Mark Larson, commissioner of the Department of Vermont Health Access (DVHA), said Monday afternoon that, despite 11th-hour claims to the contrary, Vermont Health Connect is “prepared to go live tomorrow.” That’s when Vermont officially launches its new online health insurance exchange, the first step in the state’s implementation of the federally mandated Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka “Obamacare.”
Larson took time out of what is arguably his most stressful day of the year to respond to criticisms about the new online exchange leveled by Republican Randy Brock. On Sunday, the former Vermont auditor, state senator and GOP gubernatorial candidate published a scathing editorial on VT Digger likening Vermont Health Connect to The Wizard of Oz, all “smoke and mirrors, and behind the curtain there is no Wizard — there is only Peter Shumlin.”
“The fact of the matter is this: The system doesn’t work,” Brock charged.
Not so, according to Larson.
“I think the recent op-ed is unfortunate in that it tries to create concern about our ability to successfully launch Vermont Health Connect,” Larson told Seven Days this afternoon. Contrary to Brock’s claims, he said, Vermonters will still be able to go online, compare health insurance plans, sign up for an account and then select a plan that works for them. If Vermonters get that far in October, he added, they’ll be invoiced come November and be able to pay either electronically or by check.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
shame on you Mark Larson for trying to bring to us Health Care when what you should be doing is shutting down the whole goddamn government.
who needs this Medicare crap?
Bankruptcy and foreclosure for all!
Emergency Room treatment for all!
let those good TPers in congress and their Koch-family supporters get all the money. the nation doesn’t need it nor deserve it.
Tell that to the producer of this movie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v… who had three of his relatives die while on a waiting list for treatment in Canada’s health care system..the one that Green Mountain Care is modeled after. You can provide healthcare for all through a public option safety net, instead of throwing everybody else in. I thought you people were all about choice? I guess that’s only when people agree with you.
i’ve met and talked politics with many, many folks from other industrialized countries. i have yet to meet a single Brit, or Dutch person, or French or German or Finn, or Japanese, or Canadian that would trade their single-payer system for our “freedom”-based system. not a single person.
needing, they’re laughing at us. (except when they’re crying, like in November 2004.)
Small but important point: Randy Brock’s piece in VtDigger was an opinion piece, not an editorial. An editorial reflects the views of the publisher or publication. Brock’s views were his own, not VTDigger’s.
45000 Americans died last year because they had no access to health care. USA! USA!
“
As Larson explained, the state used what’s called a “transitive procurement process.” In laymen’s terms, that means that when state A wants to buy a product or service very similar to one purchased by state B, state A can take advantage of the competitive bids state B used and accept the contracts it negotiated. Larson explained that process enabled Vermont to essentially buy the same product it would have purchased anyway but in a more streamlined way.
“There was a competitive bid process. It just wasn’t done by the state of Vermont,” he added, noting that this procurement process has been used many times before in Vermont and is perfectly legal.
“
I thought the products for Vermont were supposed to be unique enough to justify this independent and expensive approach, not “very similar”. It is not clear that Larson and others responsible understand or are concerned about the actual purpose of competitive bidding. And if this was “legal”, then it appears that either the rules need to be changed or the Administration is being very “creative” in claiming to have followed them properly. Has anyone with the press actually looked into what precisely was done, either in the original contract or the subsequent bump up in the contract, to confirm that all proper procedures (bidding, independent review, etc.) actually were followed fully for such a consequential contract, or are Larson’s assertions being taken at face value?
It’s not a wonder DC is so dysfunctional with this type of playground ridiculing going on constantly.
It’s crazy how intolerant the US has become, the idea that someone else may have a valid viewpoint has gone out the door and we are reduced to you agree with me or you’re and idiot.
Sad, very sad…