**Related Posts**
HEALTHCARE 4 ALL PA-PUSH - Southwestern PA chapter of Healthcare 4 all PA
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Medicare Birthday Celebration Tomorrow at Sen. Casey's Office
**Related Posts**
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Sandy Fox campaigning to make TIAA-CREF more Socially Resposible on Healthcare
Sandy Fox, Co Chair of the Western PA Coalition for Single Payer Healthcare, has been campaigning for the educational retirement fund TIAA-CREF to divest from private health insurers. Below is a press release from Healthcare-Now on her efforts.
--
Sandy Fox
Co-Chair, Western PA Coalition for Single-Payer Healthcare
www.WPaSinglePayer.org
TIAA-CREF shareholders meeting hears call to divest from ‘unethical’ private health insurers
Shareholder’s comments provoke response from company’s president
News release, Healthcare-NOW!, July 17, 2013
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Having suffered an earlier rejection by the leadership of TIAA-CREF of a shareholders resolution calling on the huge, nonprofit investment company to divest its funds from private health insurance firms because of the latter’s “unethical behavior,” a spokesperson for the divestment group took the microphone at the organization’s annual meeting Tuesday and urged just such a course of action.
Shareholder Sandra Fox, speaking on behalf of herself and others who have appealed to TIAA-CREF to divest its holdings in WellPoint and other giant health insurers, said such firms are not managed in an “exemplary and ethical manner” – a criterion for inclusion in the company’s portfolio – and therefore should be scrapped.
Going into to the meeting, Fox said: “The practices of these companies are anything but socially responsible. They make money by denying coverage, raising premiums, and increasing co-pays and deductibles, deterring patients from seeking care. Their everyday operations result in high overhead expenses, spiraling health care costs, worsening health, premature loss of life, and bankruptcy of countless Americans.”
Speaking from the floor to her fellow shareholders, she reiterated those points and stressed that the big health insurers have been repeatedly cited and fined by regulatory bodies and the courts for improper, unethical conduct.
Roger Ferguson, president and CEO of TIAA-CREF, who chaired the meeting, acknowledged Fox’s comments and said her group’s efforts had already made an impact. Ferguson said MSCI, its vendor for rating companies, had downgraded the stock of two health insurance companies based on the information her group had provided. He did not name which two companies they were.
Ferguson also said the dialogue on this issue would continue.
TIAA-CREF is one of the nation’s top financial services companies. It manages retirement, life insurance and other funds for people in academic, medical, faith-based and cultural fields. Its annual meeting was held today at its gated office complex in Charlotte.
Fox, a longtime social worker who lives in Pittsburgh, cited the findings of Harvard Medical School research and the congressional testimony of insurance industry whistleblowers to support her charge that private health insurers are not serving the public interest, but in fact are doing serious harm.
She is part of a larger national movement, the Divestment Campaign for Health Care, which is supported by Healthcare-NOW!, the national single-payer health care advocacy organization, and whose website is HealthCareNotWealthfare.us.
On their website, the group says the private companies should be replaced by a single-payer, improved-Medicare-for-all system, which “would provide excellent coverage to all by taking the private health insurance companies out of the equation and putting the needs of patients before profit.”
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Having suffered an earlier rejection by the leadership of TIAA-CREF of a shareholders resolution calling on the huge, nonprofit investment company to divest its funds from private health insurance firms because of the latter’s “unethical behavior,” a spokesperson for the divestment group took the microphone at the organization’s annual meeting Tuesday and urged just such a course of action.
Shareholder Sandra Fox, speaking on behalf of herself and others who have appealed to TIAA-CREF to divest its holdings in WellPoint and other giant health insurers, said such firms are not managed in an “exemplary and ethical manner” – a criterion for inclusion in the company’s portfolio – and therefore should be scrapped.
Going into to the meeting, Fox said: “The practices of these companies are anything but socially responsible. They make money by denying coverage, raising premiums, and increasing co-pays and deductibles, deterring patients from seeking care. Their everyday operations result in high overhead expenses, spiraling health care costs, worsening health, premature loss of life, and bankruptcy of countless Americans.”
Speaking from the floor to her fellow shareholders, she reiterated those points and stressed that the big health insurers have been repeatedly cited and fined by regulatory bodies and the courts for improper, unethical conduct.
Roger Ferguson, president and CEO of TIAA-CREF, who chaired the meeting, acknowledged Fox’s comments and said her group’s efforts had already made an impact. Ferguson said MSCI, its vendor for rating companies, had downgraded the stock of two health insurance companies based on the information her group had provided. He did not name which two companies they were.
Ferguson also said the dialogue on this issue would continue.
TIAA-CREF is one of the nation’s top financial services companies. It manages retirement, life insurance and other funds for people in academic, medical, faith-based and cultural fields. Its annual meeting was held today at its gated office complex in Charlotte.
Fox, a longtime social worker who lives in Pittsburgh, cited the findings of Harvard Medical School research and the congressional testimony of insurance industry whistleblowers to support her charge that private health insurers are not serving the public interest, but in fact are doing serious harm.
She is part of a larger national movement, the Divestment Campaign for Health Care, which is supported by Healthcare-NOW!, the national single-payer health care advocacy organization, and whose website is HealthCareNotWealthfare.us.
On their website, the group says the private companies should be replaced by a single-payer, improved-Medicare-for-all system, which “would provide excellent coverage to all by taking the private health insurance companies out of the equation and putting the needs of patients before profit.”
--
Sandy Fox
Co-Chair, Western PA Coalition for Single-Payer Healthcare
www.WPaSinglePayer.org
**Related Posts**
Sunday, July 7, 2013
Obama on the Employer Mandate: ". . . never mind"
The Obama administration quietly announced on Tuesday that there will be a one-year delay—until after the 2014 midterm elections—in the implementation of the employer mandate, the provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that requires employers with 50 or more employees to provide them with health care coverage or pay a fine. The decision leaves intact the individual mandate, which requires most Americans to have health care in 2014 or pay a tax penalty. Employers get a reprieve, but not workers.
Not surprisingly, Republicans are trying to exploit the obvious unfairness of postponing the employer mandate but not the individual mandate. House Speaker John Boehner asked, "Is it fair for the president of the United States to give American businesses an exemption from this health care law's mandates without giving the same exemption to the rest of America? Hell no, it's not fair." Republicans are calling for cancellation of the individual mandate as well, knowing full well that this will bring down the entire ACA. You can't have guaranteed issue—health insurance available to all regardless of preexisting conditions—without the individual mandate.
You may also be interested in reading:
The New York Times quotes Sara Rosenbaum, professor of health policy at George Washington University, as follows: “I am utterly astounded. . . . This step could significantly reduce the number of uninsured people who will gain coverage in 2014.” It's hard to say at this point how many people will lose coverage. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that there are 230,000 firms with 50 or more employees who do not offer health insurance, employing about 1.4 million workers. It's unlikely that many of them will voluntarily offer coverage with the penalty for noncompliance removed. It's even possible that some companies that currently offer health care will drop it in 2014.
What will happen to those workers? They will be required to find coverage on their own or pay a fine. Those who do will most likely pay more for comparable insurance. One of the arguments in favor of the employer mandate is that businesses can negotiate a cheaper group rate than workers can obtain on their own. Those workers with lower incomes—$88,000 or less for a family of four—may be eligible for government subsidies, which is why some critics are complaining that this decision will cost the government money. However, the whole issue of subsidies quickly becomes very complicated. For example, people who would have been eligible for Medicaid under the ACA, but whose states—like Pennsylvania—rejected Medicaid expansion, will not be eligible for any subsidy, even though others in their states with higher incomes will be. We won't know until after the fact how many Americans will lose coverage, and therefore, how many will die, as a result of this action.
 |
Photo by seiuhealthcare775nw
|
It seems likely that this decision will help to reinforce a central part of Obama's legacy: his reputation as a wimp who caves in easily to political pressure. Of course, in this case, the pressure came from a powerful source—U. S. corporations with 50 or more employees. These are the “corporate persons” who control both mainstream political parties—who, in effect, run the country.
Newspaper accounts attribute the postponement in part to threats from companies hovering around the 50 employee mark to lay off full-time workers or not hire new ones in order to avoid the employer mandate. But that threat is unlikely to go away next year, especially since Obama has caved in several times on various provisions of the law. Republicans, sensing weakness, are again calling for repeal of the ACA. It's certain to be an issue in the 2014 Congressional elections. Americans for Prosperity, the Koch brothers' advocacy group, is rolling out an aggressive new advertising campaign next week attacking Obamacare. “We think that once we incorporate the new bullet points about how the president is already delaying key aspects of the law, it will be even more effective,” said Tim Phillips, the group's president.
Of course, it was a huge mistake to ever merge health insurance with employment. Dave Steil, President of Health Care for All PA, has written about how inconvenient the employer mandate is for businesses. It may discourage the creation of small companies. It introduces needless and expensive complexity into the system—which is one of the things businesses are now complaining about. It distorts labor markets, for example, by giving employers reasons to discriminate on the basis of age, income and health status. It reduces individual choice, since your employer determines your coverage. It encourages employers to meddle in their employees health decisions, for example, by refusing to cover abortion. It reduces tax revenue, since the cost of coverage is tax-exempt. This in turn encourages overly generous coverage for highly paid employees—the kind that pays $100 a month for gym memberships. All of these problems could have been avoided with a single payer system that provides uniform coverage for everyone.
Update (7/12/13):
Not surprisingly, Republicans are trying to exploit the obvious unfairness of postponing the employer mandate but not the individual mandate. House Speaker John Boehner asked, "Is it fair for the president of the United States to give American businesses an exemption from this health care law's mandates without giving the same exemption to the rest of America? Hell no, it's not fair." Republicans are calling for cancellation of the individual mandate as well, knowing full well that this will bring down the entire ACA. You can't have guaranteed issue—health insurance available to all regardless of preexisting conditions—without the individual mandate.
This latest Republican gambit is outrageously hypocritical. They bend over even further for corporate America than the Democrats. And just yesterday, Boehner and his gang once again ground their heels into the faces of the poor by refusing to fund the food stamp program.
Tom Corbett to PA's Working Poor: "Drop Dead!" Part 3. What Medicaid Expansion Would Mean to Pennsylvania
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Pennsylvania's New Fiscal Year Without Expanded Medicaid
Via: The Advisory Board Company
The Fiscal Year (FY) begins every July 1 in every state, the Federal FY begins October 1. This year the legislature passed and the governor signed a $28.4 billion budget. The Republican controlled State Senate voted 40-10 to include Medicaid (sponsored by House Republican Dan Moul of Adams and Franklin county) expansion in the budget (where the federal government would pick up 100% of the tab for the first three years). These Republicans joined all Senate Democrats in voting yea:
Baker
Browne
Corman
Erickson
Greenleaf
Gordner
Mensch
Pileggi
Rafferty
Scarnati
Smucker
Tomlinson
Vogel
Waugh
Yaw
However the House voted 108-94 to remove and recommit this amendment (with Rep. Moul voting yea) to the Public Welfare Code with Gov. Corbett still declaring his opposition. All Democrats plus two Republicans (DiGirolamo and Harkins) voted nay.
The Pennsylvania Health Access Network promises that the battle is not over. Their arguments for Medicaid expansion are very similar to those for Single Payer. If some Republican legislators can be persuaded to vote for Medicaid expansion, maybe they can on Single Payer. This is a good case of the level of polarization in the PA legislature.
**Update**
MSNBC's Chris Hayes talks about Gov. Corbett's refusal to support Medicaid expansion. He interviews the head of the National Association of Free and Charitable Clinics about it's effect on the poor.
**Related Posts**
Medicaid Expansion Update
Monday, July 1, 2013
Biweekly Vigil at Sen. Casey's Office to Protect Social Secutiy and Medicare
The Western PA Coalition for Single Payer Healthcare will be holding a vigil this Friday, July 5 and every other Friday. It will be led by Ed Cloonan and details are below.
JOIN WITH US TO STOP THE ASSAULT ON
SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE!
FRIDAY PICKETLINE/VIGILS
Senator Bob Casey’s Office
Regional Enterprise Tower
425 Sixth Avenue
Pittsburgh 15219
12 Noon – 1PM
June 21
July 5
· Real wages have fallen since 2008, corporations are sitting on a record cash hoard of upwards of 1.78 TRILLION dollars and corporate profits after taxes were 1.7 billion last quarter, yet both major parties want to gut Social Security and Medicare.
· Democrats in the US Senate are a majority and can stop these cuts to essential programs!
· ELIMINATING THE CAP ON THE TAXABLE INCOME FOR SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS NOW SET AT $113,700 WILL HELP ELIMINATE ANY SHORTFALLS FOR DECADES
· OVER 70 % OF THE PUBLIC STRONGLY REJECTS ALL PROPOSALS TO CUT SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE.
· CALL OR WRITE SENATOR CASEY AND DEMAND THAT HE TAKE A PLEDGE TO VOTE AGAINST ANY CUTS TO SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE
WASHINGTON DC – 866-802-2833 ---- PITTSBURGH 412- 803-7370
Sponsored by:
Western PA Coalition for Single Payer Healthcare
www.WPa Singlepayer.org
Save Our Community Hospitals
PA Green Party
For more information:
Ed Grystar egrystar@aol.com 412-215-4141
Tony Buba bolex12@yahoo.com 412-351-4808
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)