Drazkowski Amendment

I saw this list of items of health care online last night, with an alarming message: 


So I looked into it and indeed this was part of the 'Drazkowski Amendment' and was passed through the MN house, as our state tries to legislate repair of our health insurance system. Neither Governor Dayton's plan, nor the plan in the senate, includes this amendment.

There are fairly informative articles here:
PB article
MN Lawyer article

In a nutshell, there are 68 line-items that are required to be covered under ACA (Obamacare), and the Drazkowski amendment makes it optional for insurers to cover them. They must offer a plan that covers all of them, but can also offer plans that cover some or none of them. This means that the insurance market will have cheaper plans available that provide crappy coverage. It encourages consumers to make irresponsible health care decisions based on cost.

SO ... this morning I wrote to my state senator, Dave Senjem, and to Rep Steve Drazkowski of Mazeppa. I'll post the text below, but the point is this:

PLEASE, if you're in MN, take 5 min and call your senator and rep (contact info here) and tell them what you think, remind them that you vote and will encourage others to let this issue influence their votes as well. Or write - their e-mail is there, too. I wrote first because it lets me compose my thoughts, but I plan to call as well. I understand that calls tend to carry more weight, as someone in the office has to spend time listening and recording your message. Feel free to take text and thoughts and ideas from what I wrote if you want.

Hi Senator Senjem

Last night, I saw some details of the ongoing work on health insurance legislation that are very concerning. Specifically, the amendment from rep. Drazkowski with a list of conditions that would not need to be covered by insurers. 

The language of a "la carte insurance" seems to me in this case to simply be a wide open door for insurance companies to save money and expand profits by not covering mental health, maternity care, addiction services, cancer care, diabetic care, emergency services ... the list is ridiculous. 

Insurers are well aware that many customers are stuck choosing insurance by price tag, and allowing them to offer a cheaper plan that consists of horrible coverage is irresponsible legislating. 

So, I'll be looking for where this amendment goes and how you and my representative vote on it, as the conversation on health care moves ahead. I will make sure to inform as many people as I can in my district about the issue and make sure it is remembered at election time. 

Hi Rep Drazkowski

I'm Tommy, a voter in SE MN. 

Last night, I saw some details of the ongoing work on health insurance legislation that are very concerning. Specifically, the amendment you authored, included in the house health insurance bill, with a list of conditions that would not need to be covered by insurers. 

The language of a "la carte insurance" is simply a wide open door for insurance companies to save money and expand profits by not covering mental health, maternity care, addiction services, cancer care, diabetic care, emergency services ... the list is ridiculous, and your framing of it is about a hair's breadth shy of outright 'alternative facts'. 

Insurers are well aware that many customers are stuck choosing insurance by price tag, and allowing them to offer a cheaper plan that consists of horrible coverage is irresponsible legislating. 

You ought to be ashamed of this amendment, which is a handout to insurance companies at the expense of your constituents.  

So, I'll be looking for where this amendment goes and how the reps and senators in my community vote on it. I will make sure to inform as many people as I can in my district about the issue and make sure it is remembered at election time.