Written and edited by Norm Scott:
EDUCATE! ORGANIZE!! MOBILIZE!!!
Three pillars of The Resistance – providing information on current ed issues, organizing activities around fighting for public education in NYC and beyond and exposing the motives behind the education deformers. We link up with bands of resisters. Nothing will change unless WE ALL GET INVOLVED IN THE STRUGGLE!
Join www.nycretirees.org for help make a donation and subscribe to their newsletter
July 5
Tomorrow, July 6, two events are taking place related to the UFT.
Resisting Mulgrewcare: Party time outside the retiree law suit
The deadline for opting out of the Medicare Advantage Plan was extended to July 10 - let's see if the judge has anything to say about that, given that some doctors are not even aware of it and people don't have the info they need. My immediate sense is there are a hell of a lot of people willing to waive their benefits - in some cases ten grand - to stay in Medicare -- the city benefits by not havign to pay -- I'm not letting them get away with that so I will not be opting out.
Thomas Paine Park is an appropriate spot for meeting up in an era of UFT/Unity leadership of increasing suppression of democracy in the face of attacks on critical voices.
So 90 degrees won't stop us boomers - actually, I'm a pre-boomer, having breathed the same air as FDR for the first month of my life. I will also be going to.....
The UFT contract vote is also tomorrow and members have a right to observe -- I'm intending to go if I can find out where it is - I have attended contract vote counts as an observer a number of times in the past.
Do I expect the increasingly oppressive UFT leadership to toss obstacles in the way? I do. They see information as an enemy, to be attacked and they engage in the Trump tactic of shouting "fake" news.
The likely suspected places to observe are either at the American Arbitration Association at 120 Broadway, the UFT at 52 or some arbitrary subway catacombs.
We pretty much expect the contract to pass but by how much is the issue.
Mistakes were made, never by the UFT leadership but by some gremlin. Maybe Chat AI. Did some packages mailed by schools get to the AAA or get lost? I'd like to see a list of schools that were returned and those that were not?
Here is the letter sent by the 7 UFC Ex Bd members on June 27 - with as far as I know, no reply:
June 27, 2023
From: Ronnie Almonte batresalmonte@gmail.com
Nick Bacon, bacon.nick.a@gmail.com Ed Calamia gonzojour2002@aol.com Alex Jallot alexjallot@gmail.com
Ibeth Mejia i.rosiomejia@gmail.com Ilona Clara Nanay icnanay@gmail.com Luli Rodriguez rodriguez.luli1@gmail.com
High School Representatives to the United Federation of Teachers Executive Board
To: Hiro Kawahara
AAA Director of Elections, 120 Broadway 21st Fl, New York, NY, 10271 AAAelectionsdirector@adr.org
Cc: Ken Egger, AAA National Vice President of Elections, eggerk@adr.org Michael Mulgrew, President, United Federation of Teachers mmulgrew@uft.org Melinda Person, New York State United Teachers President, melinda.person@nysut.org
Randi Weingarten, American Federation of Teachers President, rweingarten@aft.org
You are no doubt aware of the challenges in the UFT contract ratification process regarding delays in
ballots arriving at schools and challenges with return mailing labels for ballot packets.
Many chapters did not receive ballots until Thursday or Friday June 22nd or 23rd, resulting in rushed
balloting on the last two days of school on the 26th and 27th and potentially affecting turnout.
Even more worrisome, the mailing labels sent out for the return of ballots from schools had to be
corrected and re-sent three times, in successive emails on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, June
21st-23rd. The last email informed chapter leaders that some post office personnel were not accepting
the new return labels and they instead had to be sent via a self-service kiosk (which is not available at
all post office locations). We have received reports that this has resulted in difficulty in chapter leaders
returning their ballot packets, and may have resulted in some packets not being received at all by AAA.
The integrity of the contract ratification process is of utmost importance to our members as it will
determine the working conditions in schools and learning conditions for a million New York City school
children for the next four years.
We would like to request that the AAA record and publish the number of ballots returned from
each school chapter in each category (teacher, paraprofessional, secretary, guidance counselor,
lab specialist). This would allow chapter leaders who mailed their ballots with the faulty labels to
determine if their ballots actually arrived at the count, allowing the union to understand the scope and
scale of the lost vote.
We hope that the actual impact on the vote of these problems will be minimal, but transparent and
public accountability will be key in retaining the trust and confidence of our members in this process.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this request. Please feel free to contact us at the email
addresses listed above.
Sincerely
Ronnie Almonte, Nick Bacon, Ed Calamia, Alex Jallot, Ibeth Mejia, Ilona Nanay, Luli Rodriguez
“As
a matter of public policy, beyond the scope of our office’s specific
Charter responsibility for contract registration, I am seriously
concerned about the privatization of Medicare plans, overbilling by
insurance companies, and barriers to care under Medicare Advantage.... Recent investigations identified extensive allegations of fraud, abuse, overbilling, and denials of medically necessary care at 9 of the top 10 Medicare Advantage plans, including CVS Health, which owns Aetna. ... ‘Once
corporations privatize every inch of the public provision of health
care, we may never get Medicare back... Brad Lander
Wow! Brad Lander goes on my very small list of politicians I still vote for.... NYC Retirees
Friday, June 9, 2023
Good news. With the deadline to opt out (June 30) of MulgrewDisadvantateCare fast approaching, Brad Lander tosses a monkey wrench into the Mayor Adams/MRC/UFT deal to drag city retirees out of Medicare into the privately managed, profit making Aetna plan, due to take effect on Sept. 1. As you can see above, Lander went further than just talking about the specifics but went after the general attack on Medicare by the insurance lobby and its allies - our own union.
Fundamentally, the UFT/Unity backing of this change is anti-union and anti-worker. But with a union leadership that dovetails with the corporate wing of the Dem party, why expect anything else? We've noticed that some of the rhetoric coming from the mouth of Randi Weingarten and crew turn calls for Medicare for all into MedicareAdvantage for all --- meaning the standard neo-liberal attacks on government run programs as Medicare is.
Last week, the lawsuit was filed by retirees and yesterday a bill was supposed to be introduced by Charles Baron to the city council, with a large demo outside of retirees but that was postponed until next week - most likely June 22 - Thursday. It's important to have big crowds at these rallies -- politicians notice.
With Adams facing an election in two years, I imagine Lander has put himself into the running as retirees will vote heavily to oppose Adams and Lander just gave himself a leg up. Yes, politics do matter. Even it we don't win the medicare case, we can punish Adams in the next election - and Mulgrew too - both in 2025.
But there is some skepticism in that the Mayor can overrule Lander and will probably do so, so don't go crazy. However, Lander went much further than the narrow legal issues and raised crucial points we have been trying to raise at the UFT - that they were helping kill the only public option.
Yes, Mayor Adams may reverse
Lander’s decision. But we now have well positioned allies refusing to
sign off on retiree healthcare cuts. And that bodes well for the future,
even if it does mean our dear beloved Unity-led UFT leaders may need to
find their ‘healthcare savings’ elsewhere, as their debt
to the City passes its due date. And yes, with the spotlight on
retirees, we should expect those cuts to land on in-service teachers,
who have been promised the absurd: an ‘equal or better replacement to
GHI at 10% cheaper of a cost.’
When will that replacement be announced? You better bet it won’t be
until after Mulgrew tries to ram through a mediocre contract—and that
process will start as early as next week. So, before we vote on a TA,
let’s make sure we ask – what will only 90% of our current health plan
look like, and how will we afford it on a pay-cut?
Make no mistake: we can’t win the battle against healthcare cuts
solely on the good graces of well-positioned politicians. Ultimately, we
need to situate ourselves to be able to stop anti-labor backroom deals.
As Mulgrew is keen to remind us at DAs and executive board meetings,
health care is a part of our overall compensation. Well, we vote on
whether to accept what the City offers us in economic compensation. So,
both now and when we’re retired, we deserve a vote on changes to medical coverage too.
Since UFT leadership doesn’t see the problems everyone else sees with
reducing our coverage and tossing retirees onto MAP, we need a formal
and permanent mechanism to keep them from doing so.
I'm hitting all my docs before Sept. 1 - braving the smoke today to keep a cardiology appointment - I do preventive maintenance - like having my car checked regularly. I think today is a stress test which I think will show I have slowed down since the last one -- I'm thinking it's my weight which I can't seem to lose - probably due to the cheese cake at UFT Ex Bd meetings. Or maybe it's the stress of seeing my own union try to reduce my healthcare.
The email below was sent by a large medical group here in Delray Beach
regarding their feelings about Aetna. It's an important read regarding
their past dealings with Aetna.
Comptroller Lander Declines to Register Medicare Advantage Contract Pending Litigation
New York, NY – The
Comptroller’s Office declined to register the City’s contract with
Aetna to transfer City retirees to a Medicare Advantage program for
their health care coverage. A pending lawsuit, brought on behalf of
retirees, questions the City’s authority to enter into such an
agreement.
Comptroller Brad Lander issued the following statement:
“The
Comptroller’s Bureau of Contract Administration carefully reviewed the
City’s contract with Aetna and returned the contract to the Office of
Labor Relations without registering it. Pending litigation calls into
question the legality of this procurement and constrains us from
fulfilling our Charter mandated responsibility to confirm that
procurement rules were followed, sufficient funds are available, and the
City has the necessary authority to enter into the contract.
“As
a matter of public policy, beyond the scope of our office’s specific
Charter responsibility for contract registration, I am seriously
concerned about the privatization of Medicare plans, overbilling by
insurance companies, and barriers to care under Medicare Advantage.
“I
appreciate the work of the Municipal Labor Council and the Office of
Labor Relations to negotiate improvements to the Aetna contract to
address some of the concerns raised by retirees. However, the broader
Medicare Advantage trends are worrisome. Recent investigations identified extensive allegations of fraud, abuse, overbilling, and denials of medically necessary care at 9 of the top 10 Medicare Advantage plans, including CVS Health, which owns Aetna.
“As health care activist Ady Barkan wrote last month,
noting that half of Medicare enrollees nationwide have been transferred
from traditional Medicare to private Medicare Advantage plans: ‘Once
corporations privatize every inch of the public provision of health
care, we may never get Medicare back.’”
It’s beyond disheartening to learn
what a miserable job our negotiators did for us in 2018. All our hours
on the Contract Committee were wasted, since leadership made a
counter-productive deal behind our back. They sacrificed our health care
to win only modest gains. Our Contract Committee is a sham, UFT has the
worst negotiating team in the world, and every member of that team
should be impeached or fired. --AG
Another brilliant piece from Arthur - for the record - I couldn't vote on the 2018 contract but urged a NO vote - why? Because I never trust the UFT/Unity Caucus leadership on contracts - or other issues. But also note - they claim their plan is not Joe Namath. How do we know?
Then-Mayor de Blasio speaks to the UFT (photo: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office)
A long-time UFT chapter leader I know
used to joke, “There are two things wrong with our union—the leadership
and the membership.” I’ve been very involved with the teachers union,
both in opposition and alongside leadership, and I couldn’t agree more.
That two-pronged problem with our union is evident in the saga over
major changes to health care for retired and current teachers.
If they were actually interested in winning they wouldn't be doing things that materially make the lives of millions of seniors worse..... for the past 50 years we've seen this creeping privatization of Medicare (supported by both Dems and Rep).
Let's be clear - the UFT/AFT is tied at the hip to the center-right
anti-progressive wing of the Dem Party --- they are fundamental
neo-liberals who believe in the market. Cook says -- maybe private insurers can do a better job of keeping costs down. Maybe they think grandma was going to the doctor too often and private insurers help solve that problem.
Of course. Impose an extra barrier between patient and doctor.
Note: You will not be reading this story in the mainstream media which is why you should support independent media like The Lever. https://www.levernews.com/
Krystal Ball asks The Lever reporter Matthew Cunningham Cook why the move to MedAdv from Medicare. He responds that the idea of Medicare was to get private insurance out of the way between patient and doctor and MedAdv goal is to bring private insurers back as an intermediary.
In the midst of all this you see an 8.5% increase in payments to privatized insurance. Doctors can barely make ends meet due to Medicare payments.
If you think that wasn't the real cost saving reasons for MulgrewCare, you need to buy another bridge.
He also gets into the FDA approval of the Alzeimer's drug over the recommendations of a panel -- you think some level of corruption? That was the ostensible reason for the $20 a month increase. But when the approval was withdrawn, the 20 bucks remained. A 14.5% increase -- another Putin inflation?
Krystal asks WHY raise the premium for seniors with midterms approaching. Cook: I often say the Democrats have a kink for losing.
He goes further by ointing to the very people in the Dem Party who make these decisions always flip back and forth between public and private. They are there to help the private industry make money so they will be hired when the Dems lose.
Progressives are a bigger threat than the Republican right.
WTF: With mid-term elections coming, Biden raises Medicare premiums by $20 a month - which will cost me and my wife an extra $500 a year. And also hands private insurance companies an 8% raise. Tell me Democrats don't want to lose. Actually, since they are incompetent at governing, maybe that's the goal. Lose the midterms so badly, Biden can then claim nothing gets done due to Republican opposition. That way they can remain a permanent minority party, but still keep control of the infrastructure. That's their definition of winning -- what they get personally.
It explains how much a threat to them the Bernie wing of the party is -- that threatens their lucrative deals if they lose control of the party.
Top Biden Admin officials are more interested in their next job
Cook says they are thinking of how they can get a bigger pool at their house.
The Breaking Points story and video affirms my understanding of the reason Mulgrew and the UFT/Unity machine support privatized Medicare Advantage over the public traditional Medicare. It explains the seeming illogic behind funneling money to private insurance companies.
But it doesn't explain: What Mulgrew and the UFT are getting out of supporting private insurgence.
Krystal talks with The Lever journalist Matthew Cunningham Cook about the Biden administration's Medicare price hike that will boost the profits of private insurers
To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/
To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify
Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61...
Listen to Mulgrew brag about the plan he designed and promoted and attacked those of us who were critical. Hear Mulgrew talk about how proud he was about the MedAdv - until he abandoned it after the judge ruled in our favor.
And don't forget -- if you support medicare for all/single payer, backing Mulgrew and Unity Caucus is a total contradiction.
Mulgrew and De Blasio dipped into a fund solely designed to offset
the healthcare inflation costs. And then Mike convinced the MLC to
follow his lead.
Then, in 2021,
when Mulgrew and the UFT-led MLC were backed into a corner by the mayor
to replenish this now depleted fund, they designed and tried to sell us
all, a privatized Medicare Advantage plan, that penalizes city retirees
for their healthcare choices and burdens them with scores of
pre-authorizations, to pay for his mediocre labor agreements of the
past.
Mulgrewcare would have forced all of our city’s retirees into
an ill-conceived managed plan, or retirees who opted out would have to
pay well over $2000 to $4000 a year to keep their existing coverage
promised to them by the City.
On March 3rd, 2022, a Manhattan judge ruled in favor of the retirees who
were opting out of this failed, coerced plan. The law says the city
cannot charge retirees or active city employees for healthcare unless it
is above the cost of the HIP plan. This is the language the judge used
in citing the city’s administrative code: “
This section states unequivocally that “[t]he City will pay the
entire cost of health insurance coverage for city employees, city
retirees, and their dependents, not to exceed one hundred percent of the
full cost of H.I.P.-H.M.O. on a category basis.”
The city and unions (the Municipal Labor Committee) were violating
the law by agreeing to charge all of our city’s retirees who wanted to
keep their current Senior Care supplemental Medicare insurance $191 per
month if they opted out of the new privatized Mulgrewcare.
Now, that Mulgrewcare is dead, for now,
we must make sure Mulgrew never again places our most seasoned civil
servants, retirees, and our current in-service UFT members in harm’s
way. He also has designs on our next UFT contract, too, with his
penchant for healthcare givebacks and weak negotiating posture.
In April of 2022, UFT members must vote him and his Unity caucus OUT!
In other news: Exploring UFT/Unity Caucus links to Big Pharm and Healthcare giants trying to kill public options for their own profit
If it looks like a duck, etc. The outcome of all Mulgrew policy is to kill Medicare and support the industry in partnerships.
Think of MulgrewDoubleSpeak - He not only supported the MedAdv, but bragged about designing it. Then after the judge ruled he said he was no longer supporting it because if the opt-outers don't have to pay it is no longer worth it. Thus he reveled the intentions all along --- to make us pay for the savings along with the future denials of service for those who didn't opt out.
You might wonder why the UFT/Unity/Mulgrew team is so much against medicare for all and pro-privatized healthcare.
Links between the UFT and privatizing scuzballs are being explored. As we know the Unity/UFT leaderhsip is an outpost of the center right corporate Democrats so search there. Here's one potential connectionThe
Partnership for America’s Health Care Future (PAHCF) from a few years ago. Remember, Mulgrew raided the stabilization fund in 2014 and made the deal to screw us on healthcare in 2018 to replace that fund.
“The
Partnership for America’s Health Care Future (PAHCF), a nonprofit
created to oppose plans to create a comprehensive, universal
health care system, paid almost $760,000 to Bully Pulpit Interactive, a
communications and digital marketing firm that has worked with the
Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Democratic Senatorial
Campaign Committee (DSCC).”
Their reasoning: “The government would
be expected to set premiums for the public option approximately 25
percent below market value for comparable private insurance plans.”
Remember - Mulgrew says he wants to save us money - by opposing Medicare for all.
Do you know who the UFT uses for its digital media?
Biggest donor to this dark money outfit … Blue Cross who runs Mulgrew fave Anthem.
=======
Can the city force us into medicare Adv? Senior Care would have to reach an extremely high dollar threshold for that to happen.
Some people are reading the judge as giving the OK for the city to offer no options and force us into MedAdv.
Here is an explanation of what the judge said.
Yes, we won the case, but of course the City can appeal.
Don’t
be confused by the terms “threshold” or “statutory cap”. They are
effectively irrelevant because the statutory cap which the City is not
obligated to exceed paying is $776 per person per month. Senior Care is
$191 per month per person so we are nowhere near the cap or threshold.
For now we are in the cat bird seat.
I feel catbird seat may be the optimistic view. What I do know is that I was expecting to start paying almost $400 starting April 1 and now I don't. And I blew that money at my birthday dinner last Thursday. Parteeeeee every month.
Well this Unity Caucus attack on UFC over MulgrewCare didn't age well.
What a way to celebrate my 77th birthday and 12th year on Medicare. I still am not 100% sure I won't start paying an extra $400 a month (for me and my wife) starting April 1 to keep my seniorcare. Lots of legalese to wade through.
I'm going to spend the money anyway on Beef Wellington tonight at One if By Land, Two if By Sea.
This is not a slam dunk win for us. The judge offers the city the choice to offer no options and toss everyone into a medicare advantage plan. So if they can't get $200 out of us now they can only save money but eliminating the opt out option. Adams may still do it and Mulgrew won't say boo.
So we may just yet be forced into a MEDAV without the choice other than to leave the senior care altogether and buy an AARP type plan for $200.
A real issue for me is the UFT/Mulgrew backing of privatized healthcare profit making slimebags in the healthcare industry while undermining public option of Medicare. But I'm not shocked at Unity backing naked unfettered capitalism.
That the unions are siding with profit making privatized healthcare over the public options.
They say they are saving money but are opposed to universal care which will be the money saver.
They
are contributing to the long-time decline of medicare which has to pay a
higher premium to MedAdv to cover higher admin costs.
Upcoding is harmful to our health and that is how they squeeze more money out of Medicare.
Expect Mulgew and Unity hacks to declare this a victory for them after attacking the people filing the suit for months. "We intended this all the time."
While happy at the possibilities of victory, it may not be a total one as city and union may still have options. I'm also looking at spin from our side too.
From the decision:
...states unequivocally that “[t]he City will pay the entire cost of health insurance coverage for city
employees, city retirees and their dependents, not to exceed one hundred percent of the full cost
of H.I.P.-H.M.O. on a category basis.
2
” Respondent and nominal respondent aver that the
definition of “health insurance coverage”, as defined in Admin. Code§ 12-126 (a), stating “a
program” as opposed to “any program” means that the City of New York need only pay for the
entire cost of one program. This Court respectfully disagrees. NYC Admin. Code § 12-126
(b)(1) is simply unequivocal and does not use terms like “provide” or “offer”; rather it uses the
term will pay and it provides parameters of such payment. The definition in NYC Admin. Code
§ 12-126 (a)(iv) simply provides what constitutes a program or plan that the City of New York is
required by law to pay for, by defining the contents of such a plan. This Court holds that this is
the only reasonable way of interpreting this section.
Of course, none of this is to say that the respondent must give retirees an option of plans,
nor that if the plan goes above the threshold discussed in NYC Admin. Code § 12-126 (b)(1) that
the respondent could not pass along the cost above the threshold to the retiree; only that if there
is to be an option of more than one plan, that the respondent may not pass any cost of the prior
plan to the retirees, as it is the Court’s understanding that the threshold is not crossed by the cost
of the retirees’ current health insurance plan. This is buoyed by the fact that the current plan has
been paid for by the respondent in full to this point.
A wise sage says:
As
I read this, the city if it gives a choice, must pay for it fully
unless it costs more than HIP. If they take the choice away and truly
throw all retirees into MAP, that would be a bad political move for
unions.
Here is Daily News -- called us David -- funny but talks about city but not getting screwed by union. After all, if unions didn't agree there would be no deal.
Judge rules Adams admin cannot financially penalize NYC retirees who reject controversial Medicare plan
A Manhattan judge ruled Thursday that Mayor Adams’ administration
cannot slap a financial penalty on retired municipal workers who opt out
of the city’s controversial new Medicare plan, marking a significant
win for a group of retirees who fought the health insurance switch in
court for months.
The effort by the administration to levy a $191 monthly fee on retirees
who want to keep their current coverage instead of enrolling in the new
Medicare Advantage Plan runs counter to longstanding local
administrative law, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Lyle Frank wrote in a
decision.
The law in question, Frank continued, requires the city to “pay the
entire cost of health insurance coverage for city employees, city
retirees and their dependents.” Any attempt to impose a premium or other
cost for coverage is thereby illegal, he added.
“This Court holds that this is the only reasonable way of interpreting this section,” the judge wrote.
Frank’s decision caps a court battle between the city and a group of
retired city workers that began last year under former Mayor Bill de
Blasio’s administration.
In announcing the plan last fall, de Blasio’s administration presented
Medicare Advantage as a boon to the city and save taxpayers hundreds of
millions of dollars every year because it is subsidized by the federal
government at a higher rate. At the same time, the administration
maintained the new plan would provide the city’s roughly 250,000
Medicare-aged retirees with health coverage that’s comparable to what
they’re currently receiving.
But the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees sued over the move,
charging that the new plan would result in inferior coverage, including
by imposing complex new preauthorization procedures for specific
medical procedures.
After vowing on the campaign trail to make sure the new Medicare plan
wouldn’t be a “bait and switch” for retired workers, Adams announced last month that he would move ahead with implementing it as envisioned by de Blasio, angering retirees who said he was going back on his promise by keeping the $191 penalty intact.
Retired New York City municipal workers are pictured marching near
Brooklyn Borough Hall to call on Mayor-elect Adams to preserve their
Medicare coverage last December. (Luiz C. Ribeiro/for New York Daily News)
A spokesman for Adams did not immediately return a request for comment after Frank’s ruling.
Steve Cohen, a lawyer for the NYC Organization of Public Service
Retirees, said the judge’s order validates the concerns of his clients
and amounts to an “incredible victory” for them.
“The city got greedy, and held a sword over the head of retirees and
said, ‘If you don’t accept your new plan, we’re not going to pay for
your health care,’” Cohen said. “The judge saw right through that and
said, ‘No way, you can’t do that.’”
According to data reviewed by the Daily News, more than 45,000 retired
city workers had opted out of Medicare Advantage Plan as of mid-February
despite the now-rescinded financial penalty they would face.
The Adams administration can still offer the Advantage plan to retirees
on a voluntary basis, starting April 1, under Frank’s ruling. It was
not immediately clear Thursday afternoon how the administration will
proceed.
Here is the presser announcement going on now.
NYC Municipal Retirees to Celebrate Court Victory on Healthcare Coverage
Scores of retirees will gather near City Hall at 2:00 p.m. today
(3-3-22) to celebrate a court ruling that will let them keep their
health benefits without paying punishing premiums.
In
a David-over-Goliath victory, a Manhattan judge ruled this morning
against the city's plan to move a quarter-million retirees off their
current coverage, traditional Medicare and a supplement, into a
controversial new Medicare Advantage plan.
A
retiree group had sued the city, saying the proposed plan would limit
their access to doctors and services. Today Justice Lyle E. Frank of
state supreme court in Manhattan prohibited the city from imposing stiff
new premiums, $191 per covered person, on retirees wishing to opt out
of the premium-free new plan. Roughly 47,000 retirees and dependents
have already opted out despite the proposed penalty, which will no
longer be imposed.
The city can still
implement its new Medicare Advantage plan on April 1, with many retirees
expected to be enrolled in it -- not necessarily with their active
consent -- but the ruling gives them three months to switch out of it.
Lawyers for the retiree groups will address the rally this afternoon to give more details.
The article below dovetails with MulgrewCare and the UFT lining up with
the Biden corporate Dems: Oppose single payer/medicare for all and the NY
Health Act and support the private insurance industry.
Friday, February 25, 2022
The more you examine UFT/Unity Caucus policy the more you see the links to fundamental Republican and corporate Democratic support for privatized schemes that drain funds from public options. (Think of how the UFT didn't rigorously oppose charter schools initially and even started two of its own, both failures).
And make no mistake about it, the core UFT policy is center-right Democratic Party. Thus the move away from traditional medicare by Mulgrew fits perfectly into the overall plan to scuttle medicare and enrich private ensurers.
Mulgrew claims the money comes from medicare to the private insurer so it doesn't cost the city money. This is true but ignores that in essence instead of medicare paying directly to your doctors they give the money to the private insurer who then pays the doctor or hospital - after taking its profit. How do they make a profit? Medicare pays an extra 5% to cover the higher administrative costs -- which even Mulgrew admits to. Who cares he might say, it's not out of our pocket. But actually long-term it is out of our pocket.
Every month I get my socials security check from the federal govt. Imagine if they installed a private agency to get my check, take a bit off the top for "admin" costs and then send it on to me.
Private insurers have another way to squeeze medicare. Upcoding, as explained to me by my podiatrist. They use any excuse to upcode the patients -- meaning taking any condition you have that medicare might pay say $100 for and making it look worse so medicare would have to pay say $150 for the same procedure.
Now, the point is you the patient is not getting any better service or care -- in the long run worse care because abother money maker is denials and forcing you to go through a pre-approval process. Now Medicare also has pre-approvals and 85% of MedAdv preapprovals match medicare -- but 15% doesn't -- and therein lies more than a few bucks for the privatizers.
The end-game is the total dismantling of a publicly managed program and opening up the entire post-65 population to the privatizers. The article below shows how the Biden admin has put a Trump plan into the hands of Nancy Fowler, a chief ally of private insurers in a plan that will join Mulgrew in trying to gut medicare.
I will add one one point and that is the people who are employed by Medicare --
