Hours before the president was to outline his latest vision for health care reform, Philadelphia health care executives gathered to look closely at reform proposals, seeking to “separate fact from fiction,” according to organizers.

Vince Phillips

Vince Phillips, a contract lobbyist for the Pennsylvania Association of Health Underwriters, and Scott Crane, PAHU’s legislative chairman, tried in the two-hour session before about 80 people in the Radnor Hotel in St. Davids, Pa., to explain some of the more important and controversial aspects of the three bills under consideration in Congress. The meeting was held for the organization’s corporate sponsors.

Speaking before the Greater Philadelphia Association of Health Underwriters, Phillips and Crane addressed the controversial public option plan, whether a single-payer system is likely and how reform might affect the uninsured.

Phillips said the much-heralded Massachusetts health reform program has resulted in much greater utilization as more people have access to insurance. At the same time, costs have increased to cover the growing number of people seeking care and the state has had to seek federal assistance several times. Doctors have shied away from the plan, creating backlogs in care, Phillips said.

He suggested that this “entitlement sense” could be one result of federal health care reform.

The public option, where a government health care provider would compete with private insurers, could lead the U.S. to a single-payer system, where government would provide all insurance coverage, he said.

“You set the rules so that employers will say they can’t afford this and look at the public option,” Phillips told the audience.

He called the public option “a strategic weigh station toward single-payer,” noting that President Barack Obama has said he would have sought the single-payer system from the start if he were to lead reform efforts anew. Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat and speaker of the House, has said she will not accept a plan without a public option.

The public option would hurt private insurers, who compete for about half of the state’s population, Phillips said. Private insurers pay a 2% premium tax in Pennsylvania; a public plan would not. They must provide the coverage mandated by state law, while a private plan would be required to provide only the coverage mandated by the federal government.

The leaders suggested that efforts that do not address cost will not succeed.

“If it isn’t addressing costs, it isn’t solving the problem,” Phillips said. “If you want to target health reform, target health costs.”

Agents need to become more active in explaining to their clients the value they provide because a single-payer system and possible other options under consideration could eliminate the role of insurance agents.

“You take your role out of the system and you are calling an 800 number,” Crane said.

Phillips explained that agents’ involvement in the process is lacking.

“The work you do is central to the client, but invisible,” Phillips said. “Because it is invisible, legislators don’t understand it. They see it as an administrative cost.”

Health care reform will be addressed again by the GPAHU at its Oct. 2 annual conference.