On March 29th, the Senate passed the Omnibus Health and Human Services Budget Bill. It is Linked Here as SF 2171, and is authored by Senator Linda Berglin. The Bill spends about $250 million more than Governor Pawlenty requested in his Budget.
It’s a huge bill, but some of the highlights include:
1. Increased funding of 3.25% per year for nursing homes;
2. Increasing eligilbility for the Minnesota Care Health Plan for children, single adults, small businesses, and children of illegal aliens;
3. Establishment of a Health Care Access Task Force which is charged to develop a plan for Universal Health Care in Minnesota;
4. Cutting funding for the Positive Alternative program developed by Pro-Life advocates, and increasing the funding for Family Planning by 25% (much of which goes to Planned Parenthood);
5. Increased funding for Subsidized Child care programs;
6. $30 million of spending on an “Outreach” campaign to get people signed up for public health care programs they might be eligible for.
Here is a description of the debate on the bill provides by MPR.
Most disappointing to me was the defeat of several amendments that I offered :
1. The first amendment I offered was my bill (SF 237 Linked Here), which would have studied a redesign of the entire Health Care system in Minnesota, and established State guaranteed Castastrophic Health care coverage for every Minnsota citizen, after each person or family spends 12% of their annual income on health care.
I tried to explain that we are near the “fork in the road” with respect to health care. The left road leads to universal, single payer, government controlled health care. The right road leads to a consumer-based system, with a re-defined role for government. based on need.
Medicare is a good example of a single-payer government run health care entitlement program which is going broke. Medicare has a $40-50 Trillion unfunded liability over the next 25 years. Government cannot afford to give free or subsidized health care to millionaires any longer. My amendment would have been a great model for Medicare reform.
2. My second amendment would have prohibited tax-payer funding of elective abortion. Taxpayers would still pay for abortions when the life or physical health of the mother was at risk, or if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. Currently 29% of all abortions in Minnesota are paid for with taxpayer dollars.
3. My third amendment would have required parental consent for a minor to receive drug abuse treatment, venereal disease treatment, or pregnancy related treatment. (this is a different law than the consent needed for a minor to obtain an abortion, which does have a judicial by-pass provision).
On March 12th, the Senate approved a bill which required consent from a parent before a minor could have a “body piercing” (SF 112 Linked here). It’s already the law, that both parents must consent for a minor to get a tattoo.(See Link Here to this law).
It seems to me that treatment for venereal disease or drug addiction is more significant to the welfare of my child, than if my child gets a tattoo, or pierced belly-button. The whole “pro-choice” movement seems to have lost its perspective.
As always, I welcome comments about the direction of the legislative session.