Fresh Loaf

For years the GOP’s stern answer to a guy with a health ailment standing on a street corner was, "Get a job."

Now Sen. Judson Hill, R-Marietta, envisions a day when insurance and health care are not tied to a person’s employment. Does this portend a kinder, gentler GOP?

Hardly.

At the center of attention since he dropped a 79-page health-care bill last week, Hill came out of a transportation committee hearing Tuesday alluding to the president’s State of the Union speech just hours away.

"A lot of what’s in the bill you’ll hear the president talk about tonight," he said.

As if that’s supposed to reassure me.

I was barreling headlong through a crowd of lawmakers and lobbyists on my way out the door, but since I’ve already tried to make sense of Bush speak for the past six years with no success, I opted instead to pump Hill for some answers, and he happily obliged.

At least Hill understands the issues and welcomes debate. But he’s definitely on the same Gingrich-Center-for-Health-Transformation frequency as Bush.

Of course, it’s no accident that Gingrich and Hill go way back, and that Newt sees Georgia as the 2001: A Space Odyssey baby for his health-insurance reform plans.

Basically, Hill’s bill boils down to more tax incentives for businesses that enable their employees to invest in high-deductible health savings accounts. The bill would also give state tax breaks to individuals who open such accounts.

Some other measures in Senate Bill 28 include: enabling state employees to invest in personal health savings accounts, allowing Georgians more access to health care beyond state borders, allowing companies the choice of paying into a part-time employee’s health savings account, and incentivizing health information technology so patients can — in Republican speak — approach their health-care choices as educated consumers.

I was going to call Rep. Rich Golick, R-Smyrna, for clarification, but the last time we talked about this subject the only metaphor he could give me was a giant Chinese buffet, with people piling their plates high with health-care options.

So I stuck with Hill.

"HSAs are not exclusive to any market," the senator said. "There’s no reason your insurance should be employee-based. We want to catch people who are changing jobs, people for whom COBRA coverage is too expensive, people who lost a job, or lost coverage through divorce because the spouse was the one with health insurance."

So far so good.

Then I mentioned the common criticism of health savings accounts, which is that low- and moderate-income people don’t end up saving very much. They’re already strapped for cash after bread-and-butter expenses, and now they have to salt away more money for health care? It just seems like one more ownership-society initiative designed by people who are more tied to drug and insurance companies than actual hard-knock families scrunched into one-and-two bedroom apartments with piggy-bank budgets.

Hill conceded that in the initial stages of implementation, before the tax incentives really kick in, low- and moderate-income Georgians wouldn’t exactly prosper because of health savings accounts. But once free-market principles take over, he is confident there would be a profusion of lower-priced health-care packages, tailor-made for consumers. In the rush to compete for consumers’ attention, health-care providers would offer cheaper and better health care.

Give the guy credit for standing in there and arguing. Before he took a quick cell phone call he acknowledged it’s going to be a big battle this session. But is the answer to 1.7 million Georgians with no health insurance really more tax breaks for businesses? A more personalized health-care market?

"It’s a start," Hill said.

I’m not even close to being convinced, but I decided at least I would go back and talk to Hill about this before I listened to Bush.

– Max Pizarro

Bookmark It

Posted in News | Leave a comment