Straight from Salem: The road to a public option in Oregon

SB 770 passed in the Legislature, directing the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) to develop a public option plan. OHA contracted a law firm called Manatt, Phelps & Phillips to analyze possibilities for this type of plan in Oregon, leading to what is referred to now as the Manatt Report. Delayed due to the pandemic, this report was released in December 2020 and outlined three delivery models for a public option health plan, but left some specific policy questions about how to implement it unanswered.

Based on the information from the Manatt Report, Rep. Andrea Salinas (D-Lake Oswego) introduced HB 2010 into the Legislature. OSPIRG is a leading supporter of this bill and has taken on grassroots organizing through Voices for Better Care and media outreach. After its first reading HB 2010 was to the House Committee on Health Care, where it awaited a public hearing.

Some committee members and stakeholders raised specific questions about how the plan would reduce costs and be offered and accepted throughout the state. In response, HB 2010’s sponsors and supporters (including OSPIRG) worked with state agencies to answer these questions. Rep. Salinas proposed an amendment which would change the bill to instruct OHA and the Department of Consumer and Business Services to build on the Manatt Report and report back to the Legislature next year with more answers.

The House Committee on Health Care held a public hearing on HB 2010 and heard testimony from legislators, advocates, constituents, union representatives, and business owners in support of the public option. Abigail Giedd described to the Committee how she has watched her premiums and deductibles increase every year, saying “When the time comes around to choose my coverage, I feel as though I’m rolling the dice – can I make it another year with health insurance more appropriate for a healthy young person, until I reach the safety of Medicare?” Jim Houser explained how insurance costs for the nine employees of his auto repair shop in Portland equaled 20% of the total payroll, adding that, “So long as employers in this country are expected to provide health care coverage for their employees, small businesses are going to have to secure a more level playing field relative to large businesses.”

Maribeth Guarino, OSPIRG’s health care advocate, testified in favor of HB 2010 and the proposed amendment, explaining that “a public option is not a silver bullet to fix the health care system, but it is an incremental step that can help people in the short-term.” However, there were also concerns raised by advocates for an immediate switch to a universal system (a system which OSPIRG supports but a process which would be nearly impossible to do quickly due to federal laws and financial cost). 

During the same committee meeting, Rep. Cedric Hayden (R-Roseburg) testified in support of his own public option bill, HB 3381, which would offer benefit plans to public employees. After listening to testimony on both bills, Committee Chair Rep. Rachel Prusak (D-Tualatin) asked Rep. Hayden and Rep. Salinas to discuss their ideas together outside of the meeting and try to come to a consensus.

The Committee held a work session on HB 2010. Rep. Salinas and Rep. Hayden proposed a new amendment with the same intent as the first but with broader language that incorporated concepts from Rep. Hayden’s public option bill to combine their approaches. Rep. Hayden was listed as a chief sponsor on the bill as well. The Committee voted to adopt this amendment and move the bill forward, and it passed unanimously.