Americans for Prosperity fails on Autism
By Brian Kirwin | Tuesday, February 1st, 2011 | PolicyBen Marchi’s got a robocall making the rounds, while he makes the rounds on Political radio shows who must be having a slow guest week, attacking the Speaker of the House of Delegates Bill Howell.
The Speaker’s sin? Supporting a bill telling insurance companies they have to cover Autism.
the HORROR!!!
Marchi, mighty quiet this year, decided to get active on this bill.
So Marchi, who is quitting AFP in a month for those who’d notice, has a dilemma – is he opposed to autism coverage or just mandates?
“Obviously autism is a very personal and emotional thing for families to deal with, but not every tragic situation deserves a new government mandate,” Marchi said.
“The bill, HB 2467, would tell private companies what kind of services they must offer.”
Ok, settled. I’ll take his word that it’s the mandate not Autism. So Marchi’s march against mandates must be against all Virginia’s health care mandates. He wouldn’t just oppose an Autism mandate, right?
So…
Marchi and AFP must want to repeal coverage for adopted children
Marchi and AFP must want to repeal coverage for newborn children
Marchi and AFP must want to repeal coverage for mammograms and pap smears
Marchi and AFP must want to repeal coverage for prostate screening
Marchi and AFP must want to repeal coverage for diabetes
Marchi and AFP must want to repeal coverage for childhood immunization
Marchi and AFP must want to repeal coverage for victims of rape
Let’s go, Ben! Where’s your robocall urging legislators to end that “big government mandate” covering mammograms. I’m waiting for that call telling legislators that coverage for adopted children can be banned.
Diabetic? Let’s end coverage for that, Ben! Right?
You better be consistent, Ben. If insurance mandates are the scourge of mankind to the point where you’d try to block the Speaker’s honest effort to treat children with Autism fairly, and it’s not Autism that is your problem, then I’m waiting for a press release urging legislators to end all these other existing mandates.
Virginia mandates coverage for prostate screenings, and I think that’s a good thing. AFP might be able to locate their heads.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
Comments
77 Responses to "Americans for Prosperity fails on Autism"
I am the first person to encourage honest debate and I respect the fact that good people can disagree but this post is not an honest debate.
The objection to this mandate is that the state is requiring that “health” insurance companies pay for school. Health insurance is designed to cover medical expenses, not education expenses.
The bill also exempts individual or small group policies, contracts, or plans, and will not apply to the state employees’ health insurance plan. If it is a good idea to force the private sector to comply, why exempt the state?
Lastly,the bill is also being rushed through without a financial impact statement, another red flag.
If we are going to debate let’s debate honestly and consider all of the facts.
J. while you want to “consider all the facts” I notice you only present one side, and none of those are mentioned in Marchi’s phone call.
Thanks for playing, but your comment isn’t any closer to honesty than the post you criticize.
Considering the failures that exist in the public school system and their inability to be all things to all parents and children I believe mandates are the wrong approach to solving this obvious need.
We need to strip out all mandates and allow innovation in insurance products to better serve different socio-economic classes, faiths and pre-existing conditions.
Most of the listed mandates above, in terms of coverage, would be am option in a truly competitive market of products and the consumer would select those coverages important to them.
We need to modify our State constitution to change it from “free education” to income qualified minimal fully portable benefit to free parents to send their children to the school that best suits their needs.
No one would argue that autistic children have special needs. As a business woman and an aunt of an autistic child, I already have a non-tranditional business solution to meet these childrens needs.
We need to unleash our private sector through competition to meet the needs of our citizens. It is mandates and funding above the safety net through monopoly govt solutions that inhibits our opportunity and destroys our economic freedom.
Brian-
You’ve obviously completely missed the point on this issue. Let me reiterate that for you…issue, issue, issue. The issue here is this one mandate and how it’s attempting to be added to code and pushed through the legislature.
It’s not about already mandated coverage in the code or repealing any current mandates, as you would have us believe. It’s about this one. And it’s not about the subject matter, autism, it’s about the mandate and the slippery slope of future coverages it sets. It’s about the fact that this bill has costs associated and hasn’t had the legislative legwork done. It’s bad process and bad policy. Needless to say, your post is idiotic to varying degrees of stupidity.
As for the organization and it’s leader, I’ve been a member of AFP for years now. We can’t all be bandwagon conservatives like you, Brian. Marchi does more in one day than you’ve done in the past four years. Also, check your facts…your own blog noticed he was leaving and gave rave reviews. Thanks for the crappy hit piece though. I’d ask you to go and do a little bit of research before you write your next article, but we all know that ain’t your M.O.
Lisa, I respect you for being consistent. I disagree with you, but respect your stance.
NWright, ah. All these mandates, and the dozen others I didn’t list, aren’t the slippery slope. THIS ONE is the secret slippery slope. Whew. Thanks for clearing that up.
I admit I don’t organize bus tours with no one showing up. Maybe I should start.
I did AFP a big favor by not blogging the photos I shot of their big Virginia Beach rally with a large bus and no one around but me and a City Councilman.
This would be the first instance of the state preemptively just mandating coverage before the federal gov’t requires them to…a slippery slope, indeed. If the state starts here…by themselves, where do they stop? When insurance premiums are through the roof? When businesses can’t afford to insure their employees and their families anymore?
As for AFP, that’s kind of funny Brian. I was at an AFP event the other week with over 150 people there where we talked about state spending. Go here to see it and all the other stuff AFP “doesn’t do” and is “silent” on. Gotta be easy to sit there behind your desk and make invalid points. So…try again. I just did your research for you.
Thanks for offering no substantive counterarguments to the questions I raised about the legislation, though. Glad everyone else on this blog agrees with your position, as well. Oh wait…
You mean this Virginia Beach stop that was a MEDIA STOP?? Way to try and spend your story.
I know you weren’t talking about this stop…looks like there’s at least 200 there…but no bus…just Marchi.
Is Bearing Drift hiring?
Gee Brian, this seems more like a hit piece on Marchi than an ‘issue’ piece. I didn’t receive the robocall. I’m not an AFP member. This issue is NOT about coverage as you may want to cast it. It is about MANDATED coverage. It is about the fact that if a person wants a service THEY pay for it, not get the government to REQUIRE that we all wind up paying for it. This is an anti-liberty bill and as much as we want to see these children taken care of it is NOT the role of govt to force a company to pay for medical treatment.
Sorry. Should have posted the direct link to the pic here so you can flip through and see your precious bus, just in the sake of full disclosure.
And to note, it’s easy to call people and orgs out for stuff they ARE doing, but know it’s just as easy for someone to call you out on a lack of something you’re NOT doing, investigative journalism. You don’t just get interrupted by a robocall while you’re scarfing down your TV dinner and write a blog post about it. A guy at work, myself, and a mother who wants a choice of schools, above, has done the research and deliberation you should’ve done before posting this article. Sad.
NWright, just Ben? That crowd was for Dick Morris. When Morris wasn’t around, AFP couldn’t draw flies.
JustAnne, nice to know you think mandating coverage for mammograms is “anti-liberty”
NWright, I’m not a journalist. Never wanted to be. But thanks for reading Bearing Drift.
You folks are Pavlovian…
Kirwin, the big government liberal who advocates for mandates!
I usually only advocate for people to have the guts to post their real full names.
To answer your question directly, AFP does not support ANY healthcare mandates, including those you mentioned above. The reality is that healthcare would be cheaper without mandates and the ability for companies to compete. We have consistently opposed these mandates and will continue to do so. The same goes for being able to purchase plans across state lines. -Ben Marchi
Thanks, Ben. I never thought you’d oppose coverage for adopted children, newborn children, postpartum, diabetes, prostate screenings, mammograms and pap smears.
Sure would save money, wouldn’t it, Ben?
“Income qualified minimal fully portable benefits”
Lisa’s here, yay!
Brian,
I was staying out of this fight, but come on. Accusing AFP of not being able to turn out people? Give me a break.
In the interest of full disclosure, everyone needs to know that AFP-VA is a client of mine and I helped organize most of their bus tours, with or without a big speaker.
I have been to nearly every stop across the state, and the ONLY area they have not been able to turn out people is Virginia Beach.
So, let’s see here, AFP gets 75-100 people in Wytheville with nothing but Ben and local Delegates, but can’t get that in Virginia Beach? So, is AFP truly the problem? I think you need to reevaluate.
Yes. It would save money. Yet again you’re missing the issue that they’re mandates. It’s not about the content, just the fact that the gov’t would be liberal and pompous enough to mandate coverage.
Marchi and his group may not be silent on feel-good liberal mandates that you support, and you might jeer them for that, but then again, he never got investigated for election fraud.
Chris, better luck next tour.
NWright, or is it Reverend?
I guess since AVP has told you to oppose mandates for adopted children, newborn children, postpartum, diabetes, prostate screenings, mammograms and pap smears, you’ll be helping draft legislation outlawing them?
Damn it Kirwin – quit stealing my posts. I just wrote a post on this for Common Sense this morning. I shouldn’t have waited to post it!
What people confuse about the educationally vs medically based treatments is they tie the setting of the therapy to the therapy performed.
The treatments are to force the brain to develop stronger neural pathways to route around the damaged autistic brain so that the child can achieve as normal a life as possible. These treatments though are no different than you or I going to physical therapist for a hurt leg or physical injury. Those treatments are considered medical and so are the therapies needed for children and adults with Autism.
If you or I have a stroke we aren’t sent to school to get speech, occupational, or physical therapy. We get our medical needs serviced by healthcare professionals. Speech, occupational, or physical therapy is no different for Harry than for a stroke victim yet the stroke victims therapy is covered under the insurance.
ABA therapy goes to the core of the matter. It is provided by trained psychologists who are working with the physical brain as much as a orthopedic doctor would work with the physical structure your body to heal it. The activities are more than academic but all are structured to stimulate growth of neural connections in the brain to heal and work around brains damaged by the autism.
At the end of the day making the education system the primary care givers for autism is the same as sending your child to kindergarten to get brain surgery. Yes, special education supports our kids but should NEVER be the primary source of neurological treatment for our children.
Nothing in the bill is educational at all. PERIOD. Lie and distortion of the facts from AFP.
If you oppose the bill for whatever you reasons wether you are paid to or have a personal issue with mandates thats your business but I am so sick of people insulting families with loved ones with autism by saying they have educational issues… Its as valid a medical condition as stroke, heart attack, or cancer. Stop insulting my child and all our families.
Brian,
Advocating against mandates is not the same as advocating against coverage for any specific circumstance. Government involvement usully stifles innovation.
Somehow I am able to purchase a high speed internet connection so I can access this web site without a government mandate stating that all Internet providers must provide the same minimum download speed to all customers whether they want it or not. So if I am happy paying less for a slower speed because it fulfills my needs that shouldn’t matter, there are some people out there who want to use a lot more bandwidth and require faster speeds so the government should mandate that everyone purchase the faster service whether they need it or not in order to make it more affordable for those that actually do need it. It is notable, that absent any government mandate I can purchase Internet connectivity at speeds of up to 100Mbps if I choose to pay for it.
The free enterprise system, free of burdensome mandates, is the most productive supplier of human needs and economic justice.
Lisa, you can’t treat the insurance industry like normal private industry. It isn’t. Insurance does not create anything. It doesn’t produce anything. It doesn’t create wealth. It simply takes money, invests it, and does its best to not pay out when people need it. You aren’t going to see innovation in insurance absent government requirements. If the cost of the care far outweighs whatever premiums the insurance company thinks it can collect, they aren’t going to offer the coverage absent a mandate. The pool for autism insurance is just too low to make it economical for the insurance industry to offer it of their own volition. That’s why the mandate is necessary.
Bottom line here is that I have seen nothing from Ben or anyone else making a good case as to why children with autism should be treated differently than children with diabetes, downs syndrome or cerebral palsy. Insurance covers more than simply medical benefits, so that argument is ridiculous – disability insurance is still considered medical insurance. You don’t get it without having a medical condition that is disabling, and it doesn’t go towards the cost of care.
I’ve already responded to Brian K with a post of my own, but Brian S, are you kidding me?
Insurers provide an invaluable service: for a fee, they reduce risk and encourage investment and wealth creation. To blithely call them all but parasites is a populist ignorance that I thought was (and still hope is) beneath you.
Joe, you do realize that without government, there wouldn’t have been an internet, right?
“Insurance does not create anything. It doesn’t produce anything. It doesn’t create wealth. It simply takes money, invests it, and does its best to not pay out when people need it. ”
Wow. I find myself agreeing with both Brians on a single issue!
If it weren’t for government “mandates” the health insurance industry wouldn’t pay out on anything.
As Brian notes, their business model is “you pay premiums forever, but we never pay out” That’s why, although there might be disagreement on the particular bill, folks on the left, right and in the middle all know we need to reform health insurance.
Brian, glad you brought up the internet. If you believe in these mandates, I dont ever want to hear you rail against Net Neutrality and “Open” Internet Mandates. The underlying principle is the same.
JKM, thanks for your opposition to the First Amendment.
Brian,
You do realize that without the unfetterd ability of private enterprise to develop, provide content, and utilization of the Internet it would solely be a D.O.D communications system. The development of the Internet was comparable to the Interstate Highway system, just a way to get there and without free enterprise there would be nothing there once you got there.
Joe, I’m glad you equate the ability to afford care for an autistic child to your ability to surf for porn.
I might have had some sympathy for this argument… had Brian not chosen to attack everyone for raising questions.
Sheesh. You live and learn…
Questions? Marchi/AFP didn’t ask questions. He took a position and made statements.
…and you’ve chosen to rise above this by tearing down every commenter in this thread that didn’t share your opinion.
I know it’s personal… but try convincing us of the common sense behind coverage, eh?
We’re talking literally $3.2 million per autistic child over the course of his/her lifetime in medical costs if left unattended. The economic argument for coverage is much stronger than the invective deployed here…
Wow, Shaun. Nice lie.
Coverage is capped at $35,000 per year per Autistic Child and stops at age 6.
Read the bill before commenting.
Brian,
I am disappointed. Your resorting to personal attacks and name calling exposes your weakness. I started this string calling for intelligent debate on a very interesting issue. I do not know if you are capable of that, but if you are you failed to exhibit it.
You’re not reading what I’m saying.
The PDF that Autism Speaks points this out on page 8.
The *COSTS* for an autistic child average out to $3.2 million over the lifetime of that person. The *COVERAGE* doesn’t even come close… and if the costs aren’t met, that flips over to the federal taxpayer in terms of Medicaid.
Again — the economic costs are much stronger than the punch-everything-that-moves crap. I’m really trying to help push information out here…
Shaun, agreed. But sympathy shouldn’t even be an issue here…and isn’t.
Everyone puts their feel good hats on because it’s for the autistic kids and it hurts families and all the other arguments listed above. Replace autism with lime disease or even another affliction that may affect .00001% of the population, and it’s still the same principle.
The question isn’t whether these kids should be helped, they should. Myself, and the organization (AFP) at question, have readily admitted it’s a terrible disorder. The question is in the how and this bill sucks at the how. It hypocritically says the Commonwealth of Virginia is going to tell ME and my PRIVATE insurance company what they have to cover on MY policy, after the state railed against government mandated healthcare just last year. Your argument is akin being against abortion until your girlfriend gets pregnant. Very sad…you’re either a conservative and don’t like government intrusion and regulation or you’re not a true conservative. End of story.
D.J., if you think that is what insurance companies do, that’s fine. In my experience, the will spend $100,000 on lawyers to not pay a $100,001 claim they think they can fight. They will always take the cheap way out, and they are inherently socialist. They take money from people who don’t need their services in order to pay out benefits to those who do. What I am most surprised by is that so many conservatives seem to be in love with insurance companies.
Shaun, I misread, and I’m sure others would, too. Sounded like you were making a claim of the cost of the legislation.
NWright –
I typically don’t respond to pseudonyms… but just this once (because I know who you are — nothing you do online is untraceable, pal):
Now that’s a fair point. I concede that entirely.
Shaun, meant to say that I agreed with your first comment about Brian’s punch-everything-that-moves approach. Not the second comment about Autism Speaks’ information.
If the costs for an autistic child average out to $3.2 million over the lifetime of that person, HOW IN THE HELL IS that cost not reflected in the premium if coverage is mandated?? Answer is…it will. And that won’t cost those families with autistic children…that will cost me and everyone else, including businesses who pay for their employee’s coverage.
So, essentially, passing this mandate (or any mandate for that matter) will jack up insurance premiums, leading to poorer families and lost jobs. My point exactly.
Does anyone know what the response of the health care industry has been? Why have they not covered autism? Is it just because the policies haven’t caught up with the research? Cost?
In other words, why hasn’t the market caught up with the science?
Shaun, because the insurance companies don’t want to pay out. So they’ve concocted this convenient theory that autism requires “educational” not “medical” therapy, and thus the types of therapies that work best for autistic kids shouldn’t be covered.
It’s cynical and it’s typical. It’s why seven other states have mandated that autism be covered by health insurance, and why more and more are pushing forward with these provisions across the country.
Because the long term care costs are high, the insurance companies don’t want to cover it. It’s purely a question of profit for them. That’s why Brian Kirwin gets so upset, and those folks who are upset with him for name calling need to have a little patience and recognize this issue affects him personally.
They are making changes to this bill in the House right now as we type. If you support this bill, please focus your energy on blowing up legislators’ phones (not a threat, to be clear) with numbers to be passed to them by assistants. The bi-partisan phone tree is in motion in my county. Ben has a job to do, and I refuse to hold that against him. Meanwhile, I will be making calls.
I’m glad Ben and AFP stood on principle on this issue. Watching the floor debate, it was shocking that the numbers were misrepresented on the floor. Delegate Cline finally pointed out that the costs were more than $2Million per year, a far cry from the few hundred thousand that Delegate Greason initially stated – of course, without a fiscal impact statement from Appropriations, we don’t really know.
When did it become more important to stand on principle than it did to do the right thing?
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bearing Drift, jamie davis. jamie davis said: Americans for Prosperity fails on Autism | Bearing Drift: Virginia …: Virginia mandates coverage for prostate … http://bit.ly/eprNy6 [...]
Nikki, no worries. That substitute died a nasty death.
William, Cline’s numbers weren’t accurate, and the patron deflated his claims fairly easily.
If you don’t stand on principle, then where do you draw the line? We can’t fund everything that’s heartbreaking. How do you say we fund this until 6, but not until 7? How can you say we’ll mandate this but not other tragic childhood afflictions?
This isn’t something that should become personal attacks on someone like Ben doing his job. His job is to advocate free market. limited government principles.
The fact that he’s done that very well has often been overlooked here. Whether it’s opposing Tim Kaine’s tax hike, the smoking ban, non-recorded subcommittee votes or ousting Boucher and Periello, give him that much – at least he’s consistent. More than we can say for most of the House caucus.
William, again, some principles give way when faced with a colliding principle. I’m a firm economic conservative, but my dislike of government regulation and government mandates has to give way when a issue of such fundamental fairness as this one arises.
Where is the line drawn? I don’t know. It will be drawn somewhere, and I’m firm in my opinion that wherever it is drawn, it should include autism. I don’t say we should mandate this until age 6 – I’m for mandating it for the life of the patient subject to the same lifetime maximums for other chronic illnesses. But I’ll take a good bill if I can’t get the best one. And, as far as I know, most other tragic childhood afflictions are already covered. Autism is the outlier and there’s no good reason for it to be.
I’m not attacking Ben personally. I’m trying to get him to empathize with the folks most affected by this legislation – the families of kids with autism – by asking him to put himself in their shoes. Not small business owners. Not the insurance companies. At some point, we need to put the rhetoric aside and recognize that doing the right thing trumps slippery slopes or cynical appeals to principle.
I think consistency is a fine virtue, but when consistency becomes obstinacy, we all need to take a hard look at what we’re really talking about here.
This isn’t about small business, or government mandates, or Obamacare. It’s about treating kids with autism the same way we treat kids with other diseases. That’s just plain fair. And if the insurance companies don’t want to do that out of a cynical desire to make more money, it’s our obligation to fix that problem.
Ben Marchi’s concern is one shared by many: a health care mandate that has been consistently defeated is brought up without sitting with those impacted in the business community to talk it through. VA has the 6th largest set of health insurance mandates in the country and this only moves us up that scale. This bill exempts all businesses with under 50 employees and those who are self-insured don’t have to participate (companies with 70 employees can self-insure). The State Government has been put back into this bill but local governments are required to join in. And this becomes a health-insurance mandate although the services needed are educational so there is not network that is tied into the health insurance/medical community — a government disconnect once again. When I testified for NFIB on this issue I said the business community is not opposed to this autism mandate per se, but if a new mandate is to be placed on the very limited group of businesses as outlined above, then take off one or more existing mandates so that the cost remains the same. Or, if you really want to be “fair” about this, then simply add a dollar or two a month to everyone’s existing health insurance monthly premium and be done with it. This is a bill that is being pushed without concern about the precendent it is setting, without limitations on lifting the restrictions in it today a few years down the road; without discussing this with the business groups it targets, and without an economic impact statement.
When the VA Chamber, the 6,000 small business members of NFIB, the manufacturers assocation, the insurance folks and the underwriters are all opposed, you would think that folks would think our legislators would understand that this is simply one more regulatory straw on the small business’s back.
What is being done with this mandate is as upsetting to the business community as the way it was done. Many business leaders feel they could have, and should have, been part of the discussion before this mandate that had been defeated in previous years came up out-of-the-blue.
If this is a societal problem that deserves to be tackled then let everyone pay for it and not a small sliver of the business community — those between 50 employees and those not yet self-insured. A buck a month by everyone with a health insurance policy in our state makes more sense if this is the road to be travelled.
Mike Thompson
NFIB State Leadership Council member
Past Chairman of VA NFIB
Opps: I left out an important word — “not” — in my earlier post: local governments are NOT required to participate in this new health insurance mandate.
Mike Thompson
“if a new mandate is to be placed on the very limited group of businesses as outlined above, then take off one or more existing mandates so that the cost remains the same”
Mike, sorry that you and your folks felt left out, but really? Your idea is to trade Autism children for some other mandate? A quid pro quo with people’s lives?
What’s your offer? Want to ditch mammograms? How do the businessmen feel about that? Maybe you’d like to dump diabetes coverage so that Autistic kids can fit on your lifeboat?
Childhood immunization! Is that one we can throw overboard? Let’s bring back smallpox so the NFIB can support Autism coverage.
I’d love to hear your suggestion.
Hey Mike,
Those businesses pass the cost the employee and really at the end of the day You are paid to fight for your side and Brian and I do this because we love our kids. You make bold statements about 6,000 businesses when really you cant get 10 folks at the chamber of commerce to agree on lunch so I find your numbers to be a bit suspect. Its less than 40 cents a month and it will make a difference for those same businesses because their employee’s will have a better peace of mind about their children. Your businesses are already paying for this with their Medicare / Medicaid taxes. Why not actually have that money go towards growing the base of therapists that can attack this disability and even become members of your organization.
Mike also tell me if your child had a brain injury would you consider that a educational problem. My child has autism, it’s a neuro-biological brain injury. Why does my son have to go to school to treat it when he should see a doctor? Would you send your kid to school to have open heart surgery? I don’t think so! Where do you get off telling me to send my child to school to get his injured brain treated?
Reposted from the DJ thread since it apparently fits here too.
I didn’t see one post about how to define autism. This is not cancer or diabetes. Are you all aware there has been an exponential rise in “autism” cases over the last 20 years? Is this due to an increase in “real” autism? How are you defining Real autism? If the increase is real as opposed to definitional we have a public health crisis. Autistic people are about as dysfunctional as schizophrenics. If it is definitional then we are simply reclassifying people from one category to another or including large numbers of marginally affected individuals who can function well enough in society. If it is real then urgent action is needed to identify the cause. Health Insurance would be the LEAST of our problems. If it is definitional then we need to calm down and carefully reanalyze the data. Otherwise we will encourage people to game the system. But that would fly in the face of our desire for hysteria.
I’m surprised none of my AFP friends are saying much on this topic. It won’t be popular, but here’s my two cents – stop hating on Ben Marchi. He’s the director of an organization based on the principles of limited government and fiscal restraint, and he stands by these principles even when it is not popular. He lead the charge in our fight against Obamacare (and individual MANDATE), and he will lead any charge against policies that do not exhibit fiscal restraint. His true commitment to conservative principles one of the reasons why so many people like me in VA joined AFP.
As an aside, I am sure that Ben loves 2-6 year old children.
This article completely ignores the financial implications of the proposed bill, along with its flaws, and makes illogical analogies including one between autistic children and rape victims – classy. Should the readers take the authors support of the current HB to mean that he hates 7 year old autistic children – we’ll give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
Marcy, no one is hating on Ben Marchi. We’re simply disagreeing with him on this policy position, and criticizing the way he characterized these issues.
One can stand by principles of limited government and fiscal restraint without opposing this bill. The bill will have minimal costs to taxpayers and won’t expand government – they already heavily regulate the insurance industry and mandate forms of coverage. As Mike noted, Virginia has the 6th largest number of health insurance mandates and we’re still the #1 or #2 (depending on which study you agree with) best place to do business.
Ben was certainly involved in fighting against the individual mandate at the federal level (something that is unconstitutional) but I wouldn’t say he lead the charge. I’d give the Attorney General and Bob Marshall that credit.
The article ignores the financial implications because they aren’t relevant – in the overall scheme of things the cost of this bill is far outweighed by the beneficial effect on the families it would serve, and nobody needs a financial impact statement to know that’s true. Sure, the bill has flaws, but those flaws are, in my opinion, the result of trying to moderate the bill to gain the support of folks like you and AFP. But apparently there’s nothing anyone can say or do to convince you that this is the right thing to do.
And, no, readers shouldn’t take the author’s support of the bill to mean he hates 7 year old autistic children – they should take it that some of us believe in the principle that one should not let perfect stand in the way of good. This isn’t the best bill out there, but it’s better than the status quo and I have no problems supporting a bill that advances the ball forward even if it doesn’t score a touchdown.
Marcy, I hope the General Assembly mandates coverage for whatever mental illness your comment demonstrates you have.
NFIB had one of our members testify against this mandate who has an autistic child — their insurance covers the medical costs and the schools handle the educational issues — so let’s not set up false warring camps on this issue. Those with and without autistic children are on both sides of this issue. Let’s try to keep the discussion where it belongs.
There has never been a medical mandate or government projected cost that has not ended up costing a lot more than predicted so the 40 cent argument is really just a guess at the end of the day and a low-ball guess. As I said earlier, if autism is to be a required mandate then the cost should not be placed a small piece of business community. Everyone with health insurance should be charged and if the 40 cent figure is accurate, then by having everyone paying for this new coverage, the cost will be much less. Why is it that this mandate is placed on such a small group of employers? If the cost projections of 40 cents are something that our elected officials are comfortable with, then spread those costs among all government employees — state and local — and all businesses and unions whether self-insured or not. That is the most fair way of doing this.
I really don’t want to argue whether autism should be covered or not. But once autism is covered, then we open the door to the possibility of additional mandates for other terrible situations to be covered next. And who will pay for those new mandates? Maybe just that same small slice of the business community?
A difficult chapter is being started with this new mandate. This bill could have been handled better and it could open the door to additional mandates.
Mike Thompson
Mike, your repeated opposition doesn’t give anyone on our side any hope that some magical, mystical compromise would draw your support. You oppose the very concept of mandating this, so there is little reason to reach out to you and your organization on this.
We can just laugh when all these slippery slopes never materialize and the horrors promised from passage of this good bill never happen.
I’ve dealt with this when liberals SWORE that the courts would be clogged with litigation if the Marriage Amendment was passed.
Courtroom crickets ever since.
Schoeneman-
Ben and AFP didn’t lead the fight?? Here’s a link you should check out. To note, that was written in July 2009, a year before the AG and Bob Marshall touched the issue…and before the legislation even passed at the federal level.
Also, your opinion is just that…your opinion. Respect the fact that others have one and that some DON’T believe the “good the bill would do” far outweigh the costs associated with the bill. That’s called a “feel-good” measure and is ignorant, irresponsible, and unlimited government. The financial ramifications are indeed relevant. If this bill passes, mandates go on all included policies. If they go on all included policies, eventually private insurance will be pressured to include it on all policies, thus raising premiums across the board. If it starts here, where does it stop? Your view is short-sighted and clouded by the subject matter, and not focused on the issue at hand. Insurance companies are not the devil..they are private companies focused on profit, as they readily should be in a capitalistic and free-market economy…and they should be able to do so with the least amount of government intrusion possible, in my humble opinion.
Kirwin-
Yet again, you inspire and display a complete lack of respect for your readers, your posts, and your general presence as a human being. Congratulations.
WrightWrong, I hope that you or your family never need to benefit from the things Brian, Lee and I are fighting for.
That 40 cents on your precious premium should be of great consolation to you.
Brian: Read what I wrote. If there is going to be this mandate, then spread the cost to everyone with a health insurance policy and not just a sliver of the business community. You have avoided this idea. Sure, I am opposed to the mandate but as I said above and in my testimony last week: if we are to have this mandate and if the legislature is unwilling to exchange this mandate for one of the existing ones to balance the cost, then don’t limit those paying for this mandate and have everyone pay “their fair share.” As I said in my testimony, this would take a lot of the sting out of the mandate issue. Those who want this mandate should be willing to have everyone pitch in a few cents rather than just a small group of businesses between those with over 50 employees and those who self-insure. All businesses and unions and local governments should be part of the mandate.
Mike Thompson
Mike, you’ve opposed a broader bill in the past. Now you want us all to believe you’re against this bill because it’s not like the versions you’ve opposed in the past?
Brian – I have no mental illness. I was showing you an example of flawed logic you used when you stated that BM and AFP wanted to repeal coverage for adopted children, newborn children, rape victims, etc. None of these statements are true, but people’s positions can easily be twisted or convoluted into bold statements that get people’s attention.
This bill does raise serious concerns. Do we really want bureaucrats Richmond be deciding who gets or does not get coverage? We didn’t want those in DC deciding for Obamacare, and I would imagine we don’t want those in Richmond to do it either.
Parents of 7 year old children with autism should be (rightfully in my opinion) angry that bureaucrats in Richmond decided their son or daughter wouldn’t receive treatment and not a doctor based on some arbitrary (correct me if I am wrong) age that they set. Or what about the child that receives treatment for half a year, is making progress, and then that treatment is discontinued because they are now one day over the age limit set by Richmond.
It seems strange to me that such a narrow age window for treatment would be used for a disease that is chronic. Just about every illness has a better prognosis the earlier it is detected and treated, but I can’t think of one that has such a narrow treatment window. We don’t stop treatment for someone that has had a heart attack after 4 years, or treat someone with diabetes for only 4 years and then stop. Just as we don’t say ER’s will only help people in cardiac arrest if they are between 40-44 because they have the best chance for improvement (Note – these are completely made up ages and I do not know that the recovery is highest for this age, but you get the point I am trying to make).
NWright, if you want to argue that they were fighting Obamacare before it passed fine – but then they deserve blame for their failure in stopping it, don’t they? Despite the bus tour, it still passed.
It was Bob Marshall who had the foresight to push the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act which got us into court, and AG Cuccinelli to push the case and get the first opinion from a federal court judge that it was unconstitutional.
I don’t know where you are getting the idea that I don’t respect the opinion of others. I always do. Even when they’re wrong, like you and AFP are now.
Your whole line of reasoning is flawed because you don’t seem to understand what the point of the legislation here is. If the bill passes, private insurance will be required to cover autism care for kids between 2 and 6 up to $35k a year. This isn’t the first mandate in the law, so the slippery slope argument is a fallacy – as Mike Thompson noted, we’re already in the top 6 across the country in terms of states with mandates on insurance. And even with those mandates – mandates that affect far more people than this autism one will, like requiring coverage for mammographies or prostate exam – we’re still one of, if not the best, place to do business in the United States. It hasn’t hurt our competitiveness at all.
No, insurance companies aren’t the devil. But they are not angels either, and their entire business model is predicated on selling you something you probably will never need and if you do need it, coming up with creative ways to keep from paying you.
Without the Commonwealth, none of these insurance companies would exist. Their ability to incorporate, raise capital, provide policies – to actually be in business – wouldn’t be possible without the Commonwealth. At the very least we should be able to ensure that they are playing fair.
That’s really what this whole thing is about. Fairness.
There’s a difference between policy on paper, and politics in real life. These issues aren’t just stuff we argue about on blogs. We’re talking about things that affect real people in real life.
Marci, Ben Marchi commented on this post that AFP did indeed oppose those mandates as well.
You might want to talk to him.
I would have expected that they would oppose any mandates, just as they do with tax increases. This does not mean they are working to repeal.
Marcy, why is it better that unelected businessmen decide who doesn’t or does get coverage than having elected officials who are accountable to voters doing so?
You keep talking about bureaucrats – there are no bureaucrats involved in this process at this point. We’re talking about elected officials, accountable to the people, making this decision. I know that interferes with your talking points, but be precise. This isn’t Obamacare. You need a new script.
Parents of 7 year old autistic kids should be angry, but they also should be happy because they are smart enough to know that this is just a stepping stone to eventual full coverage. The age limit was included to try and get folks like you and AFP on board – since versions of this bill have been defeated multiple times before because they weren’t limits.
It’s kind of ironic that you’re trying to use the fact that there was a compromise on this bill to get it passed as a reason to block the bill, when last year the fact that there wasn’t a compromise on this bill was used as a reason to block the bill.
I would also like to thank Ben Marchi for providing me with an easy email tool I just used to urge my elected officials and the Speaker to pass the bill.
Thanks, Ben!
Yes, we want to repeal all coverage mandates. We trust Americans to choose what health insurance plan makes sense for them and their families.
An autism mandate will add 1-3% to premiums in Virginia, as it has in other states that have adopted it. Virginia’s other 57 benefit mandates also unnecessarily raise costs by making everyone with health insurance buy coverage they may or may not want or need. Why should every Virginian with health insurance be forced to pay for acupuncture coverage? One size does not fit all.
This report from CAHI is compelling:
http://www.cahi.org/cahi_contents/resources/pdf/MandatesintheStates2010.pdf
Phil Kerpen
VP Policy
Americans for Prosperity
Phil, please point out to us one health insurance company in Virginia that offers an autism coverage policy. If the private sector is doing such a bang up job of making it possible for consumers to purchase plans they want that include autism coverage that’s affordable, there’s no need for this legislation.
The real question is why these mandates exist in the first place. Generally, they’ve been included by law because insurance companies either wouldn’t or couldn’t include the coverage in policies at a reasonable price. The reason for the mandates was because of a failure in the market place, not the other way around.
Besides, most folks – in Virginia and nationally – don’t choose their own health insurance. They either accept the plan provided by their employer or they choose from a number of employer provided plans. The number of people who are actively buying insurance on their own with no employer subsidies is relatively small, because the premium prices are too high for most regular families to afford absent help from an employer.
According that CAHI study, half the states in the Union right now mandate autism coverage. If that is the case, I don’t see why this is such a huge deal – and 1-3% isn’t even close to some of the numbers on the list there – prescription drugs and mental health parity (a federal mandate) are 5-10%.
It’s time to inject a little common sense and a little compassion into this debate.
Marcy,if AFP opposes things and doesn’t want them repealed, then what’s the problem.
Too lazy?
Hypocrites?
What?
So far this year, AFP has attacked the Governor and the Speaker, and looked foolish each time.
Try something novel. Criticize a Democrat.
Autism is a medical condition is it not? Then why doesn’t health insurance cover it? If it doesn’t, isn’t that like fraud? So parents that are about have a baby better scour the fine print and analyze it for all the possible diseases/conditions their child might get?
Let’s be a little realistic?
I too hate the fact this bill applies to a small sector. It indeed should apply to all policies. A mandate? Well either a mandate, or just take all insurance companies to court for refusing to pay for a medical condition.
When you buy insurance, you make certain logical assumptions: like health insurances covers oh………I don’t know……..health conditions!!!
I am a fiscal conservative and a Libertarian. So, often I agree with AFP and other such groups. As a Libertarian, however, I believe the purpose of government is to protect the individual from Force and Fraud as well as provide basic infrastructure. FRAUD!
Now maybe when you sell your soul to the devil, you need to read the fine print and “buyer beware”. When you enter inot a contract for health insurance, shouldn’t you be able to assume your health insurfance will pay for health charges if you are raped, need exams, or have a child born with a medical connection?
Personally, I think this bill should be abandoned and a real bill pursued with a broad based marketing campaign. How many people have no clue this isn’t covered? How many more people are affected by autism? You don’t think you can’t get enough people to demand that medical conditions be covered health conditions? I am sure you can find many fiscal conservatives willing to rip into AFP, or any group saying that a health insurer should be able to escape paying for autism for reasons of higher profit margins.
The whole argument ignores the possibility that if the health insurance industry were allowed to compete like other industries, for example, across state lines, none of these mandates may even be necessary.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.