Posted by Tom Mattis on March 12, 1999 at 18:51:32:
In Reply to: Thanks, but no thanks. posted by john Lewis on March 12, 1999 at 18:01:47:
Mr. Lewis,
We set out to eliminate those activities that do
not need to be performed by government. We are not
an insurance company and we do not process
claims. Claim closure is a claims processing
function and we see little purpose in using
public money to continue doing work for insurance
companies.
What we do is regulate and enforce the law and
resolve disputes. If someone is unhappy with the
laws we enforce, only the Legislature can change
them.
SB 220 does not give us extra time and money.We
will eliminate all staff positions associated with
claim closure in a gradual phase-out ending June
30, 2001. That will reduce our budget (the money
the legislature authorizes us to use) by $300,000
for 1999-2001 and by $1,300,000 for each biennium
beyond. We will not have any new time or money,
because both the positions and the money is taken
out of our budget. They will be gone. However, we
will also be adding two additional auditors who
will join our 13 auditors to audit insurance
companies, as we do now.
I don't expect you or anyone else to "get behind"
legislation that they do not support, and I did
not ask for that, did I? However,I DO expect
people who want to make a change to make a serious
effort to understand what they are taking a
position on,for or against. I believe that is
especially true if you want to have influence with
legislators, MLAC members or others who have the
ability to make changes in the system.
I am happy to provide information to anyone about
SB 220 or any other matter for which we are
responsible, if understanding is what you
seek.
In the end, you have to ask yourself whether being
angry or sarcastic towards everyone who has a
different view from yours is going to help or
hurt your effort to change the system. In my
experience, you cannot expect those you attack to
help you reach your goals. They will simply tune
you out.
Tom Mattis