|
|
|
|
Times Record Endorses a Yes Vote on Question 1 |
|
|
|
| Question 1 on the state ballot poses a conundrum. The ballot reads: "Do you want to reject the parts of a new law that change the method of funding Maine's Dirigo Health Program through charging health insurance companies a fixed fee on paid claims and adding taxes to malt liquor, wine and soft drinks?" | | | | | | |
A "yes" vote would repeal taxes on beer, wine and soft drinks that were passed by the Legislature in April.
A "no" vote would enable implementation of those laws, which represent the Legislature's solution to the problematic "savings offset payment" funding mechanism for Dirigo, the state's subsidized insurance and health care reform program.
Dirigo Health represents a bold and well-intentioned effort to provide all Mainers with accessible and affordable health care.
The concept of earmarking taxes on items of dubious health value to pay for medical care merits serious consideration, because it links a potential cause of health problems to the cost of treatment.
The advocates of a "yes" vote on Question 1 have run a sometimes disingenuous campaign, funded largely by out-of-state entities that care nothing for public health in Maine.
Nevertheless, two important factors compel us to endorse a "yes" vote that would uphold the people's veto.
First, despite its noble intent, Dirigo Health flounders. The number of enrollees in the DirigoChoice insurance plan hovers around 12,000 and a cap on enrollments remains in place. This falls far short of participation projections offered when Gov. John Baldacci signed Dirigo into law in 2003 and when the program was launched in 2005.
Most legislative candidates interviewed by The Times Record, even the staunchest advocates for a single-payer health system, assert that Dirigo Health as currently configured must be scrutinized and either scrapped or retooled. Problems extend beyond the funding mechanism.
As one of its top priorities, the next Legislature should conduct a broad, public discussion on how — and whether it's possible — to make Dirigo the vehicle for more affordable, more accessible health care in Maine. Expanding the tax base to discretionary items and dedicating tax revenue from potentially unhealthy products to underwrite public health initiatives should be parts of that discussion.
Implementing the beverage taxes now would likely delay that important public conversation. In essence, it would be like painting an ambulance when it needs a complete engine overhaul. And what happens to the beverage taxes if Dirigo folds?
Second, the late-session decision to tax beverages for Dirigo funding derives more from legislative expediency than from sound public policy-making. While it's true that the notion of taxing beverages was discussed publicly in other contexts, the amendment to enact the laws came hastily at night and in the form of a compromise designed to complete the 123rd Legislature's business before adjournment of its second session.
Other important matters, including a proposal to switch legislators' state-paid health insurance coverage to DirigoChoice, didn't make it out of the session.
Late-night horse trading might be business as usual in the State House, but it's not the way the people's business should be conducted. A "yes" vote on people's veto Question 1 would reinforce the principle that laws on matters as important as health care and taxation ought to be passed in the bright light and with full public participation. |
|
|
Fed Up With Taxes? Vote YES on 1!
Home