|
Dems miss the mark on saving EMS
On Tuesday we heard HF 4738, which is a bill relating to EMS services. For some background, EMS in Minnesota has been in a state of decline. According to the Minnesota Ambulance Association, “Ambulance services are grappling with the monumental task of maintaining operations amidst mounting financial pressures and a dire shortage of personnel.” Further, the costs of maintaining excellence in care far outweigh what most ambulance services receive from insurance creating major budget deficits. The ambulance industry is struggling with finances, recruitment, and retention of qualified and motivated staff. These challenges are causing major delays and even potential closures of ambulance services, especially in greater Minnesota.
This is not a new problem. The Ambulance Association raised this issue back is 2023 when we held a $18 billion surplus, and their needs could have easily been addressed. However, instead of taking care of one of our state's most essential services, Democrats spent your taxpayer dollars on their far-left agenda leaving the state of ambulance services in disarray. Even Rep. Huot (D-Rosemount), said on the floor, “Why didn’t we do this last year with the surplus? I don’t know.” The fact of the matter is that in order to maintain the high standard of care Minnesotans deserve, the EMS industry needs additional one-time funding.
This bill that passed on Tuesday does not address any of the concerns put forward by the Ambulance Association. Instead, it drastically changes the regulatory framework of emergency medical services. It eliminated the Emergency Medical Service Regulatory Board (EMSRB) and replaced it with the Office of EMS, a new cog in the bureaucratic machine. Instead of funding EMS, Democrats created more bureaucracy that will ultimately cost the taxpayers more than if we had just approved the one-time funding ask from the Ambulance Association. Chair Liebling (D-Rochester) stated that no funding would be given until their new agency framework was in place. Unfortunately, my Democrat counterparts are holding EMS funding hostage until they can ensure that they can give additional power to their governor.
Health Omnibus Bill Passes the House
On Thursday, the House passed the Health Finance Omnibus bill, SF 4699. I am deeply concerned about the negative impacts this bill will have on Minnesotans. It will significantly increase costs for our citizens. It includes more insurance mandates that will raise health insurance premiums, making it harder for families to afford coverage. Furthermore, the Prior Authorization changes in this bill are predicted to blow up the budget forecast, leading to increased healthcare costs for Minnesotans. Additionally, the bill places more burdensome requirements on hospitals across the state, at a time when hospitals, especially in greater Minnesota, are struggling. The bill increases their operating costs and ultimately costs patients more for healthcare services.
Moreover, the bill decreases options for Minnesotans by banning new for-profit HMOs from entering the marketplace. This restriction limits the choices available to consumers for insurance providers, reducing competition and leading to higher premiums and fewer choices for consumers.
The bill also destabilizes the health insurance marketplace by removing the remaining balance of the reinsurance account, which was a proven GOP solution to improving healthcare costs. This action fully defunds a solution that was working, potentially leading to further instability and higher costs in the health insurance marketplace.
Overall, it is a bad bill. In times when Minnesota family budgets are already stretched thin, this bill makes health insurance harder to understand and significantly more expensive. The bill was passed along party lines and will move to the Senate to await further action.
New State Flag and Seal
The state will start using new flag and seal designs on Saturday, which has sparked mixed feelings. While many, myself included, appreciated the old design for its representation of our agricultural history and roots, the new design has been criticized for its simplicity and lack of key elements like our state motto and founding year, 1858. The decision-making process has also been a point of contention, with the decision left to a 13-member panel instead of being put to a vote for all Minnesotans to voice their opinions, as some of my colleagues and I had advocated for.
|
