Click here to view La Crosse Area Weather
Home > News > Story
 Advertisement 

Published - Monday, January 14, 2008

POST COMMENT | READ COMMENTS (46 comment(s))

Huebsch wants focus on health care, economic development in 2008 session


.
As Mike Huebsch prepares to begin his second session as Assembly speaker, he sees two priorities ahead for the Legislature: economic development and health-care reform, which he sees as vital to economic development.

Of course, as the man in charge of seeing that the Republican Party maintains or builds on its majority in the Assembly and regains control of the state Senate, Huebsch also will spend quite a bit of time on politics in 2008.
Huebsch recently spoke about the year ahead, and looked back at 2007, a year dominated in the Legislature by the state budget stalemate.

“We’ve got some big challenges coming up,” he said.

Health care was a big issue in the last session, with Huebsch pointing to the Senate’s Healthy Wisconsin state health-care program as one of the chief obstacles to a budget agreement.

“Everyone recognizes that health care is a huge problem in this state and this country, and the Democrats’ solution is to have government take it over,” Huebsch said. “Never before have you seen a greater difference between the Republicans and the Democrats.”

Huebsch expects the Senate to again champion Healthy Wisconsin in the 2008 session. And as much as he disagrees with the approach, Huebsch vowed to bring the Healthy Wisconsin legislation to the Assembly floor for a vote, as long is it wasn’t folded into another bill. He’s confident an “up or down” Assembly vote on Healthy Wisconsin would see the legislation go down.

What Huebsch would rather see is health-care legislation that lets market forces have more influence in health care. A vital part of that involves people becoming more savvy consumers of health care.

With the current system of health insurance, Huebsch said, people have no incentive to shop around or consider alternatives for treatment. When insurance covers everything, people don’t pay much attention to how much their care costs.

Huebsch compares having routine checkups and the like covered by health insurance to having car insurance cover the cost of routine auto maintenance.

“Can you imagine what car insurance would cost if you had it for oil changes and tire changes?” Huebsch asked.

One key to making a transition to a market-drive health-care system, Huebsch said, is to ensure that consumers can easily compare costs of treatment from one clinic or hospital to the next.

“We need to give people choices in health care,” Huebsch said. “We as American consumers can reform the health-care system overnight.”

Huebsch is confident that medical institutions would be happy to have greater clarity when it comes to pricing of services. The trick is to “develop a uniform system to compare apples to apples,” Huebsch said.

In addition to choices, health-care consumers need more control over the money they’re spending, he said. One way to achieve that is through health savings accounts.

The way Huebsch sees it working is people pay for their own medical expenses out of an HSA of, say, $3,000. Insurance would cover the cost of major expenses, but that insurance would be cheaper because the cost of “oil changes” wouldn’t be included.

“Once you have control over that, you’re going to make much better informed decisions,” Huebsch said. “It’s the free-market system.”

Promoting economic development for the state is the other major priority this session for Huebsch. He sees health care — specifically, the possibility that the state will pass Healthy Wisconsin into law — as one barrier to economic expansion.

Aside from that, Huebsch sees plenty of potential for the state encouraging new businesses to start, keeping Wisconsin companies already here and helping them grow and luring existing companies from other states.

A couple weeks ago, Huebsch traveled around the state with Gov. Jim Doyle and was encouraged by his emphasis on economic development.

“We’re singing out of the same hymn book on that,” Huebsch said.

In fact, Doyle this week proposed a new initiative called Accelerate Wisconsin that features a doubling of funding for technology business grants and loans, a venture capital tax credit and a capital gains re-investment initiative that would exclude 100 percent of capital gains taxes on up to $10 million in long-term capital gains re-invested in qualifying Wisconsin businesses.

Doyle also unveiled a companion plan called Innovate Wisconsin that offers incentives for private businesses to focus on research and development.

Huebsch isn’t as optimistic about the chances for economic development initiatives coming out of the state Senate, though.

“I think their economic development plan is indexing the minimum wage,” he said. “The true liberal wing of the Democratic Party has taken over the state Senate. I don’t think it matches up with what the people of the state of Wisconsin believe.”
.




 Advertisement 
 Tell us what you think...

 Comments »

kamikazefaase wrote on Jan 17, 2008 4:09 AM:

" The question of health care and its related insurance industry are two separate matters that merge into one crisis. We should be paying for insurance due to risk factors, yet these risk factors are spread out over the entire general public rather than those who involve themselves in these risky behaviors. Smoking, certain obesity, lack of general care should be part of the insurance premuim discussion. All matters including preventive care must be open to determine what we should be paying for through insurance including mental health. Insurance companies should be able to go from house to house and explain what they can provide at what costs in words we can all understand. Life insurance agents do. Not everyone can afford a Rolls Royce, but most people eventually need a car. "

kamikazefaase wrote on Jan 17, 2008 3:53 AM:

" The problem with Mikey's solution is that the marketplace has not solved the current problem. First of all, pooling employers contributions to health insurance has made things less competitive. If employers paid the kind wages that put the health insurance premium money into workers health insurance accounts, then employees would be able to shop on their own for the kind of coverage they want. The self employed have to shop around, why not workers? Better yet, why not public employees? Even better than that, why not political officeholders? "

kamikazefaase wrote on Jan 17, 2008 3:43 AM:

" I have been trying to contact certain legislators to also enact the California law concerning prohibiting anyone smoking in a motorized vehicle with children inside. This is another means to prove the health issue should supersede the privilege of smoking. Smokers, I wish you all would quit. But since I know a number of fools will not, it is time to become fully accountable for your actions. "

kamikazefaase wrote on Jan 17, 2008 3:37 AM:

" Sorry folks! Jeremy, like Ron Clark of another letter writer, seem to think that smoking is some sort of right when in reality it is a privilege. Their skewed prospectives result in thinking that business owners have the right to dictate what happens within their business even if it is hazardous to the health of their employees. And because it reflects on them, they feel threaten even though smoking is a threat to the general public. We all have the right to breathe wherever we go including bars and workplaces. This we have declared this as part of "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" and that we all created equally. Breathing poisons and toxics are not part of the deal under any circumstances. The public can regulate smoking like it does driving and tax it any way it wishes. "

Anna Banana wrote on Jan 15, 2008 5:44 PM:

" It is a "public" health issue because of the proven data about the effects of second hand smoke, while I don't smoke and wished no one in my family did I understand their right to as long as it does not negatively impact innocent bystanders meaning those who chose not to. But again you stray from the real issue here and that is Mike HUebsch does not represent us and never will because he is too busy making sure he is re-elected. "

just-observing wrote on Jan 14, 2008 11:12 PM:

" Anna

All the anti smoking folks have a rather rude awakening comeing their way next fiscal budget time.. But with that said...you want to ban smoking in all public places...lets go one step more....if this is truly a public health issue YOU call your state official and let's make it totally illegal period...then you'll see just how the folks in Mad-Town are yanking your chain "

Anna Banana wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:02 PM:

" Jeremy have you never traveled out of this area, say California, Arizona, Madison. People who travel to La Crosse from those areas are shocked that we do not have non-smoking in public places as they do. All of them say it works well for them - and didn't you read recently that growth in our area in jobs is in the service jobs - many times bars and restaurants are the only places whose schedules fit student's schedules, many of them don't really have a choice but to work in a smoky place. Vicky, you hit the nail on the head, he wants to get re-elected that's all. "

Vicky wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:00 PM:

" Smoking and second-hand smoke is poisonous - PERIOD! It should be banned in all places that the public has access to. Bars, restaurants, stores, etc., are private businesses, understood. But, they serve the PUBLIC! "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 8:31 PM:

" Also Vickie, you could enter a bar without knowing that they didn't have exit signs marked and then there could be a fire and you could get trapped. So it's inspected so that customers know when they enter the bar, they will know where to exit because it will be marked. Get the picture, if it's something that can be consumed without knowing about it, then there needs to be inspections. However, if you knowingly choose to enter a smoking bar, then you do so knowing the possible consequences. "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 8:29 PM:

" vickie, the answer to all of those things are simple: They are possible health hazzards that could be consumed without the customer knowing. If you choose to be around smoke, that's your CHOICE! You don't have to be, that is your CHOICE as well. But the hazzards of smoke are well know, it's up to the individual to act RESPONSIBLY in their own interest. Why isn't McDonald's being singled out for their food? Why not ban that? Everyone knows that it's unhealthy for you and the fat people that eat there are just as big of a drain on the health industry as smokers. I'll tell you why, because they know ahead of time the consequences of eating McDonald's. If they choose to eat it, then they have to deal with the consequences! "

Vicky wrote on Jan 14, 2008 8:01 PM:

" Jeremy - answer the following:
Why are there exit signs in bars?
Why are restroom facilities periodically inspected?
Why are there capacity restrictions posted and enforced?
If a bar serves food why are the kitchen facilities periodically inspected?
Why do bars have to meet electrical, construction, and plumbing codes?
Do the bar owners have a choice in these matters??? "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 5:21 PM:

" mack - it's only too simple because people in this world won't stop until nothing harms anyone. If you don't want to work in a smoking environment, then don't. Problem is, these jobs usually pay good money. So people are greedy and willing to take the chance. It's not like the workers don't know the risks associated with it, whereas asbestos and poisoned food could be injested unknowingly. You are comparing apples and oranges. Next, you'll say that when bar owners cut jobs because of the loss of customers, you'll be screaming that it's wrong. It never stops with people like you. There are risks in this world, it's your CHOICE if you want to accept them or not. No one is forcing you to work in a smoking evironment. "

Mack wrote on Jan 14, 2008 4:55 PM:

" Jeremy, you are ignoring the fact that the employer is providing poisoned air for his employees to breath. There is associated responsibility and liability with this action. No different than providing asbestos to breath or poisoned food to eat. Your position is way to simple for the world we live in. "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 4:21 PM:

" again mack, if you don't want the risks of working in a smoking environment, then don't work there. McDonald's is always hiring and there is no smoking there. "

Mack wrote on Jan 14, 2008 4:17 PM:

" The smoking debate will end when a minimum wage employee sues their employer because they have become sick and insurance companies will refuse to insure any employer who allows smoking in their workplace. By allowing smoking and not covering the healthcare of those exposed to such smoke, the owners are not taking responsibility for their actions. "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 3:57 PM:

" If you don't want to work in a smoking environment, then it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to choose not to work there. I guess I never realized it was the government's job to take care of everyone. I thought that was called personal responsibility, but as we've seen responsibility is not something that is valued in today's society. "

Hey now wrote on Jan 14, 2008 2:36 PM:

" But philly, second-hand tobacco smoke is a proven carcinogen, and taverns are workplaces. What other workplace is allowed to have something like that floating around in the air without having to provide their employees with some kind of protection? "

philly wrote on Jan 14, 2008 2:28 PM:

" Not a good analogy by Mike with the "oil change" reference. My $.02 as a Republican, non-smoker. In favor of state social healthcare and against the smoking ban. Contrary to some posters, they are not the same thing. I come up with a simple solution when I don't want to go to a smokey bar...I leave there or I don't go there. When I seeked employment back in the day, I didn't apply at "smokey" places. I found there were an exceptional amount of jobs in non-smoking environments. "

Chatter cat wrote on Jan 14, 2008 1:56 PM:

" Also, focusing on health care should include the workplace smoking ban which is a major health issue. Most cigarette smokers are drug addicts. (Addicted to nicotine) Allowing smoking in public places is a form of enabling. And, Huebsch and the tavern league seem to want to keep enabling the enablers. "

peabody wrote on Jan 14, 2008 1:46 PM:

" Mike, apparently you must have missed the day in health class when preventative health care was discussed. Your "oil changes" save millions of dollars in health care costs each year. While I applaud the HRA idea, the HRA's I've been associated with not only pays for the preventative care (check ups, screenings, etc.), the cost for these items do not come out of your HRA (they are paid 100% by the insurer) because the insurer knows these will save tons of money in the long run. Mike, if you think the rising cost of health care is due to people getting routine check ups, you must have missed more school than I thought. I would suggest some refresher course, but you don't support higher education either....so never mind. "

Chatter cat wrote on Jan 14, 2008 1:41 PM:

" Image how much auto insurance would cost if it had to pay for a replacement car whenever a car is damaged by skipping routine maintenance. And, not just for your car, but for all your uninsured neighbors’ cars too. Part of what’s driving up health costs is that those with insurance have to pay for the emergency room visits of the uninsured. The problem is not the costs of regular checkups and doctor visits. Unfortunately, too many people don’t get regular care that would catch or prevent problems before they become major illnesses.
"

Hey now wrote on Jan 14, 2008 1:26 PM:

" Happy mom, if you do indeed work in healthcare, your employer would be better off without you. Your lack of compassion for low income patients is appalling. By all means - stay home. "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 12:51 PM:

" You are correct, we the people are the government. However, those we elect, are choosing to make government oversight bigger and bigger. That includes what the current president has done and an even bigger government that Hillary and Obama are promising. We need to eliminate as much governmental oversight as possible. Instead, people are seeking more government oversight, like smoking bans, which is flat out scarey. "

happymom wrote on Jan 14, 2008 12:37 PM:

" From my experience in the healthcare world, those who pay nothing for their healthcare USE their benefits with no regard for what it costs to deliver that care. Those who have some responsibility, in the form of deductibles, co-insurance, etc, tend to be much more mindful of what constitutes a need to seek a doctor visit. All that aside, you can bet your boopy I'm going to quit my health insurance providing job when you all get your socialized medicine. It'll be daytime TV and soap operas for me! "

Hey now wrote on Jan 14, 2008 11:49 AM:

" jeremy, this is America. We ARE the government! "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 11:37 AM:

" And this is the 1 million dollar question. There are many, many of you on here that constantly trash the government and anything it does. So, you are telling me that all of a sudden you are changing your tune and believing that the government can run a health care system? People, get it through your heads. The answer is not the big government that this administration has increased and Hillary and Obama are promising to increase even more. The answer is less government! "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 11:30 AM:

" mack, where do you get those stats? And how do you know that it can be done for that amount here? Those of you that complain about high taxes will have nothing to say when you get your tax bill if we have social health care. "

Mack wrote on Jan 14, 2008 11:09 AM:

" Our profitized healthcare systems consumes 17% of GDP and countries and governments that cover everybody can do it for 10.5%. If we cannot lead, we need to follow and we need to recognize the fact. "

Vicky wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:52 AM:

" Jetter1 - you make some very good points. Preventative care does save money in the long run. Apparently Huebsch and his cohorts would rather we wait until we have a catastrophic illness to go to the doctor. Oh by the way, I looked up some stats regarding Huebsch's campaign contributors:

Health Professionals - $45,171.00
Health Services/Institutions - $25,760.00
Insurance - $10,650.00

No wonder he prefers the "market forces" approach to delivering health care. "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:52 AM:

" so let me get this straight Dean, no Democrat has EVER cast a vote AGAINST social health care? Are you sure about that? If not, then it's not just republicans that are/have been against social health care. "

dean wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:42 AM:

" To Jeromy again Republicans ,pharma,for profit health care, and insurance companies all work together against nationalized health care . They also voted against medicare and medicaid in 1964. V.A. health care is socialized medicine in their line of thinking "

jetter1 wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:26 AM:

" It is clear that Huebsch is a man with a fist full of dollars. HSA's provide an opportunity for people to put money away for emergencies. But isn't that what health insurance is for? The average household income in WI is $32,500. After paying all other required bills, the uninsured cannot possibly put $3000 a year in an account. If we could do that, wouldn't we already have health insurance.

And a comparison that check-ups are like oil changes? Why should preventative care not be free? It saves costs in the long run.

Should the next requirement be that pre-natal care not be covered by health insurance? We do not need a health system that requires us to "shop around." We already do this, and its still leaving the poor with a high deductables and an empty pocketbook. "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:17 AM:

" Dean where's that liberal open mind that I keep hearing about? You offend people with your partisan speeches that are meant to divide this country, yet we have to "not read" if we don't want to be offended. Yet when it comes to your liberal ethics being offended, you are going to shut down anything that disagrees with what you think is right, for example religion. I'm sick of reading your partisan crap that does not contribute to any discussions. There are many people that I disagree with on here, but they bring up valid points in a debate. You see Dean, that's your problem. You just spew hate speech that is intended to divide, rather than have a debate. OPEN YOUR MIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

dean wrote on Jan 14, 2008 10:00 AM:

" To Jeromy if You dont like the blogs ,Dont read them You can kiss my @$$ instead "

jeremy wrote on Jan 14, 2008 9:39 AM:

" I am disappointed in the people on this blog. When it comes to a church, you blast it, complaining that the church and it's member don't have an open mind. Now, if you want to talk about hypocrisey, what about those of you that have your mind made up that social health care is the only way to go? Why do you not have an open mind to his plan? Oh and Dean, shut your D@MN mouth, I'm sick of reading your partisan political thoughts. You are the reason that this country is more divided than ever. Open up your minds people, the same thing you claim republicans can not do, you are also guilty of! "

Hey now wrote on Jan 14, 2008 9:31 AM:

" People don't work in bars?? "

dean wrote on Jan 14, 2008 9:27 AM:

" To real world , Are You a cigrette? "

The Real World wrote on Jan 14, 2008 9:16 AM:

" Sorry for the mistakes, I have to get to work. !------First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Pastor Martin Niemöller "

The Real World wrote on Jan 14, 2008 9:13 AM:

" The constitution is where we get our rights, and it simply will not allow the government to tell property owners that they can not do. smoking is legal in there bar, restaurant, or home. It would be different if people had to go there or work there, but they do not. Please people, stand up and fight for the Constitution, if we lose it we are finished. A little at a time will destroy it and we must be diligent. All of you who want to ban legal things on private property will be affected some day, and you will remember what I said. "

Vicky wrote on Jan 14, 2008 8:36 AM:

" Mikey wants to "focus on health care", but he is going to try his best to discourage any smoking ban legislation to reach the floor of the Assembly. Now there's a good example of hypocrisy! "

Hey now wrote on Jan 14, 2008 8:21 AM:

" Mike doesn't seem to care what the people of the state believe. The vast majority supports a smoking ban in the workplace, with no exceptions, which could certainly go a long way towards a healthier Wisconsin, but he supports big tobacco and bar owners. "

The Real World wrote on Jan 14, 2008 7:53 AM:

" This is a good agenda, except we need campaign finance reform. As for health care our Constitution does not allow us to tax the general public for the good of others. This mentality will destroy what is left of this great country and state. And if it were not for our Constitution we would be a third world country already, or perhaps under the rule of some tyrant. "

dean wrote on Jan 14, 2008 7:28 AM:

" I didn't see any thing about people like Huebsch or Cheney REFUSE tax payer health plans "

dean wrote on Jan 14, 2008 7:12 AM:

" Oil changes and tires wouldnt be bad on car insurance but repubINFLATION at the gas pump would be a killer "

Vicky wrote on Jan 14, 2008 6:39 AM:

" Comparing human life to an automobile? Is this what Mikey terms as being a compassionate conservative? Give me a break! "

dean wrote on Jan 14, 2008 5:56 AM:

" The repubs only approach to health care is Band-aids with purple hearts painted on them "


PLEASE NOTE: Comments on stories that frequently update through the day disappear with each update.
The comments above are from readers. In no way do they represent the views of the La Crosse Tribune.

Click here to report offensive or inappropriate comments. Please identify the comment you're concerned about, the story to which the comment was attached, the date of the comment and the person who made the post.

 Post a comment (150 word limit) »

Log In - If you have already signed up with The LaCrosse Tribune, please sign in now!
Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Sign Up - To encourage intelligent and meaningful conversation, The LaCrosse Tribune requires all commenters to register before posting comments. It's quick, it's easy, and it's free! Just fill in the information below to get started!

**Your Member ID and password will be required to log in. Your comments will appear under your user name.

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
E-mail Address:
Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

First Name:
Last Name:
Company:
Home Phone:
Business Phone:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
 

NEWSPAPER ADS

LACROSSE JOBS

TOP HOMES

HomeSeller
Top Homes



 
 
Dailies
La Crosse Tribune
Winona Daily News

Weeklies
Coulee News
Courier Life News
The Chronicle
Houston County News
Tomah Journal
Vernon Broadcaster
Westby Times

Regional
Inside Preps
My LIVE! Entertainment
Best of River Valley
Business Report
Healthy Living Today
Strictly Golf
River Valley Bike Trails
River Valley Blogs
River Valley Outdoors

Shoppers
Tri-County Foxxy

Marketplace
Newspaper Ads
Local Website Directory
7 Rivers Rentals
HomeSeller
Wheels Website
Outdoor Motors
Work For You

Portals
La Crosse NET
Winona NET

Classifieds
River Valley Classifieds

Links
Lee Enterprises

About Us | Classifieds | Contact Us | Terms of Use | F.A.Q. | Privacy Policy | Requests | Search | RSS | Videos | Advertiser Directory | Add to My Yahoo!
Copyright © 1997 - 2008 The La Crosse Tribune. All rights reserved.
Material from this site may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed. A Lee Enterprises subsidiary.