The Dr. Nick Interview with Matt Denn
Editors Note: I view Matt Denn’s tenure as Delaware’s Insurance Commissioner as a refreshing return to the kind of old school Democratic values that seem to have been lost by a generation of Democratic politicians. He has long been a favorite of Delaware liberal and has recently cemented his reputation around here by consenting to a quick email interview with our Dr. Nick.
Dr. Nick: So you are running for Lieutenant Governor? When you were a little kid, did you say “I want to be the Lieutenant Governor of Delaware when I grow up?”
Yes, I am running for Lieutenant Governor. When I was a little kid I wanted to play shortstop for the Phillies, but that didn’t work out. So, if elected, I promise the people of Delaware that I will spend each July at Phillies Fantasy Camp having Dallas Green yell at me to cover second when there is a ground ball to right field.
Dr. Nick: Not many people really know what the Lt. Governor does. Besides being in charge of the State of Delaware’s beatings and torture, what attracted you to the Lt. Governor’s job?
What I like about the job is that it will give me an opportunity to help shape the public discussion about some very important issues we are facing, and help move the ball forward on those issues. That is something I have done as Insurance Commissioner and I think being Lieutenant Governor will provide me with considerably more opportunity to help deal with things like public education, health insurance for all of Delaware’s children, and better programs to help our children with special needs.
Dr. Nick: Do you think the Lt. Governor should wear a uniform with really big epaulets?
I am only 5’7” or so, so I think something more longitudinal than epaulets is probably in order.
Dr. Nick: You are frequently pictured with your dog. Is that to make you look taller and more physically attractive by comparison?
If that were the case I would not allow myself to be photographed with my extremely attractive wife. I do not put my dog Lenny into the pictures — he elbows his way into them. Lenny is drawn to the camera. It is kind of like being with Paris Hilton, except he is more articulate and has fewer racy videos on YouTube.
Dr. Nick: Speaking of dogs, the state’s economic development activities have traditionally focused on humping the legs of fortune 500 companies. Why is that? What should the state do to help out small business and create real solid long term economic development?
I never thought of humping as an economic development strategy. Maybe Lenny is angling for a cabinet post.
I don’t disagree with the point you are trying to make, which is that the state should be spending more time and resources trying to recruit smaller business here and help local entrepreneurs generate their own businesses. We can’t win bidding wars with big states over particular companies, because our tax base is smaller. So we should be focusing on areas where we have a competitive advantage over others.
I don’t think that there is a lot of gimmickry involved in creating a good business environment. I have tried to do what I can from my current job, successfully getting a program in place that is going to control workers compensation rates and trying to get our General Assembly to take some steps to get small business health insurance costs under control.
As Lieutenant Governor, I think I can be of the most help in three areas: (1) bringing more focus to improving our public schools, since each and every businessperson I talk to says that a qualified, educated workforce is his or her top priority, (2) assisting the state with person-to-person recruitment of businesses to locate to Delaware, and (3) assisting local business in dealing with the hurdles they need to face in getting established.
Dr. Nick: People talk about giving 110% but they only give around 30% on a good day. For example, people think of you as a really energetic and effective Insurance Commissioner, but is that fair? The person before you just phoned it in, so you only had to give like 55% to look like a superstar. What, if anything, did you actually accomplish as Insurance Commissioner?
I think the characterization of me as a “really energetic and effective Insurance Commissioner” is unfair. I would prefer something along the lines of “really, really, really energetic and effective.”
But seriously, we have done a lot in a relatively short period of time:
* Turned down rate applications from insurance companies for the first time in over a decade; in fact we’ve turned down a bunch of them. This has resulted in an extraordinary leveling-off of auto insurance, workers comp insurance and long-term care insurance rate increases. Auto insurance is a good example. In the years before I took office, Delaware was seeing double-digit annual rate increases, double the rate of our neighboring states. Now, State Farm (our largest auto insurance company) has cut average rates, as have a number of our medium-sized carriers. One of our other largest companies will be cutting rates in the next 60 days or so. And even the rate increases which have occurred have averaged in the low single digits. So taking a more aggressive approach to rate regulation is a big deal.
* Put a new regulation in place stopping homeowners insurance carriers from canceling homeowners policies after homeowners made claims against their policies.
* Got legislation passed making it much easier and less expensive for parents to keep their 18-24 year old children on the family health insurance policy.
* Increased the fines that I could assess against insurance companies that did not treat their policyholders fairly, and then assessed significant fines against some of those carriers. The result has been a much different response when the department contacts an insurance carrier on behalf of a consumer than we got when I first took office.
* Restructured the department to place an enhanced focus on protection of consumers, including increased staffing of consumer affairs division.
* Helping doctors set up their own medical malpractice insurance entity, in order to make lower medical malpractice rates available.
* Resolved a dispute between Blue Cross Blue Shield of Delaware and AI Dupont Children’s Hospital that was jeopardizing the medical treatment of thousands of Delaware children.
* Expanded homeowners insurance available under Delaware’s FAIR plan to protect coastal homeowners who could not find affordable homeowners insurance.
* Obtained refunds for 1,400 Hartford policyholders who were overcharged because their credit scores were improperly calculated.
* And, last but not least, personally assisted scores of Delawareans with serious health insurance problems, most of them involving pre-authorizations for treatments of cancer and other life-threatening conditions.
We still have a lot of work to do with the General Assembly getting them to pass some of our bills to make health insurance more affordable and to pass the credit scoring bill that was stopped last year. But I think it’s a good list of accomplishments for 27 months in an office that a lot of people didn’t notice before I got there.
Dr. Nick: Many modern Republicans, even here in Delaware, seem to view “taxes” as the only measure of the relative success or failure of a government. If taxes go up, the government has failed, and if they go down the government has succeeded. What do you see as a “Democratic” view of a government’s success or failure?
I think the Democratic Party stands for some very basic things that should animate our approach to government. We stand for the idea that we are responsible not just for ourselves and our families, but also our neighbors. (We didn’t make that one up–it’s in the Old Testament.) We stand for the idea that every child in this state ought to be able to go as far in life as their talent and determination will take them, no matter where they may have started. And we stand for the idea that we must be especially vigilant in protecting the most vulnerable among us–the very young and the very old. If we have succeeded in creating this atmosphere of opportunity, fairness, and compassion, then we have succeeded as a government.
Dr. Nick: Thanks for agreeing to this interview, I just have one last question – Does this dress make me look fat?
Sadly, that is probably not the strangest question I will be asked today.
Tags: Delaware, Interviews, Matt Denn
Nice. This is something you’d never see in a “respectable” news outlet. Even if you mischaracterized Republicans, it was rather enjoyable.
Matt has the rare ability to be wonky and funny at the same time, though he might prefer to be called really, really, really wonky and funny.
mischaracterized Republicans? How so?
BTW – I meant to ask about Denn’s view of blogs, but it is going to be a long campaign season so I guess I’ll have another shot at it.
The taxes thing. Let me explain.
“We stand for the idea that we are responsible not just for ourselves and our families, but also our neighbors. (We didn’t make that one up–it’s in the Old Testament.)”
Republicans, generally, feel that we as individuals, collectively through neighborhoods, churches, non-profits, etc., are responsible, and Democrats, generally, think that we, collectively through our government, are responsible.
No?
It sounds like you are agreeing with the premise that Republicans view the relative success of failure of government through the lens of rising and falling taxes more that you are disagreeing with it.
I think your statement concedes the fact that the Republican view is “faith based” and founded on the hope that churches and neighbors will take the lead in creating a social safety net. We’ve seen that system fail time and again over the past six years.
The Democratic view seems more practical and pragmatic since well-run governments have better track records of protecting the vulnerable from the excesses of capitalism.
In the end the Democratic view is, in a way, more “conservative” in a classical sense. After all it is cheaper to put up a tax payer funded stop sign at a dangerous intersection than it is to “hope” everyone drives safely.
“It sounds like you are agreeing with the premise that Republicans view the relative success of failure of government through the lens of rising and falling taxes more that you are disagreeing with it.”
Actually, I see the success or failure of society through the lens of whether government involvement is necessary in the lives of people.
“well-run governments have better track records of protecting the vulnerable”
Is there evidence of this? Is there even evidence of well-run governments?
Republicans, generally, feel that we as individuals, collectively through neighborhoods, churches, non-profits, etc., are responsible, and Democrats, generally, think that we, collectively through our government, are responsible
yeah but that leaves the door open wide for cracks in the safety net with huge gaps of “outsiders” suffering potential.
Safety net knows no prejudice if administered by a body of law.
In the end the Democratic view is, in a way, more “conservative” in a classical sense. After all it is cheaper to put up a tax payer funded stop sign at a dangerous intersection than it is to “hope” everyone drives safely.
*
NICE!
I have to say that the question you just asked, Dave, is a fine reason why Republicans should not be in power. This is akin to putting John Bolton in the U.N. or a communist in charge of the SEC. Does it make any sense to put someone in a position of power that doesn’t at least believe what they are doing is worthwhile?
Evidence:
Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Lux, Denmark. All top in quality of life and many top of the list in terms of taxes.
http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/QUALITY_OF_LIFE.pdf
I actually laughed out loud at some of the determinants in that survey.
“Family life” determined entirely by the divorce rate? And how is the government responsible for the divorce rate?
Am I missing something?
“Health” determined by life expectancy? And how exactly is a government determining life expectancy?
And I didn’t see taxes on the list of determinants.
“Does it make any sense to put someone in a position of power that doesn’t at least believe what they are doing is worthwhile?”
To me, putting someone in charge who wants to rein in government intrusion, spending and size makes a lot of sense.
Maybe we’ll actually DO that some day.
“Safety net knows no prejudice if administered by a body of law.”
You keep on believing that. In fact, I’m certain you’ve seen evidence that what you say isn’t true.
We tried it with Bush. How did that work out?
You expect government to fail, and feel validated frauds, dim wits and criminals you vote for fail.
Health is often measured on a macro scale as life expectancy. This makes sense. How does government impact that? Well, those places DO have socialized medicine. We here in America pay more for our healthcare and get less. Our life expectancy is lower that most other industrialized countries, largely because our healthcare system is so broken.
How about this: Republicans care deeply about themselves, and resent any government restrictions that impinge upon their actions……Whereas, altruistic Democrats care deeply about others, and constantly feel that government itself has fallen short of living up to its potential.
And as many say. the exception proves the rule, and if that be so, then in honest appreciation, Dave Burris makes it so…….
I’d rather that D’s define D’s and R’s define R’s. I’m certainly not an exception.
LG – Health in a “quality of life” determniant has to take in more than life expectancy. Obesity rate, cancer rates, participation in sporting activity, you name it.