Bachmann wants more ‘transparency’ in Medicaid payments

She’s baaaaaack … . Rested, rejuvenated and fine-tuned for action, Michele Bachmann made a splash Monday with demands to really get tough on that investigation into the state’s low-income insurance program. Says Jennifer Brooks at the Strib: “U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann is calling for greater transparency and closer auditing of state and federal Medicaid programs. Bachmann’s call, mirroring bipartisan legislation being prepared in the Minnesota House and Senate, comes in the midst of a federal probe into whether the state artificially inflated the premium rates on its low-income health insurance program. ‘We as lawmakers have an obligation to ensure that Minnesota’s payment and oversight practices are both accountable and transparent,’ said Bachmann, appearing at a press conference at the state Capitol Monday morning. She said she was concerned about the ‘massive reserves’ that have been accumulated by the four HMOs that manage Minnesota’s health Medicaid program. … ‘It’s not a partisan issue,’ said Bachmann, who nevertheless did not include any Democrats in her hastily-arranged press conference.”

Christopher Snowbeck at the PiPress includes this: “During the news conference, Bachmann said HMO surpluses in Minnesota could be 33 percent higher than in any other state in the country. But a spokesman on Monday evening clarified that Bachmann was describing a possible disparity in payment rates in Minnesota, not health plan surpluses. According to the Minnesota Council of Health Plans, the collective surplus held by Minnesota’s HMOs as well as related health insurance companies that sell coverage on the private market stood at $2.5 billion at the end of 2010, up from $2.1 billion in 2009. Insurers are putting more money into reserve because health care costs continue to increase, said Smith of the HMO trade group.” Always good to have someone follow along after her, you know, “clarifying” things.

Also, with redistricting to become a hot topic today, the AP reports: “Bachmann says she intends to run for reelection to her Minnesota congressional seat regardless of what happens to her current district when a judicial panel releases redrawn state political boundaries Tuesday. Bachmann was at Minnesota’s Capitol [Monday] for a news conference on health care spending. She said afterward that she’ll be back on Tuesday, after the Minnesota Supreme Court’s redistricting panel releases new lines for the state’s eight congressional districts and 67 legislative districts for the next 10 years. The new maps are scheduled to be released at 1 p.m.”

On those new maps, Bill Salisbury at the PiPress writes, “In 2002, the last time a court panel drew new Minnesota political boundaries, two congressmen and 52 state lawmakers — more than one-fourth of the Legislature — were paired. It resulted in a dramatic change in the Legislature’s makeup. In that year’s election, the House Republican majority increased its margin from four seats to 29, while the Senate DFL majority’s margin dropped from 12 seats to four. New boundaries could have an equally striking impact this year. Redistricting is intensely personal for lawmakers. Their political careers are at stake, as is partisan control of the Legislature. ‘The redistricting coming out on Tuesday will probably suck almost all the oxygen out of the (Capitol) building. There will be lots of folks looking at maps,’ House Speaker Kurt Zellers, R-Maple Grove, said Friday.”

That “soon/maybe as soon as [last] Friday” Vikings stadium deal is still on a burner somewhere. Doug Belden of the PiPress says: “Negotiators trying to finalize a deal for a downtown Minneapolis Vikings stadium reported no agreement Monday. Representatives of the city, state and team have been trying to craft a deal that would allow the Vikings to continue to play in their current home, the Metrodome, while construction goes on next door on a new stadium. According to a planning estimate released last month, the city would put in $150 million, the team $428 million and the state $340 million for a stadium on the Dome site. Some news reports over the weekend quoted anonymous sources putting the state’s contribution around $400 million, though the parties involved have insisted there’s no deal yet. The city has also offered more than $160 million toward operating costs. The Vikings have not specified a contribution. Lester Bagley, Vikings vice president for public affairs and stadium development, said Monday in a text message shortly before 2 p.m. that there was nothing new to report. Ted Mondale, representing Gov. Mark Dayton in the talks, emailed ‘nothing today’ about an hour later. One source close to the talks said no announcement is expected Tuesday either.” Well, you get back to us when you’ve got something.

At Field of Schemes, Neil de Mause is saying: “The details of the agreement, according to ‘multiple sources’:

• The state of Minnesota would contribute $398 million.
• Minneapolis would kick in $150 million in construction costs, plus $180 million in operating costs over 30 years.
• The Vikings would pay $427 million.

“And … that’s it. Nothing on where the public money would come from. Nothing on whether the Vikings would pay rent (or share stadium revenues) to offset some of that $180 million in operating costs. No set site, even, since the parties have only agreed to build ‘at or near’ the Metrodome. And, oh yes, the ‘state’ here just means the governor, and the ‘city’ here just means the mayor — neither the state legislature nor the city council have agreed on squat, and the council in particular features a majority opposed to a stadium without a public vote, one that the team would almost certainly lose. In other words, pretty much nothing we didn’t know last May, except that the exact dollar split has been tweaked (a bit more from the state, a bit less from the city, up-front anyway), and now the Vikings and governor are on board as pushing for a Minneapolis site. Still, it’s an occasion for headlines, and for Star Trib columnists to weigh in on why this would be the bestest thing since sliced bread.”

Even better (as deMause notes) is this, from “Big Blue Monkey” at the I Dislike Your Favorite Team blog: “Patrick Reusse wrote this defense of urban teachers in the Twin Cities:

‘We have received an enormous influx of poor and tired and tempest-tossed people from cities that have decayed, and from other lands … And as Minneapolis and St. Paul teachers and administrators have done their darndest to educate these often disadvantaged pupils, they have seen their efforts bad-mouthed by legislators from school districts with newer buildings and better equipment and with one-10th of the problems in a week that a Twin Cities teacher can face on a daily basis.’

“It’s a wonderful sentiment, except that Reusse is using that as a jumping off point to argue that anyone against $700,000,000 of public money on a new Vikings stadium is an idiot. Seriously. Just guessing, here, Pat, but if you polled those teachers, they would say, “Hey, if you are going to raise $700 million dollars, how about you spend it on the education system you are lauding? (you [bleeping] dummy).” Just to be clear, I’m not calling Patrick Reusse a [bleeping] dummy — that was just my imagining of what 95% of all teachers in the Twin Cities would say. Those teachers would also probably point out that an investment in education has been proven, by serious economists, to be an actual investment — every dollar put into improving education leads to about ten dollars in revenue for the state. Stadiums? Not so much. Just sayin’.  Not that Reusse couldn’t dig up a Gym Teacher or two who support the new stadium. He didn’t bother to, of course (that would require ‘work,’ something the sports columnists of the Twin Cities papers have heard rumors of, and this ‘work,’ you speak of? It gives them the willies.)” Then he goes on to rip Sid Hartman.

Oh, my! Say it isn’t true! A “statement of admonition”? Frederick Melo of the PiPress reports: “For months leading up to the November elections, John Mannillo criticized the process that earned fellow St. Paul City Council candidate Chris Tolbert the DFL endorsement last June. DFLers rallied on both sides, with party activist Don Gemberling authoring an 18-page complaint seeking to overturn the Tolbert endorsement. The effort failed, and Tolbert won the November election for the Ward 3 council seat by a large margin over three other candidates, thanks to heavy support from organized labor and key Democratic-Farmer-Labor leaders such as St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman and Ramsey County Attorney John Choi. DFL State Party leaders are now expressing fresh concern about the process. Minnesota DFL Chairman Ken Martin recently issued a formal ‘statement of admonition’ to St. Paul DFL leaders Michael Lewis and Darren Tolbert. It says the endorsing convention was marred by poor advance notice, bad record keeping and minutes, and confusion over who was allowed onto the floor during restricted times. It also notes ‘other disorder that occurred at the convention.’ ” Can anyone actually count the number of disorders on the floor of your average convention?

It may have taken pancreatic cancer to make it happen, but the Strib’s Kevin Giles and Andrew Johnson give Stillwater blogger Karl Bremer some long overdue respect: “ ‘I like to think I’ve made a difference,’ said Bremer, who has built a reputation in Minnesota for piercing public officials and other establishment types with his pen. As he mustered his strength recently for a fourth round of chemotherapy to attack the cancer in his pancreas and liver, he spoke of future topics that will light up his blog, ‘Ripple in Stillwater,’ with inspired outrage. Among them: Michele Bachmann’s re-election campaign, a possible four-lane St. Croix River bridge and government fraud. Bremer’s medical condition, despite its urgency, has yet to rival his lifetime war with the status quo. His main target is Bachmann, a Republican representing Minnesota’s Sixth District — where Bremer lives — in the U.S. House. Bremer has condemned her as a ‘gold-bricker’ inattentive to matters in Congress while using her position to promote her religious and anti-gay beliefs.”