March 24, 2010
Ensuring treatment for Lyme Disease
As we finally begin to enjoy some warm weather, folks will begin spending more time outdoors. In the spring and summer months, we can all be found hiking, biking, playing sports, and picnicking with our families. Unfortunately, as all Minnesotans know, these fun activities also lead to exposure to ticks and Lyme Disease. Chisago and Isanti counties are in a high-risk area for exposure to tick-borne illnesses, so I encourage folks to use precaution again this year.
Because of the high occurrence of Lyme Disease in our area, I’ve taken an interest in the issue at the State Legislature. As lawmakers, we heard from Minnesota doctors that some doctors in other states were being investigated and disciplined for treating patients with Lyme Disease. They were concerned that this may occur in Minnesota someday and thus limit the care they could provide to their patients. To prevent such action from occurring, I, along with other legislators, authored a bill that would limit the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice from holding physicians liable for treating patients diagnosed with Chronic Lyme Disease.
In response to our legislation, the Board of Medical Practice recently announced that they would place a moratorium on the “investigation, discipline, or issuance of corrective action agreements based solely on the long-term prescription or administration of antibiotic therapy for Chronic Lyme Disease.” This moratorium will be in effect for five years and allow the board to review and study Lyme Disease treatment methods. At the end of the day, this will result in increased treatment options and improved care for patients who are afflicted with this disease. I’m glad that our legislative action prompted the board to reconsider their original position and now they will ensure that doctors can continue to treat their patients.
In order to catch Lyme Disease, you must have been bitten by a black-legged tick that is infected with the disease bacteria. The tick must be attached for 24-48 hours to transmit the bacteria to a person. The chance of catching the disease increases the longer it is attached, so if you do find a tick on yourself, you should remove the tick promptly with a tweezers. Remove it slowly and steadily, and be careful not to squeeze it. Never burn an attached tick!
If you are concerned that you may have contracted Lyme Disease, you should contact your doctor for medical testing. Symptoms include a rash, nausea, fever, chills, headache, muscle and joint pain, and fatigue. Early detection of this disease will limit the time you’ll feel sick, as the disease is very treatable with antibiotics. And because of the legislative concern, you can rest assured that your doctor will be able to provide you with the care and treatment you need!
_________________________________________________________
July 17, 2009
Health care for thousands disappears
I’m very concerned about the possibly dire consequences from the Governor’s decision to eliminate the General Assistance Medical Care (GAMC) program on March 1, 2010. He cut this program both through a line-item veto during the legislative session and through the unallotment process, where he unilaterally made cuts to the state budget.
On paper the move will save the state nearly $400 million in the upcoming biennium, helping to solve about 6 percent of the $6.4 billion budget deficit for 2010-2011. However, in the long-term, the elimination of this important safety net will have serious consequences. This program serves Minnesota’s poorest of the poor and sickest of the sick. Along with jeopardizing their ability to receive health care, this cut will force these people to hold off on health care until it is absolutely necessary, resulting in expensive emergency room care. This approach will cause insurance premiums to increase for all insured Minnesotans, because of the uncompensated emergency room care provided.
General Assistance Medical Care was created in 1975 and it currently provides health care for over 30,000 adults without children who are below 75 percent of the federal poverty guideline. The majority of individuals on the program face mental illness and chemical-dependency issues. Hospitals and health care experts have expressed their concern that eliminating the health care coverage for these individuals could have an affect on other social service programs and result in increased suicide, homelessness, unemployment, and crime.
With the cuts to GAMC, many folks will have to turn to MinnesotaCare, which is health insurance program for working Minnesotans. Most individuals using the program pay a premium each month. Unfortunately, most folks from GAMC couldn’t afford to pay a premium. Adding 30,000 more people to MinnesotaCare who cannot pay for it will bankrupt the Health Care Access Fund by June 30, 2012. The Health Care Access Fund, which helps support MinnesotaCare, receives its revenues from the 2 percent provider tax upon hospitals and health care providers. While eliminating GAMC might save the state money, it could ultimately result in increased taxes every time we see the doctor to keep this fund solvent.
Finally, the loss of the GAMC program could also be devastating to local hospitals. Over 7,000 hospital-related jobs are at stake with the elimination of the GAMC program. In our area alone, Fairview Lakes Regional Medical Center will see a $957,000 cut and Cambridge Medical Center’s budget will be reduced by $3.5 million. Additionally, many hospitals in rural areas could be forced to close because of the impact of these cuts, jeopardizing both the health and economic vitality of these communities.
I am deeply troubled by the negative effects that will occur with the elimination of the GAMC program. The Legislature made significant cuts and passed a balanced state budget that would have prevented this loss in jobs and health care. I sincerely wish the Governor would have been willing to compromise with us to adopt a budget that would provide long-term economic stability. Instead, I fear the consequences of unallotment will result in increased costs and problems down the road.
_________________________________________________________
Date: April 29, 2009
Senate’s health budget prevents 100,000 families from losing health care
The Senate recently passed its Health and Human Services Budget Bill. In the wake of the state’s $6.4 billion budget deficit, this bill makes over $700 million in cuts for the next biennium and nearly $1 billion in cuts for 2012-2013. While these reductions in spending will impact the lives of many Minnesotans, I’m very glad that the Senate was able to achieve these cost-savings without individuals and children losing their health care coverage.
The Senate’s approach contrasts with the governor’s health budget, which originally proposed cutting the eligibility to MinnesotaCare. This is a program where working families pay a monthly premium based on a sliding fee scale that provides affordable health care coverage. The governor recommended cuts that would have resulted in over 100,000 people, including children, losing their health insurance. He also proposed eliminating 300,000 Minnesotans’ dental coverage.
When the federal economic recovery plan was passed by Congress, it required that states not cut health care eligibility to receive the stimulus dollars. The governor then had to revise his budget recommendations. He recommended pushing the eligibility cuts out to 2012-2013, and eliminating hospital and emergency room coverage for 33,000 people to make up the budget difference. The Senate’s bill does not implement these cuts.
During these difficult economic times, when many families’ budgets are already strained, I don’t think it’s the time to be taking away their health insurance. These added costs could push monthly expenses over the edge. I believe that those who are already struggling the most to get by in this economy shouldn’t bear the burden of the state’s budget deficit.
Additionally, the governor’s recommendation to cut hospital and emergency room coverage could have devastating effects on hospitals and insured Minnesotans. The added expenses from uncompensated care at hospitals would cause folks’ insurance premiums to rise, along with closing the doors of many hospitals. It’s not good for the health or economy of Minnesota to lose the care and jobs provided by these hospitals.
I’m also pleased that the Senate does not raid the Health Care Access Fund (HCAF). The HCAF helps pay for MinnesotaCare and is financed by a 2 percent tax on all hospitals and health care providers. The governor proposes that the tax keep being collected, but that we eliminate the HCAF and divert its funds to the General Fund to balance the budget.
I don’t think it’s inappropriate to use a tax, which is collected for a specific purpose—providing affordable health care for working families—to balance the budget. The health care community has also expressed great concern with using these dedicated tax dollars to solve the budget deficit.
While the Senate’s bill does make substantial health care cuts that will impact many vulnerable people’s lives, I’m glad we were able to avoid removing families from their health care coverage and crippling Minnesota hospitals. Instead, we provide a bill that balances for the next four years through reforms that will allow health care to be provided at a lower cost.
_________________________________________________________
April 15, 2009
Ambulance ride along demonstrates excellent local service
I recently had the opportunity to spend the day on an ambulance ride along with the Lakes Region EMS. Not only was this an exciting learning experience for me, it provided me with insight on the level of regional coordination of emergency medical services and the cooperation between ambulance, police, and fire services. I’m very proud to say that our region is in good hands and well-served by all of our first responders.
I rode with Adam Donahue, a North Branch High School graduate, who, as a kid, used to help out on our farm when we raised cattle. It was fun to catch up and see the man he has become and the skills he has developed in his career. During the eight hours in the ambulance, I received a tour of all three Lakes Region facilities in North Branch, Chisago City, and Rush City, and responded to five calls.
On one of our runs, we responded to a possible heart attack. I saw them use the EKG machine and transport this patient to the hospital. An ambulance is truly like a mini-operating room—they have everything on board needed to medically assist a patient. I was impressed by the skills and professionalism the EMS personnel used in helping the patients.
On the ride along, I learned that the Lakes Region EMS coordinates with other regional providers to ensure that all areas are covered in case of an emergency. For instance, if the Forest Lake EMS needs to respond to a call, Lakes will shift their ambulances south to ensure that they can be available to help out in the event of another call.
We also responded to a grass fire in North Branch. This fire grew quite large and spread into a housing development. Along with the North Branch Fire Department, Harris, Stacy-Lent, and Cambridge were on hand to assist. If not for these departments’ good work, the whole development could have burnt. This proved to be a climatic end of the day!
I learned later that at the same time as the North Branch fire, there was another large grass fire being fought in Isanti. Sometimes conditions can just explode, so it’s important to have the good emergency systems in place to respond. Luckily, in our region we had the coordination in place to ensure both situations were safely resolved with minimal damage.
Just a few weeks ago, I wrote a column about the importance of local police and fire protection in terms of Minnesota’s public safety. Well, this ride along just further emphasized this point to me. At every stop we made, there was a police officer, sheriff, or firefighter there as well. It’s important to have all these professionals available to respond, assist, and protect us in these emergency situations. As legislators and the governor tackle the state’s budget deficit, we need to remember the important role these folks play in keeping us safe.
_________________________________________________________
January 11th, 2007
The Goal: Better health care for Minnesota families
While I was out on the campaign trail, the concern I heard repeated the most was the rising cost of health care. Skyrocketing premiums are stressing individuals, families, and businesses in our district and state, which is understandable, as the need for health care is central to many critical decisions we make in our daily lives.
I believe that a fiscally responsible solution to this health care crisis requires three approaches: reforming the health care system, passing cost savings onto premium payers, and increasing the number of insured Minnesotans.
Increasing the number of Minnesotans with health care coverage will not only ease the burden on those without it, but provide cost savings to those who currently have coverage. When people without coverage go to the emergency room, the providers and hospitals are not compensated. As a result, insurance premiums for those who have coverage increases to make up for this uncompensated care. As I see it, the more people who have health care coverage, the more everyone’s premiums will decrease.
A number of important health-care reforms and initiatives were recently introduced by the Senate. I am confident that these proposals, which are estimated to provide 20,000 new Minnesotans with health care coverage, would have positive results for families in our district and state:
* Increase MinnesotaCare eligibility for single adults without children.
o By increasing eligibility standards, the number of covered adults will increase, resulting in savings and lower premiums across the board.
* Allow small businesses with less than 50 employees to purchase MinnesotaCare coverage for their employees.
o This gives small businesses, the staple of our communities, an affordable opportunity to provide their employees with health coverage.
* Allow children to be covered by MinnesotaCare without going four months without other insurance coverage
o Health care for children should not have to wait for administrative bureaucracy.
* Create a prescription drug discount program for families of four earning less than $60,000.
o Allow working families to purchase prescription drugs at an affordable price.
* Expand the definition of “dependant coverage” to allow parents to keep unmarried children up to age 25 covered under their policy.
o Many young adults do not have jobs that offer health coverage. Allowing them to be covered under their parents’ policies will significantly reduce the number of uninsured Minnesotans.
* Modify the definition of self-employed farmers by eliminating the requirement of adding back in the business’ depreciation.
o Increase the number of farmers and families covered by MinnesotaCare.
* Place a cap on the annual increase in health care premiums.
o The skyrocketing increases in health care costs must be contained.
* Eliminate MinnesotaCare premiums for members of the military and their families for up to 12 months.
o Many military families face financial hardships during or after a family member is overseas. This proposal recognizes the sacrifices these soldiers gave on behalf of our country by waiving premium payments.
* Restore outreach programs for MinnesotaCare.
o It is estimated that one out of three people who are eligible are not enrolled. The state needs to extend greater effort to inform these people that they are eligible for health care coverage.
Many components of this legislative package can be funded through surpluses in the Health Care Access Fund and others through the state General Fund with no tax increases necessary. I enthusiastically support these proposals and look forward to a legislative session where we can hold down health care costs for all Minnesotans, and help working families get the affordable health care coverage they deserve.
