Insulin Bill
On Wednesday, the House approved legislation that establishes an “emergency” insulin program. Let me first say that I support ensuring access to insulin for those in emergency situations or who are struggling to afford their medication. However, the Democrats’ bill to address this issue is not an effective way to accomplish this worthy goal.
This bill raises taxes on insulin manufacturers by $114 million to pay for this program and also requires manufacturers to provide free insulin as a condition of their license for doing business in the state. Raising taxes on manufacturers will just increase costs to Minnesotans by increases drug prices or premium rates, which will ultimately increase costs for insulin users.
All three insulin manufacturers and many insurance companies have come to the table in the last 6-months and now provide generous programs for anyone struggling to afford insulin. This includes health insurers on the individual market, who have capped the costs of insulin at $25 or less for a month’s supply.
Further, Minnesota’s public health care programs, Medical Assistance and MinnesotaCare already offer very generous insulin coverage, usually providing the products for free or at a copay of $15.
If you or someone you know struggle to afford or access insulin, please contact your doctor to discuss options available for you.
My understanding is that the Senate is considering a different approach to addressing the cost of insulin which will set requirements for low-cost insulin and stiff penalties for companies and insurance plans that don’t follow these guidelines. This approach would enable us to get the result we want without creating a new government program and requiring private companies to give their product to the public free of charge as a condition of operating in the state.
I am hopeful the Conference Committee will come out with a bill I will be able to support and everyone who needs it has access to affordable insulin.
Presidential Primary Bill
Minnesota will conduct its first Presidential Primary since 1992 on Tuesday, March 3rd. This law was passed in after the 2016 caucuses, where record turnout required people to wait in lines for hours and created a lot of confusion and frustration. That law required that the Secretary of State collect the voter party preferences and that the data would be available public (as was the case in 1992).
Last year, as part of the end-of-session “Tribunal,” the 2016 Presidential Primary law was amended and the final version requires that the lists of everyone who participates in the Presidential primary be given to all 4 “major parties” in Minnesota – the DFL, the Republican and the two marijuana-related parties.
As a reminder, the Presidential Primary is not an actual election – it just gives people a chance to express their preference for their party’s nominee. I view the State’s role in conducting the Presidential Primary as a facilitator of the parties’ presidential nominating process.
To that end, I introduced a bill (HF 3766) which would strengthen voter privacy for the upcoming presidential primary and require the parties to pay for access to their individual lists. Fundamentally, we should strike a balance between facilitating a smooth process for voters to participate in selecting their party's presidential nominee and voters' privacy and data protection rights.
The Secretary of State also has a proposal that was debated on the floor this week. His proposal, which passed the House, would classify the voter’s party preference data as “private” and require the voter’s party preference (but not other information) to be deleted after it has been given to the parties.
Under my bill, HF 3766, the role of the state is to simply to act as a facilitator for the political parties' presidential nominating process. Under the caucus system, people who wanted to participate in selecting the party's presidential candidate had to show up, sign up, and provide their contact information.
Now with the presidential primary, the state enables this process to run more efficiently and allows voters more flexibility in when they vote. Early voting has already started and you can vote all day on March 3rd, rather than having to show up at 7:00 p.m. on a Tuesday night in February to select your party’s nominee.
Under my bill, political parties would have to pay for a portion of this facilitation and the state would not retain the voter lists once they have been transferred the individual parties. In contrast to current law, under my bill each party only has access to the list of people who voted for their nominee - they do not get access to voter identification and party preference of everyone who voted in the presidential primary.
Like the Secretary of State’s bill, voters can opt-out of being added to the list by filling out a form on the Secretary of State’s website.
Although my bill didn’t get a hearing, I was able to raise my concerns with the current law and the Secretary of State’s proposal during the Judiciary Committee hearing. I also co-authored a bill, and supported a floor amendment by Rep. Peggy Scott, which would prevent collection of any party preference data and require data already collected through early voting be purged.
I am hopeful my proposal to limit each party’s access to only the list of those who voted for their party’s nominee will be incorporated in the Conference Committee version of the bill.
|
