'These Hearings Drive Me Crazy, Too': Mark DeSaulnier Gets Real With Experts Ahead Of Questioning

5 months ago

At a House Education Committee hearing before the Congressional recess, Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA) asked Founder and President of FCP, LLC. Ali Khawar about budget cuts.

Transcript

00:00Ranking Member DeSaunier of California for your questions.

00:03Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And to the last comments, before the conference chair leaves,

00:10she's not listening, I'm happy to follow up in a dialogue. It's consistent with my opening

00:17statements. These hearings drive me crazy, too. As a professional healthcare patient for the last

00:2510 years, and as a former small business owner, and we've had these conversations multiple times,

00:30the chair and I, this is something that just seems so obvious. And unfortunately, our current

00:37atmosphere in the Congress doesn't bode well that we will actually come to conclusions. I would say

00:44that waiting for the IG report would be very helpful. And hopefully, the inspector general

00:50will give us a real objective way that we can make this beleaguered agency work, given that

00:57we have one investigator for every 17,500 plans. So, Mr. Quar, give a moment here to talk about the

01:06cuts and efficiencies. And I would be interested in hearing from private employers, if you're not

01:13going to fund a program to make it efficient, why would you surprise it doesn't work well? So,

01:19talk about the budget cuts, and then if you could talk about this, it was Brandeis who said sunshine

01:27is the best antidote. But how do we get to that point where it's efficient so everybody has it? This

01:34nefarious idea that somehow the employees are getting information. And as you said to Mr. Scott's

01:41comments, that's not your history. You're trying to help with a settlement that is both efficient and

01:49is acceptable to both parties. So, speak to both. Cutting the budget, and then we added money in the

01:55No Surprise Act, so that helped the budget. Speak to the budget problems, but then this accusation from

02:02the majority that there are nefarious things going on that benefit the one side as opposed to working with

02:07both sides to a mutually agreed acceptable settlement and conclusion. Thank you. I will do my best in

02:16the remaining time to answer all of that. On the budget cuts, I mean, I think it is ironic to have

02:25a conversation about additional reporting at a time when the agency's personnel has been cut so much. And

02:32the budget cut is important to understand in the context of the personnel cuts that it creates.

02:39If the agency can only support 640 employees, all told, which is what the FY26 budget request is for,

02:47that is not just 640 investigators. That's the investigators, that's economists, that's reg writers,

02:54that's benefits advisors, that's also people that handle personnel, travel, those kinds of things.

03:00There's an accounting function. It is everything that the agency does in 640 people. And at its peak,

03:07the agency had close to 1,000. So it is, in that context, tiny for the obligations that it has.

03:16And the timeliness problem is going to get worse. And I just wish the conversation we were having,

03:24it's not coming at a point where the agency has been given a fair chance to do everything that it can

03:29to close investigations in a timely manner, for example. Instead, it's been resource starved.

03:34It's been trying to figure out how to make do with less and less and less. And one function is that

03:40investigations are going to take longer. That is going to be another consequence of the budget cuts.

03:46That's going to be another consequence. On this issue of, you know, the trust and the relationship between

03:55the agency and its various stakeholders. I mean, I have a few thoughts. First is, just as Mr. Golombik,

04:05you know, observed in his opening statement that, you know, he doesn't view the agency as playing the same

04:12role that it used to. I would say the same is true of the private defense bar in particular,

04:18which has become, over the years, far more antagonistic. Another cause of untimely investigations

04:23is that the private defense bar increasingly tells their clients that they shouldn't cooperate with

04:30EBSA. They shouldn't help us get to the bottom of it. What we really want to do is get in, get the

04:35documents, figure out the problem, fix it, and move out. The agency's goal is to solve problems

04:41voluntarily. It's in no one's interest for the agency to start bringing lawsuits on everything.

04:46And what we want to try and do is have an efficient process that works for plan sponsors,

04:52works for the agency, but importantly also works for participants and make sure that their rights

04:57are actually being realized. Thank you. I yield back.

05:03All right. The gentleman yields, and I think we have no more questions.

05:09I want to now recognize the, well, first I'll give my closing statement and then,

05:22well, actually, the ranking member gives his closing statement. Would you like to close

05:28out your side? You did a good job on questions, by the way.

05:31Oh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Collegiality. Maybe it'll come back, Mr. Banducci.

05:36And then you can come back as well. Well, I do appreciate that. And although I,

05:41we've had some serious disagreements, this is something I think it would really be constructive,

05:47Mr. Chairman, to have a conversation about. With the increase in denials that we had hearings

05:53about in this subcommittee over the last couple of sessions, your predecessor, Mr. Good, who is no

05:58longer a member of Congress, we actually worked to try to make corrections in a bipartisan way. But it's so

06:05important. If people are going to be, not be able to access Medicaid, and we have more denials in the

06:14private, in the employer-employee section, having bet on the governing body of a public hospital,

06:21you know where people are going to end up. They're going to end up in the emergency room with critical

06:26care. So if we don't get this right, it affects the whole system. If you cut police, unfortunately,

06:33there are going to be people who do bad things. You've got to have the appropriate level of funding

06:40so that people like Mr. Kawar can work in good faith with both parties. So I would just say,

06:45Mr. Chairman, there's an opportunity here. I'm afraid that ethical behavior more and more in our

06:51culture, politically and business-wise, is making it harder for us to get people to do the right thing

06:57without regulators. And just consistently underfunding and demeaning public sector employees who are

07:07doing a good job doesn't help the situation. And from my perspective, as opposed to our conversations

07:14about our experience in the business sector, it's eroding the level of trust. And in this case,

07:20where you've got denials going up and the efficiency of the system unfortunately not working,

07:28it would be really a wonderful opportunity for us to work together to see if we could fix

07:34some of the challenges we have. And just defunding it and blaming the people who are left,

07:38I don't think speaks well to our institution as trying to engage in problem solving. Mr. Banducci,

07:46Mr. Kawar, I have the feeling in a former setting, the two of you could go into a room and negotiate a

07:51lot of this for everybody's benefit, particularly all of the American taxpayers, consumers, and high

08:01road business owners, both public and private. So with that, Mr. Chairman, these bills don't solve

08:07the problem. I would argue that it would be better for us to take a deep breath, wait for the inspector

08:14general's report, and engage in constructive, bipartisan, heavy work of legislating in good

08:21faith to see if we can fix the situation before we make it worse. And I will yield back.

'These Hearings Drive Me Crazy, Too': Mark DeSaulnier Gets Real With Experts Ahead Of Questioning

Category

Transcript

Be the first to comment

Recommended