Dr. Lanhee Chan is a Stanford University research fellow who was the chief health advisor for Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign.

In other words, these are not left-wingers, and both of them indicated Section 1332 offers the potential for major state-based reforms to the Affordable Care Act.

In a nutshell, here’s how it would work. Beginning Jan. 1, 2017, states can receive waivers from the federal government for large sections of the law provided their reforms meet four requirements. A waiver says the law does not apply in a particular situation.

First, health plans – whether provided by insurance companies or the state – must provide coverage that is at least as comprehensive as would be provided otherwise. What does that mean? It’s not clear, but it could mean that plans in Arkansas could have a heavier focus in some areas and a lighter one in others than they currently have.

The other requirements are that out-of-pocket expenses for individuals must be no higher than they are now; coverage must be provided to a comparable number of people as otherwise would be provided; and the changes must not increase the federal budget deficit over a 10-year period.

The section is so open-ended that it appears states can propose almost anything – although one thing they can’t change is the requirement that insurance companies offer coverage regardless of pre-existing conditions. If a state can figure out a way to cover as many people without the individual and employer mandates, it can propose it. Arkansas might be able to move large parts of its population from Medicaid, which is strictly government health care, to the so-called private option, which is more flexible because it’s government-funded health care through private insurance companies. Chan said it might be possible to collectively make changes to all federal health care programs within a state’s boundaries, including Medicare, where states’ roles now are limited.

“My own view is that 1332 has the potential to be a significant step forward for those seeking market-based health care reform,” he told the Health Reform Legislative Task Force May 28. “The challenge, of course, as with any waiver is that the negotiation process has two parties. It has the state, and it has the presidential administration.”

There’s the catch: The waivers have to be approved by the secretary of Health and Human Services and the secretary of the Treasury, which includes the IRS. The skeptical lady sitting beside me was doubtful those officials will approve anything that’s not more generous to beneficiaries than Obamacare already is. Sen. Terry Rice, R-Waldron, wondered if the administration might fail to hold up its end of the bargain if a waiver were approved. When Chan said that would be “unprecedented,” Rice replied, “I appreciate that thought, but I’m one that (feels) like we’ve seen some unprecedented things.”

On the plus side, the Obama administration has proven itself willing to grant health care-related waivers. The private option, in fact, exists because of a waiver. The administration knows that the Affordable Care Act is widely distrusted in red states like Arkansas, so it has an incentive to be flexible. Judging by the questions legislators asked, most seem to be keeping an open mind. Chan’s job in 2012 was to help defeat Obama, and he seems cautiously optimistic about the possibilities.

No state has yet submitted a waiver request, and Arkansas is nowhere near doing so. In fact, most legislators only now are learning much about it. It could create a lot of work that leads nowhere and is a huge disappointment. Or it could let states creatively reform health care reform. We won’t know which will be the case until 2017 is much closer. Until then, remember the number 1332.

With 600 jobs at stake, reality beats ideology

By Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

This week, state legislators, many of them elected promising to fight big government, voted for a lot of it, coming and going. They did so because today’s realities trump their political ideologies.

The legislators voted in special session for an $87 million bond package, paid for by Arkansas taxpayers, to help Lockheed Martin win a federal government contract to build 55,000 Joint Light Tactical Vehicles near Camden. In other words, state taxpayers will go into debt so the federal government can spend money.

This is corporate welfare at its most naked. Almost all of the package, $83 million, is going directly to a global company with $45.6 billion in sales last year, dwarfing Arkansas’ state budget. The practice is so ingrained that, during a press conference on the Capitol steps Tuesday, when asked why taxpayers should give his company money, a Lockheed representative simply turned and walked away from the podium, letting Gov. Asa Hutchinson answer the question.

All of this should be contrary to somebody’s political ideology, and yet of course legislators said yes, because in this case, reality is far more important. And the reality is that this project is expected to create at least 600 jobs and perhaps far more in south Arkansas, which badly needs them.

This would be the auto plant Arkansas has long wanted, but it’s even better because the customer is almost guaranteed to buy the plant’s products. Moreover, in addition to Uncle Sam’s 55,000-vehicle order, foreign governments will come shopping. Suppliers would locate close to the JLTV factory, creating more jobs. The presence of the JLTV facility would increase the area’s defense presence; already, hardware such as the Patriot missile is produced there. And if the state does this auto plant right, maybe civilian auto manufacturers could be persuaded to locate here as well. These things tend to snowball.

Those are realities. Here’s another one: Legislators knew the next potential large employer might want to locate in their district. They’d better play ball with south Arkansas lawmakers, because someday they may need their votes.

Finally, there’s this reality. Lockheed Martin is competing against two strong companies, Oshkosh and AM General, maker of the Humvee. The Pentagon has already decided that these 55,000 vehicles will be built somewhere, so Arkansas taxpayers will pay for them regardless. If 600 jobs are to be created, it might as well be in Camden.

Human beings need foundational beliefs lest we twist in the wind. For lawmakers, those foundational beliefs might include – actually, I hope they include – an aversion to big government and corporate welfare.

But there’s a difference between foundational beliefs, which allow room for difficult moral judgments and common sense, and rigid political ideology, which runs everything through a filter and requires new facts to conform to prior beliefs, or to be ignored.

Outside of this session, legislators and others are talking about difficult issues that won’t be settled in three days: how Arkansas’ health care system should look; how it should fund highways; how it should reform its prison system; what it should do about the Common Core.

If lawmakers are willing to vote for the JLTV package because it’s better to do so than not, then let’s hope they are willing to accept some other realities as well, and then work within them. Ideologically, they may hate the private option, but the reality is that it now provides health insurance for a quarter million Arkansans who mostly wouldn’t have it otherwise, so if they want it to go away, they should replace it with a better idea. The reality is that highways are badly underfunded, so if lawmakers’ ideology says that taxes are bad but roads are good, they need to offer creative ideas that are consistent with their foundational beliefs but not hamstrung by rigid ideologies.

If it were up to me, the federal government would buy fewer than 55,000 JLTVs. We’re going to pass part of the cost to our kids, and that’s not right. But if they’re going to be built, I hope they’re built in Camden by my fellow Arkansans. All things being equal, I think you take care of your own first.

It’s a foundational belief.

Arkansas seeks to find its place in the nonstop campaign

CapitolBy Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Gov. Asa Hutchinson announced Tuesday that legislators will be returning to Little Rock for a special session May 26. The main reason will be to pass a bond issue to help Lockheed Martin compete for a contract to produce the military’s new Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, the replacement for the Humvee, in Camden.

Lockheed Martin is a global megacorporation with $45.6 billion in sales in 2014, so it will be interesting to see what Arkansas taxpayers will be asked to fund. But this is the way the game is played these days, so Arkansas must play it. At stake is the production of 55,000 vehicles – basically, the auto plant the state long has coveted – and that’s not counting what foreign militaries might order. About 600 jobs would be created in south Arkansas, which needs them.

Legislators also will consider ways of streamlining state government – Hutchinson hasn’t offered concrete proposals regarding how – and might consider moving Arkansas’ political primaries, or maybe just the presidential ones, to March 1. That’s the subject of the rest of this column.

Tired of ceding the early presidential nominating process to Iowa and New Hampshire and then being forgotten later, a group of Southern states are considering holding their primaries March 1 in what many are calling the “SEC primary.”

Arkansas voters don’t usually play much of a role in presidential politics. The state’s primary election occurs so late in the process that many candidates have dropped out by the time Arkansans vote, and the state is so small that the remaining candidates don’t make it a priority. Legislators considered the SEC primary in the recently completed regular session. The bill didn’t pass, but support didn’t die. Maybe it would make Arkansas more relevant. It might give Gov. Mike Huckabee’s presidential campaign a boost, which his supporters would see as a plus.

These campaigns start early – Jan. 3 in Iowa in 2012, in fact. This year, the Iowa caucus will be Feb. 1, nine months before the general election, and the New Hampshire primary will be Feb. 9. And of course, candidates already have been campaigning for months.

Didn’t we just have an election? These days, elected officials are so focused on the next campaign that they can’t do the jobs voters chose them to do in the previous one. And that’s a problem with real-life consequences.

Case in point: The federal Highway Trust Fund is nearly empty, and the bill that funds it expires at the end of this month. A real, multi-year replacement is badly needed, but time is running out. We were in this same situation last year, but of course an election was coming up, so Congress passed a gimmicky, short-term fix that funded 10 months of construction with revenues borrowed from the next decade. Now those 10 months are over, and we’re right back where we were. Uncertain about what Congress is going to do this time, the state Highway Department has cancelled $282 million in construction projects this year. Last month, the American Trucking Associations’ chief lobbyist told Arkansas trucking executives that a bill must be written this year or else we’ll have to wait until the end of 2017 because presidential politics will get in the way.
.
Contrast American democracy with Great Britain’s recently completed parliamentary election. Queen Elizabeth formally dissolved Parliament in late March at the request of Prime Minister David Cameron, the election was scheduled for May 7, the parties campaigned, and 66.1 percent of the electorate voted. The Conservatives won, and Cameron retained his post. It was over in six weeks.

Great Britain has its own problems, of course, and nobody here wants a monarch, but the United States clearly is not well served by a democratic government where few have time to govern anymore. According to the Declaration of Independence, the “pursuit of happiness” is one of the three inalienable rights that led to America’s founding. Are the nonstop campaigning and barrage of toxic negative advertising helping you pursue happiness?

We’ll know whether the primary election will be moved before the session begins because only issues where the outcome is reasonably certain will be included in the call. It will be predetermined behind closed doors, which is not very transparent but is efficient.

At least they’ll govern, and then voters can decide if they did the right thing. I hear there’s an election coming up.

Limit state lawmakers to 10 bills

CapitolBy Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

During an 81-day session, Arkansas state legislators considered 2,200 bills and passed 1,288 of them into law. That’s a lot in a short amount of time.

The session was relatively brief. The legislative volume was not out of the ordinary, but were there really 1,288 ways Arkansas needed to be fixed – especially this way, this fast?

This is not a column bashing legislators, whom I find to be generally honorable and likable, with flaws like the rest of us. Many are idealists who spent months walking the streets of their hometowns campaigning for office with no guarantee they would win.

They want all that work to mean something, which is why they filed an average of 16.4 bills per legislator. (There are 135 legislative seats, but one was vacant this session.) Many lawmakers are reluctant to vote against each other’s bills for fear of offending someone they may need later for their own legislation – plus, it just feels kind of rude. As a result, many bills are passed with overwhelming majorities, at least in one chamber. Because there are so many bills – and because legislators don’t have staff members to read them – most of the important work happens in committee. There’s just too much to do in too little time.

The Legislature’s cooperative spirit enables it generally to get its work done – unlike Congress. Under the Revenue Stabilization Act, Arkansas state government will not run a deficit this upcoming fiscal year. In contrast, the Congressional Budget Office projects Uncle Sam will add $468 billion to the national debt in 2015 – the equivalent of about $1,459 per American, and this was a good year. In contrast to the Legislature’s 1,288 acts, Congress passed 296 laws over a two-year period in 2013-14 and 283 in 2011-12, according to the Pew Research Center. In other words, the Legislature passed more than twice as many laws in 81 days as Congress passed in four years.

Congress and the Legislature exist in very different universes. Congress deals in trillions while the Legislature deals in billions. Congress governs a vast, diverse country with significant regional and partisan differences. In the Arkansas Legislature, most Democrats and Republicans have similar viewpoints. The politics is less professional in Arkansas – though it’s moving in that direction.

Still, it probably would be best if Congress were more like the Legislature and if the Legislature were a little more like Congress. Passing 1,288 laws in 81 days – that’s just too many.

So here’s a modest proposal: Each legislator should be limited to filing about 10 bills per session. That would have cut the number to 1,340 this year, creating a more deliberate process and giving legislators a chance to focus on their priorities. If a bill is only 11th on their list, it can’t be that important to them.

This should start as a flexible rule of thumb enforced by the Legislature’s culture rather than a formal, legal limit enforced by law. Issues arise late in a session – for example, banning adoption “rehoming” – and legislators need to be able to file another bill if they are the best positioned to do so.

The downside would be that legislators would write longer, broader bills – try to get two for the price of one, in other words. Yes, that’s a danger, but the more a bill tries to do, the more likely it will contain provisions that draw opposition.

In 1,288 ways, legislators over the past three months have changed Arkansas through the force of government. Some of those laws were good and some weren’t, but all of them were passed in a hurried environment that places too much emphasis on passing bills for passing bills’ sake. Lawmakers should slow down and do less, but do it more deliberately.

•••

I need to make a correction. In a column about the Legislature’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act published around April 1, I wrote that I voted against the state’s 2004 amendment banning gay marriage. I had my elections confused. I voted in 2008 against a ban on unmarried couples adopting or fostering children, which also passed. It was aimed at gays and lesbians and also affected heterosexual unmarried couples.

I’m pretty sure I voted for the gay marriage ban in 2004. I would not vote that way today. Americans should not look to the government to define marriage. Let the government focus its attention elsewhere – and pass fewer laws at the state level thanks to a 10-bill limit. See above.

Governor conducts legislative orchestra

Asa for webBy Steve Brawner
© 2015 by Steve Brawner Communications, Inc.

Arkansas’ state government was designed to have a weak governor, and that tradition has continued. The framers of the current 1874 Constitution ensured a veto could be overridden by a simple majority vote, and later amendments, such as the one that transferred the governor’s authority to the lieutenant governor when the governor leaves the state, have continued that tradition.

Gov. Asa Hutchinson pretty much took a sledgehammer to all of that during this recent legislative session.

On issue after issue, the Legislature gave him whatever he wanted. He wanted a middle class tax cut. It passed. He wanted to buy time on the Medicaid private option, so he asked legislators to extend it for two years while they study what to do with it. Even those who campaigned on an over-my-dead-body platform said yes. When the House Committee on Public Transportation advanced a bill transferring part of general revenues to highways, Hutchinson said it didn’t fit into his budget, so the sponsor killed it, though with a promise from Hutchinson to appoint a task force to study highway funding.

Then there were the constitutional amendments. Legislative leaders indicated they didn’t really care to refer any of those to the voters, so the process looked dead in its tracks. Then Hutchinson said he wanted two – one to end the aforementioned practice of giving up his powers to the lieutenant governor, and one to increase the fund Arkansas uses to attract economic superprojects like auto plants. Both now will be on the ballot in 2016.

How did a system designed to produce a weak governor instead produce an orchestra conductor like Hutchinson? One explanation is that he displayed extraordinary political skills this session. He took potential train wrecks like the private option and Common Core off the table by appointing task forces to study them, and when all heck broke loose with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, he charted a middle ground that made him a hero to both sides even though he originally supported the bill.

History also was on his side. Hutchinson is the first Republican governor to hold office with a Legislature controlled by Republicans since shortly after the Civil War. His party wanted to govern effectively rather than look like the dog that caught the car and didn’t know what to do with it.

Hutchinson had another explanation during a sit-down session with reporters in his office last Thursday.

“The strength of the governor is from the respect of the office and the recognition that we need to have a leader, and also the desire to have the governor succeed,” he said. “And so that’s impressed me, and that’ s not a Republican thing. That’s a Republican and a Democrat thing. Democrats who opposed me, they not only said it, but they showed it in actions that it is important for Arkansas that the governor succeed.”

Contrast that attitude with this statement made by Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, now majority leader, during an interview with National Journal on Oct. 29, 2010: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

Democrats often point to that statement. To be fair, according to the fact-checking site Politifact, he said it in the context of discussing historical elections and said in that same interview that Republicans were willing to work with Obama “if he’s willing to meet us halfway.”

Still, Republicans’ priority from day one of Obama’s administration clearly has been to position themselves for future elections – just as Democrats in Washington will behave if a Republican presidential candidate manages to beat Hillary Clinton. The days when the president had a “honeymoon” after being elected may be just a fading memory.

Of course, it’s not the job of Democrats and Republicans to help each other succeed – particularly not in Washington, where the parties have real differences in their stated goals. But Washington could use more of Arkansas’ spirit, and Arkansas probably could use a little of Washington’s. Very little, but a little.

The latter will happen in Arkansas over the course of the next two years. Hard decisions on issues like the private option must be made, and legislators in both parties increasingly will challenge the governor.

It will get tougher for Hutchinson, just as it did for previous governors after they had been in office for a while. Unlike in Washington, most legislators still will want him to succeed, but eventually the honeymoon will be over.