Congratulations on the recent passage of your Health Care Reform bill.
I'm a Voter, Blogger and a former ardent supporter you lost during the Health Care Reform debate.
Before I proceed its imperative you know I do not agree with all of the provisions listed in the HC Reform bill (now law).
However since Health Care reform was so desperately needed in our country, at least your law could be considered the framework for a future system that will work well for all legal citizens.
Mr. President in your quest for Bi-Partisanship support, it appears you procrastinated too long during the Health Care Reform bill drafting process.
This procrastination hindered your administration from focusing on Jobs and Education.
Why did you allow this to occur?
When it was evident Republicans were NOT going to support HC Reform, why didn't your administration and other Dems just pass the bill anyway? After all didn't Democrats have the majority?
Why did you wait until Scott Brown won to finally take charge?
While I do agree that having Bi-Partisan support on major legislation is of vital importance, both parties must fully cooperate and/or compromise to achieve Bi-Partisan success.
Because you allowed the GOP to kill your Health Care message, even I became Angry and began attacking your administration's weakness, or what appeared to be weakness on my Blog.
Today I wish to offer my deepest apologies but I hope while your still in office you never, ever allow such complacency on important issues to occur again.
You are our President! We believed in you! We voted for you!
Effective Leaders don't second guess themselves, over analyze situations, procrastinate, they're NOT afraid to take risks and they aren't satisfied with being in second place.
Real Health Care Reform, Education Reform, Financial Reform are the CHANGEs we voted for and are still seeking.
Again I apologize but how can you win back millions of American Voters and former supporters like myself?
How can you help make us believe in the substance of your administration's agenda and efforts again?
I live in North Carolina where Public Schools are being Re-Segregated across the board. (Wake County & Charlotte-Mecklenburg, etc.,)
NC BCBS increased their rates but decreased Patient Care & Quality of Care for their members.
(NC Blue Cross, Blue Shield (North Carolina's Health Care Insurance monopoly) increased their rates again prior to the passing of your health care reform bill.)
Will your administration just sit back and allow these injustices to continue or will you as our nation's Leader take charge?
I represent average Americans and we need help!
Please no more procrastination or political games. Please.
As a current resident of Charlotte, North Carolina I've seen enough Corrupt, Slack Leadership to last a lifetime. Now I'm ready for CHANGE.
New York isn't the only state with serious Corruption problems, North Carolina has its share too. Tons of it!
1) Crooked Campaign Finance deals, possible stolen Elections (ACORN helped NC in 2008), Unnecessary Gerrymandered Districts (12th), pushing or forcing Straight Ticket Voting from Minority Low Income citizens who are treated the worse in North Carolina (Democrats),
25) Creating Jobs for Politicians' spouses during Hiring Freezes after the vacancy is advertised for just one day,
26) Only collecting Taxes from the Middle Class & Low Income citizens, while allowing North Carolina's Wealthy White citizens and Businesses to forgo paying their taxes,
31) Not awarding NC State Contracts to Minorities,
32) Continuing to award State Contracts to Contractors with records of Shoddy Products, Terrible Service and many Consumer complaints,
33) Luring Companies to North Carolina by promising them they can pay employees very low salaries and don't have to pay Taxes,
34) Cooking the numbers of North Carolina's Public School Drop Out rates especially among Minority Students who are currently receiving an Inferior Education,
36) North Carolina Law Enforcement Officials refusing to provide the same protection for Minority citizens (Greensboro, N.C. A & T Students) as they do for White citizens and not sending out Amber Alerts for missing Black Children right away versus immediate responses for missing White Children,
37) Refusing to collect Child Support for Black Children (Charlotte) while doing so wonderfully for White Children,
39) Allowing serious Housing Discrimination to take place and dismissing numerous Complaints about Violations from Minority citizens on this issue,
40) Allowing Developers to build Shoddy homes for Minority citizens & Minority Homebuyers (Charlotte),
41) Intentionally sending raggedy City Buses into Minority communities but sending out nice, well-maintained buses to White communities while ALL riders pay the same fares (Charlotte). In Black communities the buses are often late or fail to even arrive thus hindering many Low Income people from getting to work on time.
Also securing Federal DOT & Mass Public Transportation Funding but only investing it in North Carolina's Wealthy White or Pre-Dominantly White communities,
42) Allowing North Carolina City Councils to make risky investments in the Stock Market using Taxpayer money,
43) Using Federal Neighborhood Revitalization Funds only in NC's White Communities and intentionally leaving Black Communities out of City Planning (except for West Charlotte where many Low Income Straight Ticket Voters live),
44) Terrible Age Discrimination used in NC Hiring & Firing Practices,
45) Giving Black Youth Life Sentences for committing Non-Homicidal, Non-Drug Related offenses while giving White Offenders much less jail sentences for committing worse crimes,
46) North Carolina Media organizations refusing to publish and report FACTS instead citizens keep getting Partisan Propaganda from the state's Corrupt Democrat party,
47) Allowing Bank of America to Foreclose on thousands of homes owned by Minority citizens. How? BOFA officials intentionally ignore or lose Loan Modification Applications,
48) Giving North Carolina's Black Colleges much less money than pre-dominantly White student populated Colleges & providing Financial Aid to fewer Black College Students than White College Students,
49) Refusing to provide Mental Health Counseling for Low Income Minority citizens. I'm NOT speaking of locking up people. Instead I'm referring to providing Mental Health Counseling to stop Child Abuse, Drug addictions, Alcoholism, etc.,
In North Carolina White citizens often receive State-Funded Mental Health Counseling, while Black citizens are sentenced to Prison.
50) Encouraging Low Income Women to have Abortions or to have more babies out of wedlock, in order to secure more Federal Funding from the U.S. Dept of HHS.
As you can see North Carolina Politicians within the Democrat Party can do whatever they please without any real consequences, unless your Black.
For Black North Carolina Democrats they may get a pass, they might not.
It depends upon how low their willing to go as it relates to selling out the North Carolina Black Community to help White constituents.
I find it strange the Federal Gov't is suddenly no longer getting involved while all of this obvious Corruption is being committed by NC Politicians and State Officials (all Democrats).
If this NC Democratic Party Discrimination & Corruption is not Cleaned up soon, many North Carolina Democrat and Independent Voters will be voting for Republicans come November 2010 and in 2012.
Check out the videos below to learn just how Corrupt North Carolina has become under Democrat Leadership.
Sources: NY Times, Civitas Institute, The State, WRAL, McClatchy Newspapers, Meck Deck Blog, John Locke Foundation, Conservative Blog Watch, Recovery.gov, WCNC, Youtube, Google Maps
Congresswoman Maxine Waters joins Ed Schultz on MSNBC's "The Ed Show" to discuss her concerns regarding the Senate Health Care "reform" bill and how House-Senate Conference talks might play out.
Congresswoman Waters states to Ed that via the Senate version, many states like (North Carolina) will continue running Health Care Monopolies (Blue Cross/ Blue Shield) and charging Consumers high premiums.
She then goes on to explain how (because Speaker Pelosi is caving in i.e., NO Public Option!) many Key U.S. House members (including her) are being kept out of the Conference talks which will more than likely prove to be detrimental when discussing issues like Insurance Exchanges, Taxes, etc.,
Such a foolish move by Democrat Leaders won't be good for the 2010 and 2012 elections.
The former president of a publicly traded Raleigh company is accusing NC State Sen. Tony Rand, one of the state's most powerful lawmakers, of Insider Trading and other illegal actions.
In a complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Labor, Paul Feldman, who claims he was illegally fired as president of Law Enforcement Associates in August, alleges that Rand had a scheme to profit from manipulating the value of LEA stock, Alan Wolf reports on the .biz blog.
Rand, the Fayetteville Democrat who plans to step down from the state Senate this month, has been chairman of LEA's board since 2003. The company, which makes security and surveillance equipment, was spun off in 2001 from Sirchie Finger Print Laboratories, a Franklin County company started by former state Sen. John Carrington.
In his complaint, Feldman also alleges that Rand told another LEA executive that he previously had traded the stock of Raleigh-based First Citizens Bank based on inside information he had gotten from former president Frank Holding. Rand said that he "planned to do the same to LEA stock," Feldman wrote.
Rand called the charges "insane" and "hogwash."
"He's a disgruntled ex-employee," Rand said Wednesday in a phone interview with Rob Christensen. "I'm embarrassed that Frank Holding has even been mentioned in this mess. But I guess that is part of it, when you are in business and in politics. People think you are fair game and maybe you are."
LEA disclosed Feldman's allegations, including his Nov. 17 letter to the Labor Department, in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday.
Feldman also alleges that Rand and other LEA board members violated SEC rules by falsifying minutes of board meetings and omitting information in SEC filings. He also contends that LEA sold video equipment and other products through a sister company to police in the Dominican Republic. That violated federal export laws, Feldman alleges.
Feldman wrote that he has been interviewed by special agents for the FBI and IRS related to his allegations.
Rand said he has not been contacted by any law enforcement officials. "This offends me," he added. "There's no truth to any of this."
A spokeswoman for First Citizens wasn't immediately available for comment.
LEA officials responded in its SEC filing on Tuesday that Feldman's "claims are groundless, and are an attempt by a disgruntled former executive to seek retribution from the company."
LEA "does not believe the allegations ... have any merit" and plans to "vigorously defend against these actions."
The company also wrote that Feldman was removed as CEO in August for "insubordination" and "in the face of poor performance."
Feldman claims that Rand and other LEA board members fired him in late August when he was hospitalized for two days because of a "mini-stroke" and unable to attend the meeting to defend himself. Feldman couldn't be reached for further comment.
Feldman is seeking reinstatement as CEO and president of LEA, or economic damages for lost compensation, and "damages to his career, reputation and earning capacity." Feldman had been LEA's top executive for 19 years.
The company has struggled to boost sales of its products, including under-car inspection systems, explosive detection kits and GPS tracking equipment, to law enforcement agencies, nuclear power plants, the military and other customers.
LEA moved its headquarters to Raleigh from Youngsville last year, and has been cutting costs and jobs. It now employs about 25. Chief financial officer Paul Briggs couldn't be reached for comment.
LEA reported last month that net sales fell to $1.9 million during the third quarter, down 21 percent from the same quarter last year. LEA's net loss was $99,000, compared to net income of $96,000 last year.
Its stock now trades for pennies. In 2004 and 2005, when Feldman alleges the insider-trading scheme occurred, LEA's shares surged above $4. At its peak, in January 2005, the stock closed as high as $10.86.
On Wednesday, the shares rose 4 cents to 15 cents.
Legislation to bail out the State Health Plan is expected to be back before House members Thursday, and several proposed amendments will be taken up that could further delay its passage.
House Majority Leader Hugh Holliman said one amendment would switch the plan from a fiscal year — July 1 to June 30 — to a calendar year so that members can better take advantage of health savings accounts and other cost-saving initiatives, Dan Kane reports.
Another would allow drugs that help the mentally ill to be treated the same as most drugs, instead of being labeled specialty drugs that would cost members more.
A third amendment would restore a benefit that allows members to pay the same co-payment to see a chiropractor as the family doctor. This is the same benefit that former House Speaker Jim Black inserted into the state budget four years ago and helped land him in prison when three chiropractors admitted to giving him cash payments while pushing their legislative agenda. It was later rescinded.
Holliman didn't criticize the proposals, but he said they all come with a cost.
"We're asking the sponsors where the money will come from," Holliman said.
Meanwhile, members of a state employee group are asking House lawmakers to cut out the benefit reductions that would increase co-payments and deductibles and in later years force smokers and overweight members into the most expensive coverage.
"In a year when employees are already facing possible layoffs, furloughs and a freeze in longevity pay reducing health care benefits at over $600 per member is just bad policy," said Chuck Stone, a representative with the State Employees Association of North Carolina.
Holliman, a Lexington Democrat, said putting off benefit reductions for a year would cost the plan $145 million. "With our deficit we don't have somewhere to come up with that," he said.
Holliman and Senate Majority Leader Tony Rand, a Fayetteville Democrat, have urged lawmakers to pass the bail out bill quickly to make money available to the plan before it runs out of money in the next two weeks, and to give the plan time to notify its 667,000 members of benefit reductions and other changes that would start July 1.
Holliman said if the bill gets out of the House Insurance Committee tomorrow it could still get through the chamber next week, though if it is changed it would then need Senate approval as well. The current version would cost the state's general fund roughly $660 million.
Former House Speaker Jim Black has been reunited with a former colleague and fellow felon.
Black, who is serving a 63-month sentence for political corruption, was recently moved to a federal prison in Jesup, Ga., so he could be closer to home. Both he and his wife are in poor health.
The move means that Black is now at the same prison as Kevin Geddings, whom Black appointed to the state Lottery Commission in 2005.
Geddings was convicted in 2006 of fraud for hiding his ties to a lottery vendor. He is serving a four-year sentence.
Black, a 74-year-old Mecklenburg County Democrat, held the top position in the state House for a record eight years before resigning in February 2007 and pleading guilty to state and Federal Charges.
Former House Speaker Jim Black started his journey to Lewisburg, Pa., Friday to start serving his 63-month prison sentence.
Black left the Franklin County Jail in handcuffs and boarded a van with other inmates. He will serve his sentence at a minimum-security federal prison.
The 72-year-old Mecklenburg County Democrat led the House for eight years as speaker. But in February, Black pleaded guilty to a federal felony charge of illegally taking more than $25,000 in cash from several chiropractors while pushing their agenda in the state Legislature.
On Tuesday, he was sentenced to eight to 10 months in prison and was fined $1 million on a state obstruction of justice charge. Black's state sentence will run at the same time as his federal sentence.
"It was the most foolish and stupid thing I have ever done. It embarrassed my family and the Legislature," Black said in court Tuesday. "It was improper and I knew it was improper."
On July 15th, 2009 SEANC organized a protest in front of the Blue Cross Blue Shield North Carolina headquarters in Chapel Hill. Attended by over 60 members of SEANC, HCAN, ACORN, AFL-CIO and other progressive groups, the event highlighted Blue Cross' use of taxpayers and customer money to fight against affordable health care for all.
Free health clinic attracts scores in Big Easy. Just one week after the House approved a landmark health reform bill, New Orleans residents lined up for complimentary care. NBC’s Chris Jansing reports.
Rep. Kirk touts GOP's health care ideas. Delivering the Republicans' weekly radio and Internet address, Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., promotes several provisions in the House GOP health care bill, which was rejected a week ago when the House passed the Democratic plan.
With the U.S. House expected to shortly begin debate on health care legislation, most North Carolinians believe some form of reform is needed, according to a new poll released this morning, Rob Christensen reports.
Three out of four Tar Heel residents believe the current system health care system in the United States needs reform, according to the Elon University Poll.
But North Carolinians are divided about what type of changes are needed. The survey found that 54 percent would support health insurance legislation that would include a public option and that 51 percent would use a public option if it became available.
State residents were even more divided on a national insurance plan in which the federal government pays most of the medical and hospital costs for all citizens with 47 percent favoring and 47 percent opposing it.
"Obvious from these results is that citizens recognize that the health system is in need of reform, but like most Americans, are divided over how to do it," said Hunter Bacot, director of the Elon University Poll.
The survey found that the percent of people who said they had some form of private insurance had dropped from 83 percent to 73 percent during the past year. The polls was conducted Oct. 26-29 and surveyed 703 North Carolina residents. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.8 percentage points.
Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Bob Etheridge will hold a tele-town hall on Wednesday at 7 p.m. to discuss the health care plans before Congress.
Second Cistrict residents who want to participate in the call-in can sign-up by visiting Etheridge's Web site by noon Tuesday.
(NC State employees fume over the implementation of a "Fat Tax". This appears to be another effort that will legally allow NC Health Care Insurance companies to deny coverage or deny paying eligible claims. Just because its legal (in NC) doesn't mean its still not discriminatory or unconstitutional.)
A Colorado insurance company is changing its attitude about fat babies.
Rocky Mountain Health Plans said Monday it will no longer consider obesity a "pre-existing condition" barring coverage for hefty infants.
The change comes after the insurer turned down a Grand Junction 4-month-old who weighs about 17 pounds. The insurer deemed Alex Lange – called by his parents a "happy little chunky monkey" – obese and said the infant didn't qualify for coverage.
The infant's father works at a local NBC affiliate, KKCO-TV, and news accounts about the boy's rejection made national headlines.
The insurer said Monday it would change its policy for babies who are healthy but fat. The company attributed the boy's rejection for health coverage to a "flaw in our underwriting system."
"We have changed our policy, corrected our underwriting guidelines and are working to notify the parents of the infant who we earlier denied," Rocky Mountain Health Plans said in a statement.
The company is the same insurer praised by President Barack Obama and ruling Democrats for having one of the nation's lowest Medicare reimbursement rates. The Grand Junction-based insurer grew out of an agreement by area doctors that all would accept patients using government health insurance, lowering costs.
Alex Lange's parents said they wanted to switch insurers because of rising rates but were surprised to find their youngest boy was too fat to get covered. Father Bernie Lange joked to The Denver Post that the breast-feeding infant wasn't about to start a diet or hop on a treadmill to shed pounds.
"There is just something absurd about denying an infant," Bernie Lange said.
Born at just over 8 pounds, the boy's current weight puts him in the 99th percentile for babies his age. The company says it's an industry standard to reject new patients, including babies, above the 95th percentile for weight. But it says it has never before rejected a fat baby.
The boy's mother, Kelli Lange, said her baby has had nothing but breast milk and that his brief insurance rejection didn't change how she fed him.
"I'm not going to withhold food to get him down below that number of 95," she told The Denver Post.
Smokers will feel the drag of higher costs, too, as North Carolina and South Carolina state employees who use tobacco are slated to pay more for health insurance next year.
N.C. officials, coping with a steady uptick in health care costs for state employees each year, are aiming to improve state workers' health, which saves money in medical expenses.
"Tobacco use and poor nutrition and inactivity are the leading causes of preventable deaths in our state," said Anne Rogers, director of integrated health management with the N.C. State Employees Health Plan. "We need a healthy workforce in this state. We're trying to encourage individuals to adopt healthy lifestyles."
State workers who don't cut out the Marlboros and Big Macs will end up paying more for health insurance. Tobacco users get placed in a more expensive insurance plan starting in July and, for those who qualify as obese, in July 2011.
Some state employees, though, are criticizing the planned changes. The State Employees Association of North Carolina opposes the tobacco and obesity differentials as invasive steps that could have been avoided if the legislature had fixed the plan.
"It's my understanding they're talking about testing (for tobacco use) in the workplace which, to me, would create a hostile environment," said Kim Martin, a sergeant at Piedmont Correctional Institution in Salisbury. "And it's an invasion of privacy. This is America, the land of the free. I don't think (body mass index is) a very good measure. I know some folks who would have a high body mass index because they're muscular."
The health plan covers more than 600,000 state employees, retirees and teachers at a total cost last year of $2.6 billion. Last spring, the legislature bailed out the plan with an infusion of $250 million to pay the bills after rising costs and inaccurate projections left little money for claims. Over the next two years, the state general fund will pump about $408 million into the health plan.
While officials have not yet estimated any potential savings from the obesity requirement, the higher costs for smokers could save $13 million in the 2010-2011 budget year, Rogers said, emphasizing that the plan's priority is to improve health and save money in the process.
The idea of penalizing unhealthy lifestyles and rewarding healthy conduct is hardly new among insurance plans. Public health insurance plans in other states already penalize smokers or reward nonsmokers in insurance costs. South Carolina's state employees health plan is scheduled to add a $25-per-month surcharge on smokers in January. Elsewhere in the southeast, Kentucky and Georgia impose surcharges, and Alabama gives nonsmokers a discount.
Alabama was out front on weight testing. Starting in January, state workers will have their blood pressure, cholesterol, glucose and body mass index checked by a nurse. If they're in a risk category, such as a body mass index of 35 or greater or a blood pressure of 160/100 or greater, they are charged an extra $25 per month on their insurance premium. If they go to a health screening, either offered by the state or by their personal physician, then the $25 is subtracted, according to Gary Matthews, chief operating officer for the Alabama State Employees Insurance Board.
North Carolina will allow state workers with a BMI of up to 40 to keep the discount, although a BMI of 30 is considered obese by some experts.
Private sector employers appear to have been targeting tobacco and weight in their insurance pricing ahead of state health plans.
"We're beginning to see a lot of employers extremely interested in this," said Tim Smith, president of BioSignia, in Durham, which provides for private employers a system of measuring employees' risk factors for the onset of chronic disease. The company presents only aggregate data to the employers and does not disclose information about individuals, Smith said.
Tobacco and obesity are leading risk factors for ailments such as heart disease, stroke, Type 2 diabetes and chronic breathing disorders. BioSignia is not under contract with the state health plan, but Smith said that employers like the state are trying to catch employees who are in pre-disease stages to save both lives and money.
Only a fraction of employers, though, offer financial incentives for healthy behavior or wellness programs, such as gym memberships or smoking cessation, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study last year. Differences in employees' education, health literacy and access to basic health care could affect the usefulness of financial incentives in reducing health-care costs over time, the study said.
The results are not yet in. The higher costs for smokers and the obese don't appear to have been in place long enough for any state to boast a healthier workforce yet, according to officials in several states.
"I don't know that any states have a lot of hard data on this," Rogers said.
The policies have generated a backlash among at least some state workers. Some workers are anxious about the idea of tests for smoking. The tests involve examining a saliva sample for cotinine, a derivative of nicotine found in the system of tobacco users. Health plan officials recognize those concerns and are getting ready to take bids from companies that will perform the tests.
The state plan has not yet developed a procedure to monitor members for the obesity standard due to take effect in 2011.
"We're going to have to work out those logistics," Rogers said.
South Carolina and Tennessee rely on self-reporting instead of tests for illicit tobacco use, and Tennessee found the percentage of smokers in voluntary reports match public surveys.
Martin, the prison sergeant in Salisbury, doesn't smoke but considers herself overweight. Instead of financial penalties, she would like to see financial subsidies.
"If they're going to hold us accountable," Martin said, "pay for a gym membership or part of a membership. Give us an incentive, a way to combat it."
(NC State employees fume over the implementation of a "Fat Tax". This appears to be another effort that will legally allow NC Health Care Insurance companies to deny coverage or deny paying eligible claims. Just because its legal (in NC) doesn't mean its still not discriminatory or unconstitutional.)
(July 15th, 2009: SEANC organized a protest in front of the Blue Cross Blue Shield North Carolina headquarters in Chapel Hill. Attended by over 60 members of SEANC, HCAN, Acorn, AFL-CIO and other progressive groups, the event highlighted Blue Cross' use of taxpayers and customer money to fight against affordable health care for all.)
Smokers will feel the drag of higher costs, too, as North Carolina and South Carolina state employees who use tobacco are slated to pay more for health insurance next year.
N.C. officials, coping with a steady uptick in health care costs for state employees each year, are aiming to improve state workers' health, which saves money in medical expenses.
"Tobacco use and poor nutrition and inactivity are the leading causes of preventable deaths in our state," said Anne Rogers, director of integrated health management with the N.C. State Employees Health Plan. "We need a healthy workforce in this state. We're trying to encourage individuals to adopt healthy lifestyles."
State workers who don't cut out the Marlboros and Big Macs will end up paying more for health insurance. Tobacco users get placed in a more expensive insurance plan starting in July and, for those who qualify as obese, in July 2011.
Some state employees, though, are criticizing the planned changes. The State Employees Association of North Carolina opposes the tobacco and obesity differentials as invasive steps that could have been avoided if the legislature had fixed the plan.
"It's my understanding they're talking about testing (for tobacco use) in the workplace which, to me, would create a hostile environment," said Kim Martin, a sergeant at Piedmont Correctional Institution in Salisbury. "And it's an invasion of privacy. This is America, the land of the free. I don't think (body mass index is) a very good measure. I know some folks who would have a high body mass index because they're muscular."
The health plan covers more than 600,000 state employees, retirees and teachers at a total cost last year of $2.6 billion. Last spring, the legislature bailed out the plan with an infusion of $250 million to pay the bills after rising costs and inaccurate projections left little money for claims. Over the next two years, the state general fund will pump about $408 million into the health plan.
While officials have not yet estimated any potential savings from the obesity requirement, the higher costs for smokers could save $13 million in the 2010-2011 budget year, Rogers said, emphasizing that the plan's priority is to improve health and save money in the process.
The idea of penalizing unhealthy lifestyles and rewarding healthy conduct is hardly new among insurance plans. Public health insurance plans in other states already penalize smokers or reward nonsmokers in insurance costs. South Carolina's state employees health plan is scheduled to add a $25-per-month surcharge on smokers in January. Elsewhere in the southeast, Kentucky and Georgia impose surcharges, and Alabama gives nonsmokers a discount.
Alabama was out front on weight testing. Starting in January, state workers will have their blood pressure, cholesterol, glucose and body mass index checked by a nurse. If they're in a risk category, such as a body mass index of 35 or greater or a blood pressure of 160/100 or greater, they are charged an extra $25 per month on their insurance premium. If they go to a health screening, either offered by the state or by their personal physician, then the $25 is subtracted, according to Gary Matthews, chief operating officer for the Alabama State Employees Insurance Board.
North Carolina will allow state workers with a BMI of up to 40 to keep the discount, although a BMI of 30 is considered obese by some experts.
Private sector employers appear to have been targeting tobacco and weight in their insurance pricing ahead of state health plans.
"We're beginning to see a lot of employers extremely interested in this," said Tim Smith, president of BioSignia, in Durham, which provides for private employers a system of measuring employees' risk factors for the onset of chronic disease. The company presents only aggregate data to the employers and does not disclose information about individuals, Smith said.
Tobacco and obesity are leading risk factors for ailments such as heart disease, stroke, Type 2 diabetes and chronic breathing disorders. BioSignia is not under contract with the state health plan, but Smith said that employers like the state are trying to catch employees who are in pre-disease stages to save both lives and money.
Only a fraction of employers, though, offer financial incentives for healthy behavior or wellness programs, such as gym memberships or smoking cessation, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study last year. Differences in employees' education, health literacy and access to basic health care could affect the usefulness of financial incentives in reducing health-care costs over time, the study said.
The results are not yet in. The higher costs for smokers and the obese don't appear to have been in place long enough for any state to boast a healthier workforce yet, according to officials in several states.
"I don't know that any states have a lot of hard data on this," Rogers said.
The policies have generated a backlash among at least some state workers. Some workers are anxious about the idea of tests for smoking. The tests involve examining a saliva sample for cotinine, a derivative of nicotine found in the system of tobacco users. Health plan officials recognize those concerns and are getting ready to take bids from companies that will perform the tests.
The state plan has not yet developed a procedure to monitor members for the obesity standard due to take effect in 2011.
"We're going to have to work out those logistics," Rogers said.
South Carolina and Tennessee rely on self-reporting instead of tests for illicit tobacco use, and Tennessee found the percentage of smokers in voluntary reports match public surveys.
Martin, the prison sergeant in Salisbury, doesn't smoke but considers herself overweight. Instead of financial penalties, she would like to see financial subsidies.
"If they're going to hold us accountable," Martin said, "pay for a gym membership or part of a membership. Give us an incentive, a way to combat it."
Gov. Beverly Perdue says there's a good reason why she didn't join most of the nation's other Democratic governors in signing a letter supporting health care reform.
Perdue says she was too busy with an economic development trip to consider the letter.
It's a standard letter addressed to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi and Minority Leader Boehner, telling them states "will only achieve the health care security and stability they need if we succeed in working together with the Congress and the President to achieve health care reform."
Perdue was one of six Democratic governors who did not sign the letter. Talking Points Memo and some bloggers have read the missing signatures as a sign of how tough the health care battle is.
In North Carolina's case, that may be overstating things. Perdue was given a copy of the letter Wednesday between meetings, Perdue spokeswoman Chrissy Pearson said.
"She didn't feel she had enough time to give it due consideration," Pearson said. "Her focus that day was the trip to New York City. It was a very grueling schedule."
Pearson said Perdue agrees with the points made in the letter.
"She did not sign it but wants to make it clear that she remains committed to working with the Obama administration on health care reform," Pearson said. "She has continued the dialogue that began a few months ago whenever the White House asked North Carolina to host one of their forums on health care reform and she continues to remain concerned about the fact that while she believes reform is needed, such reform should not place an undue financial burden on the state."
We are writing to express our support for your efforts to reform our nation’s health care system. As the chief executives of our states and territories, we realize that the status quo is no longer an option and we support getting health reform done this year.
Sky-rocketing health care costs hurt families, force businesses to cut or drop health benefits and cause already strained state budget deficits to significantly grow. We believe reform can relieve these burdens by reining in costs and making coverage more affordable, both for our citizens and our state budgets.
Efforts at the federal level, like the recent and critical investments through the Recovery Act that support states’ HIT and prevention initiatives, are beginning to work to lower health care costs. Our citizens and our states, however, will only achieve the health care security and stability they need if we succeed in working together with the Congress and the President to achieve health care reform.
We commend you and your colleagues for provisions included in your bills that will help states and territories. Many of the provisions will allow states and territories to achieve long term savings and help cover those who currently go without coverage. We recognize that health reform is a shared responsibility and everyone, including state governments, needs to partner to reform our broken health care system.
We thank you for your leadership in this historic effort and look forward to continuing to work together to get health reform passed this year.
(July 15th, 2009: SEANC organized a protest in front of the Blue Cross Blue Shield North Carolina headquarters in Chapel Hill. Attended by over 60 members of SEANC, HCAN, Acorn, AFL-CIO and other progressive groups, the event highlighted Blue Cross' use of taxpayers and customer money to fight against affordable health care for all.)
Smokers will feel the drag of higher costs, too, as North Carolina and South Carolina state employees who use tobacco are slated to pay more for health insurance next year.
N.C. officials, coping with a steady uptick in health care costs for state employees each year, are aiming to improve state workers' health, which saves money in medical expenses.
"Tobacco use and poor nutrition and inactivity are the leading causes of preventable deaths in our state," said Anne Rogers, director of integrated health management with the N.C. State Employees Health Plan. "We need a healthy workforce in this state. We're trying to encourage individuals to adopt healthy lifestyles."
State workers who don't cut out the Marlboros and Big Macs will end up paying more for health insurance. Tobacco users get placed in a more expensive insurance plan starting in July and, for those who qualify as obese, in July 2011.
Some state employees, though, are criticizing the planned changes. The State Employees Association of North Carolina opposes the tobacco and obesity differentials as invasive steps that could have been avoided if the legislature had fixed the plan.
"It's my understanding they're talking about testing (for tobacco use) in the workplace which, to me, would create a hostile environment," said Kim Martin, a sergeant at Piedmont Correctional Institution in Salisbury. "And it's an invasion of privacy. This is America, the land of the free. I don't think (body mass index is) a very good measure. I know some folks who would have a high body mass index because they're muscular."
The health plan covers more than 600,000 state employees, retirees and teachers at a total cost last year of $2.6 billion. Last spring, the legislature bailed out the plan with an infusion of $250 million to pay the bills after rising costs and inaccurate projections left little money for claims. Over the next two years, the state general fund will pump about $408 million into the health plan.
While officials have not yet estimated any potential savings from the obesity requirement, the higher costs for smokers could save $13 million in the 2010-2011 budget year, Rogers said, emphasizing that the plan's priority is to improve health and save money in the process.
The idea of penalizing unhealthy lifestyles and rewarding healthy conduct is hardly new among insurance plans. Public health insurance plans in other states already penalize smokers or reward nonsmokers in insurance costs. South Carolina's state employees health plan is scheduled to add a $25-per-month surcharge on smokers in January. Elsewhere in the southeast, Kentucky and Georgia impose surcharges, and Alabama gives nonsmokers a discount.
Alabama was out front on weight testing. Starting in January, state workers will have their blood pressure, cholesterol, glucose and body mass index checked by a nurse. If they're in a risk category, such as a body mass index of 35 or greater or a blood pressure of 160/100 or greater, they are charged an extra $25 per month on their insurance premium. If they go to a health screening, either offered by the state or by their personal physician, then the $25 is subtracted, according to Gary Matthews, chief operating officer for the Alabama State Employees Insurance Board.
North Carolina will allow state workers with a BMI of up to 40 to keep the discount, although a BMI of 30 is considered obese by some experts.
Private sector employers appear to have been targeting tobacco and weight in their insurance pricing ahead of state health plans.
"We're beginning to see a lot of employers extremely interested in this," said Tim Smith, president of BioSignia, in Durham, which provides for private employers a system of measuring employees' risk factors for the onset of chronic disease. The company presents only aggregate data to the employers and does not disclose information about individuals, Smith said.
Tobacco and obesity are leading risk factors for ailments such as heart disease, stroke, Type 2 diabetes and chronic breathing disorders. BioSignia is not under contract with the state health plan, but Smith said that employers like the state are trying to catch employees who are in pre-disease stages to save both lives and money.
Only a fraction of employers, though, offer financial incentives for healthy behavior or wellness programs, such as gym memberships or smoking cessation, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study last year. Differences in employees' education, health literacy and access to basic health care could affect the usefulness of financial incentives in reducing health-care costs over time, the study said.
The results are not yet in. The higher costs for smokers and the obese don't appear to have been in place long enough for any state to boast a healthier workforce yet, according to officials in several states.
"I don't know that any states have a lot of hard data on this," Rogers said.
The policies have generated a backlash among at least some state workers. Some workers are anxious about the idea of tests for smoking. The tests involve examining a saliva sample for cotinine, a derivative of nicotine found in the system of tobacco users. Health plan officials recognize those concerns and are getting ready to take bids from companies that will perform the tests.
The state plan has not yet developed a procedure to monitor members for the obesity standard due to take effect in 2011.
"We're going to have to work out those logistics," Rogers said.
South Carolina and Tennessee rely on self-reporting instead of tests for illicit tobacco use, and Tennessee found the percentage of smokers in voluntary reports match public surveys.
Martin, the prison sergeant in Salisbury, doesn't smoke but considers herself overweight. Instead of financial penalties, she would like to see financial subsidies.
"If they're going to hold us accountable," Martin said, "pay for a gym membership or part of a membership. Give us an incentive, a way to combat it."
Gov. Beverly Perdue says there's a good reason why she didn't join most of the nation's other Democratic governors in signing a letter supporting health care reform.
Perdue says she was too busy with an economic development trip to consider the letter.
It's a standard letter addressed to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi and Minority Leader Boehner, telling them states "will only achieve the health care security and stability they need if we succeed in working together with the Congress and the President to achieve health care reform."
Perdue was one of six Democratic governors who did not sign the letter. Talking Points Memo and some bloggers have read the missing signatures as a sign of how tough the health care battle is.
In North Carolina's case, that may be overstating things. Perdue was given a copy of the letter Wednesday between meetings, Perdue spokeswoman Chrissy Pearson said.
"She didn't feel she had enough time to give it due consideration," Pearson said. "Her focus that day was the trip to New York City. It was a very grueling schedule."
Pearson said Perdue agrees with the points made in the letter.
"She did not sign it but wants to make it clear that she remains committed to working with the Obama administration on health care reform," Pearson said. "She has continued the dialogue that began a few months ago whenever the White House asked North Carolina to host one of their forums on health care reform and she continues to remain concerned about the fact that while she believes reform is needed, such reform should not place an undue financial burden on the state."
We are writing to express our support for your efforts to reform our nation’s health care system. As the chief executives of our states and territories, we realize that the status quo is no longer an option and we support getting health reform done this year.
Sky-rocketing health care costs hurt families, force businesses to cut or drop health benefits and cause already strained state budget deficits to significantly grow. We believe reform can relieve these burdens by reining in costs and making coverage more affordable, both for our citizens and our state budgets.
Efforts at the federal level, like the recent and critical investments through the Recovery Act that support states’ HIT and prevention initiatives, are beginning to work to lower health care costs. Our citizens and our states, however, will only achieve the health care security and stability they need if we succeed in working together with the Congress and the President to achieve health care reform.
We commend you and your colleagues for provisions included in your bills that will help states and territories. Many of the provisions will allow states and territories to achieve long term savings and help cover those who currently go without coverage. We recognize that health reform is a shared responsibility and everyone, including state governments, needs to partner to reform our broken health care system.
We thank you for your leadership in this historic effort and look forward to continuing to work together to get health reform passed this year.
Welcome to the BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog. (Established 2008)
My name is Laurel. (Author & Publisher)
I Blog with a focus on POLITICS, Business, and occasionally Entertainment.
FACTS ABOUT LAUREL:
Wife,
Mother of a U.S. Soldier,
Sister,
Woman of GOD,
Loyal Friend,
Creative,
Blood-related to a nationally known Charlotte Politician.
Black Female, Intelligent,
Married,
Love to Travel,
Credentialed by the RNC and DNC.
Political Blogger/ Commentator
Grassroots Activist,
PROFESSIONAL STATUS:
Credential Political Blogger/ Commentator,
Registered Independent Voter
Original Native of BROOKLYN, NY
Currently reside in CHARLOTTE, NC
I’m Nice but don’t get it twisted because my Mind is Sharp!
Since You’ve Chosen to Visit and Read the Contents of this Blog by Personal Choice, and of Your Own Free Will,
Please don’t ask me to Compensate you for Expressing individual commentary/ Posted Articles, which are protected by the First Amendment, citing Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Expression.
No Intentionally Malicious Slander, Libel or Defamation of Character content will be published and I will always Credit all Sources.
NOTE TO ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, APPOINTED OFFICIALS & PUBLIC FIGURES:
Per the Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case: 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan………
The Public has a Right to Criticize the People who Govern them, so the least Protection from Defamation is given to Public Officials. When officials are accused of something that involves their behavior in office, they have to prove all of the above elements of defamation and they must also prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” (For a definition of actual malice, see the “History of Defamation and the First Amendment, below.”)
People who aren’t Elected but who are Still Public Figures because they are influential or famous — like Actors, Actresses, Movie Stars, Singers & Entertainers, Journalists, TV Hosts, Bloggers, etc., — also have to Prove that Defamatory statements were made with Actual Malice, in most cases.
To the Associated Press and other Media Organizations:
When I use your Content Links., I’m also citing the Fair Use Doctrine (Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107) for further Copyright permission.
Posts and Links published on Black Political Buzz are not endorsed by Black Political Buzz Blog Author Laurel’s Employer, nor the Employers of other Black Political Buzz employees.
This includes Links, Posts and Comments posted on Black Political Buzz’s Facebook and Twitter account pages.
Comments, Links and Opinions of site visitors are Independently-Owned and not endorsed by Black Political Buzz employees, Blog Author Laurel or Laurel’s Employer.)
(No Personal Offense intended) Please know that Black Political Buzz is not responsible for nor do I endorse Requests for Donations from Third Parties on this Blog.
I will Only Endorse Requests for Donations made on behalf of BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog for Business Purposes & Operating Expenses.
I will also Only Endorse Requests for Donations on behalf of Legitimate Politicians and Legitimate Political Candidates. PERIOD!!
If anyone else or another Organization wishes to post a link to Request Donations, I am NOT endorsing ANY of those Requests!
Unless I receive a personal Request to do so and I have Professionally Confirmed that the Third Party Organization or Charity is indeed a Legitimate Entity.
NOTE: Anyone who chooses to give to any Third Party Organization NOT Endorsed by BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ is doing so at his or her own risk.
BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ does NOT Discriminate against Politicians, Political Candidates, Organizations or Charities based on Race, Color, Nationality, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Religion, Faith, Disability, Political Affiliation, Creed, Education, Social Status, Age.
This disclaimer applies to ANY and All requests for Donations on this Blog. Thanks for understanding. Again No Personal Offense intended.
For Story Tips….Corrections…….. or Requests for Endorsements:
Please contact me via e-mail: blackpoliticalbuzz@gmail.com
or via my Facebook page: facebook.com/blackpoliticalbuzz
Thanks for stopping by
God Bless
Laurel @BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ
LINKS: POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE & INFORMATIONAL SITES
.jpg)
