8/3/2019 AB 210 At a Glance

1/2

1

FACT SHEET: AB 210 at a Glance

What would AB 210 and/or the current emergency rule do?

Both achieve compliance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, or Obamacare) inregard to independent insurance review processes

o AB 210 would write PPACA language into the Wisconsin State Statutes

o The current emergency rule achieves temporary PPACA compliance by administrative means,with the goal of implementing a subsequent permanent rule, most likely AB 210

AB 210 additionally:

o Makes rate-setting information proprietary and unavailable for public scrutiny

o Provides rule-making authority to Wisconsins Insurance Commissioner

Who stands to win with AB 210?

Big Insurance: Gains competitive advantage because it can afford to comply

Big Government:

o The Federal Government needs voluntary compliance to implement PPACA

o Voluntary compliance undermines state sovereignty under the 10th

Amendment and any claims ofPPACAs unconstitutionality

o Despite provisions to rescind parts of AB 210 if PPACA is repealed or ruled unconstitutional,defunding the federal law would leave AB 210s language in place

o Bureaucratic rules and processes are historically difficult to rescind once established

Who stands to lose with AB 210?

Small Insurance Companies: Wont be able to withstand increasing federal mandates PPACA will yield

State of Wisconsin: Any compliance with PPACAdamages Wisconsins credibilityin a 26-state lawsuit

to challenge Obamacares constitutionality, thereby weakening the case overall

Wisconsin Consumers and Taxpayers:

o PPACA mandates would level "hidden tax" on Wisconsinites

o Problems in PPACA regulations would craterfuture state budgets

Who currently supports AB 210 and/or the emergency rule?

The State Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI)

o Testified in support of AB 210 at both theAssemblyandSenatecommittee hearings on the bill

o Promulgated the currentemergency rule Big Insurance: Many large insurance companies have publiclyregistered in favor

Who currently opposes AB 210 and/or the emergency rule?

Sen. Frank Lasee (R De Pere), Chair, Senate Committee on Insurance and Housing:

o Correctly identified AB 210s language as Obamacare compliance andrecognized its outcome

o Killed AB 210 in committee, though OCI and others are attempting to resurrect it

5 Republican Assemblymenwho voted noon AB 210

http://bit.ly/uf1hcEhttp://bit.ly/uf1hcEhttp://bit.ly/uf1hcEhttp://bit.ly/uf1hcEhttp://bit.ly/uf1hcEhttp://bit.ly/sCuyrLhttp://bit.ly/sCuyrLhttp://bit.ly/sCuyrLhttp://bit.ly/uINYwnhttp://bit.ly/uINYwnhttp://bit.ly/uINYwnhttp://bit.ly/asmblynoteshttp://bit.ly/asmblynoteshttp://bit.ly/asmblynoteshttp://bit.ly/senatenoteshttp://bit.ly/senatenoteshttp://bit.ly/senatenoteshttp://bit.ly/v4T6bNhttp://bit.ly/v4T6bNhttp://bit.ly/v4T6bNhttp://bit.ly/shpfuDhttp://bit.ly/shpfuDhttp://bit.ly/shpfuDhttp://thedc.com/ur3UKVhttp://thedc.com/ur3UKVhttp://thedc.com/ur3UKVhttp://thedc.com/ur3UKVhttp://thedc.com/ur3UKVhttp://bit.ly/sPGcdPhttp://bit.ly/sPGcdPhttp://bit.ly/sPGcdPhttp://bit.ly/sPGcdPhttp://thedc.com/ur3UKVhttp://thedc.com/ur3UKVhttp://bit.ly/shpfuDhttp://bit.ly/v4T6bNhttp://bit.ly/senatenoteshttp://bit.ly/asmblynoteshttp://bit.ly/uINYwnhttp://bit.ly/sCuyrLhttp://bit.ly/uf1hcE

8/3/2019 AB 210 At a Glance

2/2

2

The Goldwater Institute opposes AB 210 and/or the emergency rule on principle, because both risk:

o Undermining state sovereignty under the 10th

Amendment

o Prejudicing the U.S. Supreme Court on the severability issue

Citizens Council for Health Freedom

Many Wisconsin conservative grassroots/Tea Party groups

Is there any merit to OCIs key claims?

Claim 1: Wisconsin must comply with PPACA to maintain control of its insurance industry

Unfortunately, the moment Wisconsin started to comply with Obamacare, it began to play a dangerous and losinggame. PPACA is written to give the Federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) all power. In fact, itcan change rules on a whim. Additionally, in a conference call with Tea Party organizers, OCI representativesacknowledged that it can keep its independent review process only as long as HHS says its acceptable to do so.

The fact that Wisconsin is complying with any aspect of PPACA in order to maintain state control is proof thatthe state has already ceded much of its control. To say that Wisconsin must comply with Obamacare to resistObamacares outcomes is akin to Newspeak.

Wisconsins PPACA compliance must stop immediately in order to reverse this trend.

Neither AB 210 nor the emergency rule compromise Wisconsins legal challenge to PPACA

This claim simply fails to acknowledge facts. Compliance has already damaged Wisconsins credibility in courtand compromised the integrity of the 26-state lawsuit to which it is a party. This states continued compliancecannot help but prejudice the U.S. Supreme Court, which has just agreed to hear arguments on this and otherrelated cases in March 2012.

Its also important to recognize that Wisconsin is not just complying with PPACA via the current emergency rule,but also on the development of a compliant healthcare insurance exchange. In February, Governor Walkersadministration accepted $49 million in federal Early Innovator Grant funds, provided for the express purpose ofbuilding a compliant healthcare insurance exchange. The state has already been sending very loud signals to thecourts for months that it views the individual mandate as severable from the rest of PPACA.

Moreover, the Federal Government has made it clear that it needs compliant states to implement PPACA and thatcompliance undermines and mitigates any federalist/10

thAmendment arguments the states might use to resist

PPACA in court.

There is no such thing as compliance without risk.

Additional Facts

Wisconsin is currently theonly state with Republican leadershipnot to have returned federal Early InnovatorGrant funds, provided in February for the express purpose of establishing a compliant state healthcare insuranceexchange. Wisconsin is continuing to pass milestone after milestone in meeting the grant project requirements,which aim at bringing the state into full PPACA compliance.

Unless or until the Walker administration returns these $49 million in grant funds, Wisconsin remains at risk of:

Undermining its sovereignty under the 10th

amendment

Making itself deeply vulnerable to federal whim

Compromising the healthcare freedoms of its citizens

Damaging its own credibility and the overall integrityof the 26-state lawsuit against ObamaCare

In order to put Wisconsin on solid footing again, Governor Walker must return the $49 million to the FederalGovernment, abandon work on the federally compliant exchange, rescind the current emergency rule, and ensurethat no further compliance-geared rules or legislation are promulgated.

http://bit.ly/uhOKKThttp://bit.ly/uhOKKThttp://bit.ly/uhOKKThttp://bit.ly/uf1hcEhttp://bit.ly/uf1hcEhttp://bit.ly/uf1hcEhttp://bit.ly/uhOKKT