Our Views: A final act in OGB battle

While there’s been a long political battle over privatization of a state office that oversees insurance benefits for state workers and retirees, the bottom line is pretty simple.

Does Louisiana remain the only state, other than Utah, that has not contracted out these services?

Gov. Bobby Jindal seeks to put day-to-day management over all the state’s policies under Blue Cross Blue Shield of Louisiana. That would eliminate the jobs of 177 employees in the Office of Group Benefits, who have been managing — apparently, quite efficiently — the preferred-provider policies. Other types of policies, though, have been contracted out for years.

Jindal critics have questioned the estimated $20 million in cost savings from private management, essentially from layoffs, and certainly the administration should have to document that assertion when legislative committees consider this week whether to approve the Blue Cross contract.

At the end of the day, though, isn’t this one of the back-office operations that can be performed in the private sector? The state will remain responsible for oversight of services and premium rates.

The experience of just about every state should be heeded, unless there is found to be a very good reason to emulate Utah.

Comments

1) Comment by tradewinns - 02/11/2012

not so MGBFU; i don't know what the cost or savings is on privatizing/in-house handling of the fund, BUT, if everyone is doing it, there may be a savings there. it's worth looking into. jindal says it will save $20M, if that's wrong, don't just say that's wrong, prove it!

2) Comment by Mygulfbleedsforu - 02/11/2012

@ tradewinns, to be honest, your post sounds like "no matter what The Advocate says, you will find fault with it." This opinion piece clearly says to me that The Advocate disagrees with the Jindal critics on this issue. As for me, I hear my mother's caution: "Just because everyone else does it ..." I personally think that's about the last reason for making such a change from a system that everyone agrees operates efficiently.

3) Comment by DMJ - 01/11/2012

Jindal will get the credit for the budget "savings" and Obama will get the blame for the layoffs. Just watch...

4) Comment by shad-o - 01/11/2012

You guys might have an actual point if the current system as run by the state was not being run efficiently and at a minimum of cost. Just because most other states have privatized doesn't mean we should. That's not a good reason, that's just an excuse to allow yet more privatization for no reason.

5) Comment by DMJ - 01/11/2012

The Jindal administration is one in which public money is funnelled to private, for-profit corporations...at a higher cost, long-term. Public schools, hospitals, insurance, prisons. People are getting rich. Meanwhile, we're cutting hundreds of millions of dollars from health care and higher education while giving away billions (with a B) in subsidies, exemptions and cuts. It's insane.

6) Comment by tradewinns - 01/11/2012

advocate, don't you have any shame? regardless of what gov. jindal does, you find fault. if he wants to privatizes something, you are against it. if something is kept in-house, you are against it. perhaps you could publish a list of what the newspaper thinks should be in-house and what should be privatized. then gov. jindal would have a shot at joining you.