Posted: Monday, November 10, 2008 12:00 am
Star-Tribune Editorial Board
The soon-to-be defunct Wyoming Healthcare Commission wants to recommend to the Legislature what should replace it.
Why bother? Legislators have ignored most of the commission's recommendations since it was created five years ago. What makes members believe that lawmakers will suddenly listen to what they have to say now?
The commission was established by the Legislature to help it make decisions on state health care policies. The members dutifully studied the issues, and recommended creating an independent state health board that would regulate the number and location of health-care providers. Lawmakers turned the proposal down flat.
Other ideas developed by the commission but rejected included a $58 million health information technology network, an expanded health education and nutrition program in schools, and a living will registry.
Earlier this year, a bill to create a pilot project to provide health coverage for uninsured workers was sponsored by Sen. Charles Scott, R-Casper. The project would create an insurance pool for people who have entry-level jobs but who make too much to be on Medicaid and don't get insurance through work.
The bill passed the Senate unanimously but got stalled in the House Labor, Health and Social Services Committee. It should have gone directly to the Wyoming Healthcare Commission to be studied before it was considered by lawmakers, but the bill died before the commission even got a chance to look at it.
It was a classic example of how the Legislature has left the commission out of the process. That's the main reason Wyoming has been so slow in responding to health care issues. It's also why the commission - which has had four different executive directors during its short history - has struggled to fulfill its mission.
The Legislature spent a lot of state money on advice it chose to ignore. It budgeted $2 million per biennium for the commission to operate. Lawmakers decided in the last session to not even consider extending the work of the commission, opting to let it simply expire on June 30, 2009.
The commission, still mindful of the role such a body should play in the legislative process, spent most of its meeting last week talking about what should replace it. Co-chairman Dr. Larry Kirven said the members need to decide what type of authority the next organization would have, and how it could be restructured to be more effective.
Our advice: Let the Legislature decide what it's going to do next on health care. It obviously has no use for an advisory group. If it merely wants a fact-finding organization, it should make that clear when it spells out any new responsibilities for another group.
The Wyoming Healthcare Commission shouldn't worry about how the Legislature replaces it.
What do you think?
We welcome viewpoints from our readers on this and other issues.]]->