Sen. David Hann, the leading health care expert in the Senate, just told Gov. Dayton the health care exchanges called for by the Affordable Care Act won’t get examined until after a new congress is sworn in:
In his letter, Dayton said that Democrats and Republicans share the responsibility for creating a Minnesota exchange, or else the state will be forced to accept a federal model for how the marketplace should function.
“By working together, we can make this project non-partisan and maximize its benefits for all Minnesotans,” Dayton wrote, suggesting that action is needed since the U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld the constitutionality of the health law.
But Sen. David Hann, R-Eden Prairie, responded that “there is nothing more partisan than this health care law given the way it was passed.” No Republicans voted for the measure when it was passed by Congress in 2010.
“Most people don’t like this law,” Hann said. “As a practical matter, the Legislature will not be in session until January…Let’s give the public a chance to weigh in on this during the next election.”
What Sen. Hann is saying is that exchanges won’t get a hearing until a new president and new Congress have a chance at repealing the Affordable Care Act.
Sen. Hann also let it be known that talk of bipartisanship with regards to implementing provisions in the Affordable Care Act aren’t going anywhere after Democrats shoved it down Americans’ throats without their consent.
Now that Democrats don’t have the ability to shove wildly unpopular legislation down the American people’s throats, their tone changed from I won to ‘Let’s work together in the spirit of bipartisanship.’
It’s refreshing to hear Sen. Hann essentially say that the bipartisanship will start after the new Congress and new president repeal the Affordable Care Act.
It wouldn’t be surprising to see Gov. Dayton attempt to establish these exchanges via executive order. He’s tried implementing things that way before. The good news is that the courts slapped him down before for attempting to enact legislation without subjecting the bill to legislative scrutiny.
If there weren’t strings attached to the exchanges through the Affordable Care Act, they’d be a fine idea. Since these exchanges have to comply with the minimum requirements of the federal government, things like providing free contraception coverage would be required of these exchanges.
Minnesotans would reject that without hesitation. So should the legislature.