A bill that would have taxpayers underwrite what amounts to a new government-run insurance agency is not the way to make health insurance plans more affordable for small employers, says Rep. Beverly Woods, who voted against the passage Monday night of House Bill 2069.
   “Every health insurance plan sold in Washington must cover 47 different medical services. Apparently the majority party finally recognizes that so many requirements are putting the cost of health insurance beyond the reach of small employers. But the answer isn’t for government to become an insurance broker, and compete with the private insurers,” said Woods, R-Kingston.
   “We should allow private insurers the flexibility to finally offer employers’ access to lower-cost, less restrictive health plans,” said Woods. “If more people are insured through employers, fewer people would need to rely on the Basic Health Plan, and there’s no need for a new government insurance agency.”
   Woods is a sponsor of House Bill 1686, a comprehensive health care reform bill that would include a moratorium on new required health benefits and require an independent cost-benefit analysis of the 47 benefits already required. That bill died in the House Health Care Committee.
   Woods noted HB 2069 is among the bills passed March 5 by the House Appropriations Committee without a “fiscal note” to estimate the cost of implementing the measure.
   “Supporting a government-run insurance brokerage is a greater risk than the taxpayers should be expected to bear,” Woods said. “We should keep the state out of the way and let the free market provide the solutions. Unfortunately, expanding government and government control seems to be the theme of this session so far.”