The shell game

The Legislature has passed the Catamount Health bill, H861. I believe it has some very good points, but unfortunately, it also has quite a few negatives. In my opinion, the negatives will prove to outweigh this bill's positives. I urge you not to take my word for this but to look up the bill itself. You can find it on the government page of the Vermont.gov Web site under the Legislature section. It is so important, it has its own link down at the bottom. I would also urge you to e-mail Rep. Thomas F. Koch of Barre Town at tkoch@leg.state.vt.us and in the subject line, request a copy of his document called "Scribblings" dated May 6. In the limited space I have available to me in this column, I will not be able to go into the details of this bill. That's why it is so important for you, the reader, to look up this bill and make up your own mind. But here's my opinion.

The "financial health" of this bill is dependent on funding that may not be sustainable in the long run. This bill anticipates using revenue received from the Global Commitment Funds, a federal program, to pay a substantial portion of the costs. In addition, this bill authorizes a 50 percent or more increase in the cigarette tax, which is a regressive tax. Are these two revenue sources reliable, or will the taxpayer end up paying for most of this program? Also, how much of a burden will we be creating for Blue Cross/Blue

Shield and MVP, the last two major insurance companies in our state?

How does Catamount Health work? First, it creates a new insurance market, especially for people without insurance, who do not have adequate insurance available to them from an employer. Insurers will be invited, not required, to offer products in this market. Two insurers, Blue Cross/Blue Shield and MVP, have already indicated they would like to participate. But will they? What happens if they don't? And what happens if they don't want to participate, but ultimately are mandated to do so by the state? Will they then leave Vermont like all the other insurers have done under the Dean administration?

Another questionable part of this plan is the burden it puts on the small business owner. It requires an employer to contribute based upon the number of employees it has who are not covered by insurance. Will this burden become excessive? Will this bill, in the long run, encourage employers not to provide insurance at all, and just give the $365 per person to the Catamount Health program, and let the state pick up the insurance tab for everybody?

I believe that in the small business person's world, there are enough mandates, and that one more will discourage small businesses from starting up, remaining in our state or at the very least, providing insurance to their employees.

Most people agree that health insurance is an issue that needs to be dealt with. But I believe the Legislature rushed through H861 in a similar way as it did with the Act 60 education bill. And for years, we've been trying to recover from that one.

Instead of creating a new health bill that is sustainable and covers only those who truly need it, they have moved this on the fast track in an election year. I wonder why. Unfortunately, I believe the governor is buying into this plan, not because he believes it is the best solution, but because he is also concerned about it being an election year.

Once again, our legislators seem to be more concerned with returning to Montpelier in January than providing the good people of Vermont with a sustainable, quality program. The ultimate shell game continues.

Mike Bethel is a community activist living in Bennington.