MAPE’s Political Council hosts health care retreat

MAPE’s Political Council hosted a health care retreat earlier this month to begin exploring the health care needs of MAPE members.  

“There has been growing interest among membership to take another look at our health care system and look at how we get our health care through the State Employee Group Insurance Program (SEGIP). We wanted to look at the ‘public option’ legislation recently passed, as well as health care more generally, and our advocacy around it,” said Local 2101’s Nicole Juan, a Political Council member and event facilitator.  

The goal of the retreat was to devise a strategy for addressing members’ health care needs, including developing a framework for effective roundtable discussions with members and a deeper understanding of the pros and cons of SEGIP and other models/programs that have been proposed in the Legislature. 

“I wanted to be involved because there is a tendency to want to blow up the employer-based system without consideration to building coalitions and knowing about the hidden federal subsidies that would evaporate. How can we get to a better place that is less profit-driven and allows those who want to buy into MinnesotaCare do so? I agree with the goal of having everyone covered, but the ways of getting there are up for debate – even within our union,” Region 6 Director Nate Hierlmaier said. “I’ve always been interested in how people have shared goals and how collective power works better than individual power.” Hierlmaier is a senior researcher with the Health Economics Program at the Minnesota Dept. of Health.    

“The overall purpose was to start to create a framework on how the union approaches health care both for our members and across the state,” Juan said. She said next steps include developing a one-page document on the conversations so the Board of Directors and other interested members can be informed about the discussions.  

“I think there’s a general understanding that SEGIP is one of the best plans out there, but it still has problems. Greater Minnesota in particular has many challenges with access, for example, and it’s frightening that people are still having to wait months and months for the care they need,” Juan added.  

Both Juan and Hierlmaier pointed out that however the health care system moves forward, when it comes to contract negotiations there will be less of an argument from State officials saying, ‘We’re giving you good health care,’ and the negotiations conversation will have to concentrate more on wages and workplace issues.  

Recent legislation called for a study and actuarial analysis on a ‘public option’ report due Feb. 1, 2024. The bill also calls for a proposed implementation plan in early 2027. According to a recent Star Tribune editorial (A wisely careful approach on ‘public option’), “One possible answer to also keep in mind: a public option might not work here given other states’ lackluster experience and the potential to upend Minnesota’s other pioneering efforts to keep coverage affordable.”