Last week, I had a brief chance to speak with Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones, and before he and I had to attend to other matters, he briefly stressed the importance of AB-52's pre-increase rate regulation. The first thing that you have to consider, of course, is that AB 52 would greatly expand the Insurance Commissioner's power. Now, Jones has been pushing the bill even when Poizner was calling the shots, so there must be something else.
That something else is the poor division between the Department of Insurance, which Jones heads, and the several other departments in the executive branch that manage health insurance. When it comes down to it, the elected Commissioner, under the current system, actually has relatively little power in that whole process. AB 52, at its core, is a simple regulation that would give the Dept. of Insurance the power to block unreasonable rate increases.
For an industry that has some rather unclean hands, it unsurprisingly fighting this tooth and nail. It is a majority vote measure, so they must rely on a few Democrats to hold up the process.
Tomorrow's vote is the Senate Health Committee, and under normal circumstances, with two co-authors of the bill on the committee, would likely get at least a party line vote. But these are hardly normal circumstances, and many of these Democratic Senators have a insurance money habit that is quite hard to break. nyceve has a diary up at dKos with the names and numbers of the Senators on the Committee, which you can also find below the fold. If I had to prioritize my calls, I would go Hernandez, Alquist, Rubio, de Leon, Wolk, DeSaulnier, in that order. But, if you are a constituent of any of these Senators, please, please call them right away.
There will be more work to go to get this through the Senate, and then pressuring the Governor to sign it. However, this important first step should not be neglected. Get those phone calls in as soon as possible.
Los Angeles Times business columnist Mike Hiltzik offers a stark choice to state legislators in his Wednesday column. What'll it be, has asks: the millions of dollars that the insurance industry pours into your campaigns and treasure chests, or the millions of Californians battered by health premiums that kill the family budget or company benefits account? Plus the 8.2 million Californians with no health insurance at all?
The health insurance industry's lobbying muscle in the California Legislature is legendary. It's the reason that the state's insurance commissioner remains all but toothless to reject outrageous spikes in health insurance premiums and rates, unlike in a majority of other states. So it's not a shock that a new version of a bill to let the state insurance commissioner reject or modify health insurance premiums barely squeaked through the state Assembly's Appropriations Committee late last week with the minimum 9 votes.
Can you hear Blue Cross screaming in the distance? Vermont is about to hit the road toward a real (if modified) single-payer health care--Medicare, but for everyone. Cut out the middlemen, save some money, cover more people.
Washington D.C. -- It's hard to imagine that a briefing on rate regulation and a new Consumer Watchdog report would draw a fascinated audience, but this is DC. Journalists and nonprofit advocates spent 90 minutes Wednesday as Sen. Dianne Feinstein and an expert panel made an impassioned call for getting health insurance companies under control with tough regulation of the rates they can charge. As the senator put it, without mincing a single word:
“While insurance premiums continue to spiral out of control, CEO's paychecks are getting bigger, and insurance companies are spending less on medical care and more on profits. Today, in 17 states including California, state regulators do not have authority to block or modify insurance rate increases that are excessive, unjustified, or discriminatory. In order to protect consumers from skyrocketing insurance premiums, state regulators need this explicit authority to ensure rates are justified. This is why I have introduced the Health Insurance Rate Review Act of 2011, and why I have endorsed state legislation in California, AB 52, to close this loophole.”
by California Labor Federation Communications Organizer Rebecca Greenberg
Most of us are familiar with the popular bumper sticker, “Labor Unions – The folks who brought you the weekend.” And yes, unions did play a pivotal role in the creation of the five-day work week. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
Over the last 170 years, labor unions have done a whole lot more than just establishing the weekend. We’ve effectively served as the first line of defense against the corporations and politicians that seek to exploit working class families. We’ve fought tirelessly for better treatment for workers from all walks of life. And we’ve won some major victories along the way on issues that affect working families every day.
From improved wages to safer working conditions to fairness and equality in the workplace, the policies championed by labor unions benefit all working families, regardless as to whether they themselves belong to a union.
Most of Labor’s major accomplishments have become so engrained in our daily lives that it’s hard to imagine a time without them. In honor of May Day, which is celebrated around the world as International Workers’ Day, here are just a few of the hard-fought victories of the labor movement that we often take for granted:
Child labor laws. Nowadays, the idea of young children working in dangerous and hazardous conditions is uniformly appalling, but as recently as the early 20th century, child labor was all too commonplace. In 1881, the very first American Federation of Labor (AFL) national convention passed a resolution calling on states to ban children under 14 from all gainful employment, which motivated states to take action and pass child labor policies, and that led up to the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act – the first federal law in the nation to prohibit child labor.
Occupational health and safety. Prior to 1970, firefighters, mineworkers, those who work around dangerous chemicals and just about everyone else had absolutely no health and safety protections at work. But all that changed when labor unions successfully urged President Nixon — a conservative Republican — to sign the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the first comprehensive federal legislation that regulates safety in the workplace. OSHA has provided the basis for more reforms in occupational health, including mine safety laws and standards for workers who are exposed to toxic chemicals. Unions continue to work daily to enforce OSHA’s regulations, and also to expand and refine safe protections for all workers.
The eight-hour day. During the industrial revolution of the late 1800’s, workers often toiled for 14 or 16 hours at a stretch with no overtime pay. In May of 1886, a labor strike for the eight-hour day led to the now infamous Haymarket Square riot, where striking workers lost their lives standing up for the core labor ideal of “eight hours for work, eight hours for rest, and eight hours for what we will.” Workers and unions fought for decades for this basic right, and the eight-hour day finally became reality for all workers in 1938 with the passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Here in California, we succeeded in securing a strong daily overtime law, and we continue every day to fight to protect this basic right.
So Arizona Senator Jon Kyl went and did a stupid thing the other day by claiming on the floor of the Senate that 90% of what Planned Parenthood does is related to abortions, and that, by God, we need to cut that Federal funding for abortions, and we need to cut all Federal funding for Planned Parenthood-and we need to do it today.
Of course, that 90% claim was total hooey; it turns out that only 3% of Planned Parenthood's work relates to abortions. (The Federal funding for abortions part is, too; the Hyde Amendment made such funding illegal decades ago.)
When confronted, Kyl's office released a statement claiming the Senator's comments were "not intended to be a factual statement".
Sir Rev. Dr. Stephen T. Colbert, DFA, decided to have a bit of fun with Kyl, and he challenged his audience to Tweet their own "Not Intended To Be A Factual Statement" about Kyl.
I decided to compose a Tweet of my own...and then another...and before I knew it I had an entire story's worth; that's why, today, we'll be taking a taking a short break from the daily grind to have a bit of fun with a man who truly deserves it: Jon Kyl.
Some people don't want to wear a prescription eyeglass because they think that the design is ordinary and even sometimes old fashion. On the other hand, they have to face that the price of prescription eyeglass is very expensive. So, what is the solution for this kind of problem? Actually, you can try to check the latest prescription eyeglasses from Zenni Optical. To solve the first problem, this online eyeglass store is ready with up to date prescription eyeglass even your friends will not realize that you are wearing a prescription eyeglass. Moreover, if you think the price of the eyeglass is even more expensive so you are wrong.
What you need to know that this website is ready with cheap eyeglasses including $6.95 prescription eyeglasses. Just a little idea for those who still don't have Valentine's Day gift for your beloved one, you can choose to buy one of Valentine's Day glasses available there. It is considered as a great gift because you can ask your beloved one to wear a prescription eyeglass which is good for them. The most important thing is that the price is affordable and you can buy it right away. Just visit ZenniOptical.Com for more information and you can just choose your favorite eyeglass from their online catalog.
In the year since President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) into law on March 23, 2010, a sea of ink and digital bits have been spilled on every possible angle of commentary and advocacy about the law. But a year later, one simple conclusion deserves its share of sunshine: Health Reform is good for America's 74 million children.
The Good News: Insurance companies are no longer able to deny any child health coverage for chronic conditions. Common conditions such as asthma or diabetes were previously excuses for refusing coverage, even though these are the conditions that most often require health care for children. These diagnoses are grim enough to receive anyway. You can imagine the relief, now, for families who no longer have to fear whether they can get basic health insurance for their child. In California, alone, 1.1 million children and youth under age 25 have pre-existing conditions that previously would have resulted in health coverage denials.
Take, for example, this story from Celina, a MomsRising member from California. Her story demonstrates why moving forward with health care reform is critical for ensuring all kids have the chance to grow up healthy:
My child is adopted and was born with reflux and was later diagnosed with asthma. I cannot imagine what I would have done if his health was further compromised, because health insurance was denied due to a pre-existing condition. Thanks to our ability to secure ongoing health check-ups and keep his asthma under control, we have never experienced a full flare up nor have had to visit the emergency room. Which translates to many dollars saved!
Another relief to many families is that young adults can stay on their parent's insurance through the age of 26. With a struggling economy, this option can be essential for young adults who are just getting started, and especially for those for whom a gap in health coverage would be life-threatening. Here's an example from our colleagues at Young Invincibles: Sara, a 22-year-old with Type I Diabetes. After she began working a part-time job, she no longer qualified for Medicaid, and, without insurance, she would have to pay over $850 a month to control her condition. Her options are woefully limited without health reform.
When Sara found out about the cancellation of her health insurance, she tried to purchase insurance from her college campus, San Diego State University. However, after speaking with the school social worker, she found out that the plan would not work for her. It would only cover a maximum of $500 a year for over-the-counter prescriptions, nowhere near enough to meet her needs.
Looking to the private market has also not been an option. Although she works part-time while in school to help pay the rent, she does not earn nearly enough to pay the premium of a private market plan. As a result, Sara has stayed uninsured,
cobbling together various ways to maintain her health.
And it's not just these individual stories that show how the law is making a difference. After the first year, the impact of the expanded coverage can be seen in a rise in enrollment. In California alone, Health Access estimates the number of newly eligible enrollees to be 200,000. And the California Public Employee Retirement System (CalPERS) reports to have enrolled 28,000 new older children.
For children and young people, especially, the focus needs to be on wellness and prevention-and it is under the Affordable Care Act. The good news is that families cannot be required to pay co-payments for preventive screenings, a provision that will protect nearly 6 million children under age 19 in California alone. By ensuring that children receive the right vaccinations and diagnoses, more expensive health care costs down the road can be avoided. More good news: insurance companies can't just drop children when they are sick or limit the lifetime value of coverage.
And, families will finally have more control over their own lives. Without being restricted to employer-based coverage, if a child has a condition that would have been previously denied, a parent can make employment decisions that are in the best interest of their family, without risking their child's coverage.
The Challenge Ahead: If we are to reach our goal of making sure all of America's 74 million children are insured by 2014, we cannot sit back now and jeopardize these tremendous gains. We must encourage political leaders to ensure that federal funding and guidance are available for full and effective implementation of ACA.
Making health reform work for families depends on states taking thoughtful and swift action, too. At this time when states across the country are struggling with serious budget deficits, we urge elected officials along with employers and philanthropic leaders to support states as they leverage the available federal funding for implementation as soon as possible.
As debate about the law continues in Congress and in the courts, we must remind ourselves that quality healthcare is good for our kids-and every child should have the opportunity to grow up healthy.
Wendy Lazarus is the Founder and Co-President of The Children's Partnership, which advocates for improvements in child health care. Ms. Lazarus has been involved in advocacy for health coverage for all children for more than 35 years.
by California Labor Federation Policy Coordinator Sara Flocks
I have a friend, Patty, who worked as a waitress to pay her way through college. She worked hard and studied hard, so when she got sick and couldn’t get better, she just chalked it up to stress. For two years, Patty was chronically ill with mysterious and debilitating symptoms. She knew she should go to the doctor, but she didn’t have health insurance through work, and she couldn’t afford to buy insurance and pay for rent and tuition at the same time. So she never went to the doctor. Eventually, Patty ended up in the hospital, where she was diagnosed with a thyroid problem. Since she had not gotten care for so long she had to immediately have surgery, which left her with $10,000 in medical debt.
Patty is just one of the 8.4 million Californians who lack health insurance. Californians who don’t have job-based insurance are left to purchase coverage on their own in the individual market—a maze of complicated and overwhelming options hawked by giant health insurance corporations that know how to make a profit. The high cost of health coverage drives many people like Patty into the ranks of the uninsured, because they just can’t afford to buy insurance and pay rent at the same time.
Patty didn’t have health insurance. But even if she did, the rate increases proposed by Blue Shield would have priced her right out of the market. A recent report states that Blue Shield is proposing insurance premium increases as high as 86.5 percent for some policy holders and 45,500 customers will see increases over 50 percent. The total includes three rate increases in the last six months, from October, January and now another one pending in May.
Policy holders were already understandably upset over Blue Shield’s proposed 59 percent increases —so why did that figure jump to 86.5 percent? Turns out, when Blue Shield originally said 59 percent, they neglected to include the October increase in the totals—they only included the two from 2011. Oops, sorry!
Reasonable? Really? Reasonable for whom? I’m sure Blue Shield thinks its ‘reasonable’ to jack up prices during a recession when millions of Californians have lost their jobs, their homes and their savings. But I doubt that the 200,000 Blue Shield policy holders find the increase ‘reasonable.’ I doubt the people who will no longer be able to afford health care and can’t take their kids to the doctor find it ‘reasonable.’ And I highly doubt that the millions of uninsured like Patty find it ‘reasonable’ that even when they work hard at their jobs every day, they will never be able to afford to buy health insurance.
If you are seeking for drug addiction treatment then you might want to consult an expert now in regards with drug rehabilitation. Treating people with addiction is not easy; it needs professional and medical help. Therefore, prior to rehabilitation you need to seek someone who had an expertise in regards with drug treatment consultation.
Anyway, one of the best site I came across online is Unsafedrugs.com. They are indeed expert in the field of resources on drug side effects, law suits and legal help related to unsafe drugs, finding experienced Attorneys and more services based on long or short terms. Unsafedrugs.com is a boutique Drug Litigation firm that represents people injured by unsafe drugs. Therefore, if you need help or do you know someone who needs medical help and rehab from unsafe drugs, contact unsafedrugs.com today. It is not too late yet. Click the link above for more information.
The budget deal backed by the Governor moved one step closer to reality today, as it passed through committee on its way to the floor. The package still retains most of the shocking cuts to the social safety net:
After years of fighting to save health and social services for the poor and elderly, Democrats on a key legislative committee reversed direction Thursday and voted for a budget plan that makes large cuts to California's safety net. And, in a rare action, the vote sends the package to the full Legislature months before the constitutional deadline.
Lawmakers voted to limit welfare, cap the number of doctor visits for the poor, end the Adult Day Health Care program for the elderly and eliminate redevelopment agencies, among other reductions, to close California's $26.6 billion deficit. (SF Chronicle)
I've written about that "cap the number of doctor visits for the poor" proviso. And frankly, if that somehow passes, which I'm still investigating its chances now, we need to get our heads (and our consciences) examined.
Nonetheless, at this point it is pretty hard to argue that Democrats aren't giving something up. It's just that they've given up too much already.
At the National Governors Association, President Obama just threw his weight behind a bi-partisan effort in the US Senate to allow states to innovate with health reform, including adopting a public insurance system or single payer health care system by 2013 instead of 2017.
With the exception of Mary Bono Mack, California's House delegation voted down party lines last week to revoke all federal funding for Planned Parenthood. Nominally, the move was to prevent federal funding from supporting the full range of legal, reproductive choices to which women are entitled. But thanks to the long-standing Hyde Amendment compromise, federal funds cannot fund abortion services anyways. And so this move -- which will not reduce the deficit and will eliminate jobs rather than create any -- is simply a direct attack on basic primary and preventive health care.
Let's be clear. At best, the rhetoric about reproductive choice used by opponents of Planned Parenthood is an excuse; an attractive smokescreen. This is a fundamental attack on basic health services for underserved communities of all kinds throughout the country. It's a revocation of access to basic breast, cervical and other cancer screenings, basic health exams, HIV testing, contraception and birth control for many millions of Americans- including an estimated 1.4 million who would be cut off from their health care by the Pence amendment.
Well, except for Mary Bono Mack, all the California Republicans in Congress voted in favor of strip out all Title X funding from the budget. From Joan McCarter:
The war on women is full on. The House voted today, 240-185, to block all federal funding to Planned Parenthood, and to go one further, by defunding Title X entirely. A handful of "Dems" voted with Republicans to endanger the lives of women all over the nation. ...
Yep, culture of life. Cut off the means for millions of to have access to affordable birth control, thereby creating more unplanned pregnancies. Deny them affordable breast and cervical cancer screenings. Make sure they don't know how to use contraceptives, and even if they do, they don't have access to them.
Make sure that women can't get abortions safely and affordably by making sure insurance won't pay for it and hospitals can refuse to perform it, even if it means the death of the patient. These combined efforts will send more and more women into the hell created by monsters like Kermit Gosnell--the hell created by denying women access to affordable care.(dKos)
Back in my high school days, I volunteered for Planned Parenthood, in an educational program called "TACT" that aimed to educate local youth about the risks they face. The word "abortion" would come up at most once, and not in a particularly positive light. And while I was called a child murderer, I know that these are the programs that make up the heart and soul of Planned Parenthood.
Title X funding is simply imperative to the health of our nation. At a time when we are struggling to provide basic services, why would we gut a program that saves far more money than it requires? This is just another example of ideology trumping good policy under Speaker Boehner.
The largely peaceful revolution in Cairo and Americans' celebration of it raises the question:
What would it take to mount a peaceful revolution in America against the Wall Street and corporate powerhouses that have turned the government against the best interests of our people?"
Everyone is looking for ways to stretch their dollars further. There are plenty of banking products that make it easier to save, such as CDs, savings accounts and money market accounts. But did you know that your checking account can also help you reach your financial goals? It's possible when you get the best checking account interest rates. One of the first steps any savvy consumer should take is to compare checking account rates online. There are many Web sites that post the latest figures and percentages from high yield checking accounts, letting you get details on who has the best rates.
Beyond checking account rates however, you should also look at the bank's terms. Banks are willing to reward loyal customers with added perks such as unlimited check writing or withdrawals, a free check card (debit card), ATM withdrawals and online banking transfers to and from your checking account between one financial institution and another. Finally, although your checking account rates will help you earn extra money, you'll still want to protect against overdraft charges and still have the flexibility and convenience of online access. Look for a bank that consistently offers some of the most competitive checking account rates available.
One of the more astonishing proposals of the Governor's budget cuts was a "10 appointment maximum" for Medi-Cal patients.
In an effort to close the state budget gap, California health officials are proposing a "hard cap" of 10 medical visits per year for needy patients who rely on the Medi-Cal program for health care.
Some patients and health advocates are calling the strategy a "death sentence" for patients who need dialysis treatments to clean their blood or chemotherapy to rid them of cancer. The bipartisan(sic) Legislative Analyst's Office recommended a cap that also grants exemptions for certain services or conditions.
The 10-visit cap (PDF), estimated to save the state $200 million a year, would affect the 10 percent of California patients who rely most heavily on the Medi-Cal program to meet their medical needs. (California Watch)
In many ways, this cap is just as scary as the non-existant "death panels" from the health care debate. This ten-visit cap would mean death for those that are easily treated through consistent, but expensive, care.
This cut is simplistic, and not really reflective of a more thoughtful approach of tightly managing care for the most expensive patients. As of yet, nobody has acted on the Leg Analyst's suggestion, but one hopes that is something of a given. A harsh 10-appointment cap is simply unacceptable.
We are still waiting to see how the legislature acts on Brown's proposal, but I would be pretty shocked if this particular one got too far.
At any rate, why aren't we seeing Tea Party fury on this? Oh, right, this is poor people, so it's not that big of a deal.
