STEALTH LOBBYING

loading...
The news trumpeted by Consumers for Affordable Health Care this week that Maine insurance companies had failed to file lobbying expenses with the Bureau of Insurance, as required under the Dirigo health reforms, was an unacceptable situation for the companies. But they make up only half the equation,…
Sign in or Subscribe to view this content.

The news trumpeted by Consumers for Affordable Health Care this week that Maine insurance companies had failed to file lobbying expenses with the Bureau of Insurance, as required under the Dirigo health reforms, was an unacceptable situation for the companies. But they make up only half the equation, and the Baldacci administration should be concerned about a bureau that could let two filing years pass seemingly without noticing the missing information.

The insurance companies were wrong to neglect to file this information, and the fact that they all missed the lobbying line in their financial reports is more than an odd coincidence – whatever the individual reasons or mutual confusion, all concluded it was a safe line to ignore. This isn’t a major crime – the companies filed related lobbying data with the Maine Ethics Commission – but it is part of a larger problem with a lack of transparency in health care.

The information on the Ethics Commission Web site is not aggregated in the way it is supposed to be with the superintendent, and while it is possible to estimate that Anthem spent about $60,000 in 2004 and ’05 on lobbying; Aetna spent around $37,000; and Cigna, about $38,000, it’s hard to know what lobbying activities have been missed in that accounting. That’s why the Legislature wanted the bureau to be an unambiguous source of information on these costs.

But what about the bureau? When the 2004 financial reports arrived – and it’s not as if Maine has dozens of insurance companies – no one said anything about the “zeros” listed in the lobbying lines. Superintendent Al Iuppa said his bureau is doing fact finding on the issue now and if the filing requires more explanation, he would include it.

That’s nice, but inadequate. The bureau must be more aggressive about examining costs, even comparatively modest costs such as these, if it is to effectively oversee the insurance industry. Its apparent failure in this instance is a small sign that Maine still has a long way to go before it understands its very high health care costs.


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

By continuing to use this site, you give your consent to our use of cookies for analytics, personalization and ads. Learn more.