Mass. Public Employees- Your Tax Dollars at Work? – The “Costly Loopholes” that allow Public Employees to Collect Unemployment – Even Amherst Has Issues!!!

(Click on Image to Enlarge.)

From Gov. Deval Patrick's task force - the Total Charges for Unemployment paid out by Cities and Towns for Public Employees from 2005 to August 2012 -image from PDF Task force at Mass.gov.

There were reports from the Boston Herald back on March 7th 2012, titled: “Official: Public workers’ questionable jobless benefits add up” - speaking to municipalities who must pay public employees, including temporary election officials unemployment benefits, which come out of the Town or City’s tax revenues. The article and letters from twenty six towns got the attention of Governor Deval Patrick, who got a task force going to find out the scope of the problem and recommend changes.

The task force and the Governor are now “promising to close the costly loopholes that allow public employees to collect unemployment benefits while also drawing a paycheck form the city or town they work for! according to the Lowell Sun. November 16, 2012. Those on the task force included: State Labor Secretary Joanne Goldstein, Salem Mayor Kim Driscoll, Newton Mayor Setti Warren, state Sen. Dan Wolf, D-Harwich, state Rep. David Torrisi, D-North Andover, Massachusetts Taxpayers Association President Michael Widmer, retired Appeals Court judge Raya Dreben, Massachusetts Teachers Association President Paul Toner and Massachusetts AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Jennifer Springer. The Tax force was addressing the following classifications that are currently eligible to receive Unemployment (and will be until the legislature address the issue): Public employees with pensions of $53,920, who return to work, earn salary up to 900 plus hours, then quit, and collect UIC, Teachers who collect UIC while being paid by the municipality, School Bus Drivers and Crossing Guards who count every day, including Black Friday toward UIC, and the “kicker” – Election Officials, who list their “stipend” (for working the election) on UIC claims.

The Task force concluded, after reviewing claims from 2002 forward, that it was a small percentage of the workforce that was taking advantage of loopholes, although when one reviews the report submitted by the task force it is a real eye-opener. What is most surprising is that only 26 of the Commonwealth’s Cities and Towns expressed a desire to halt the practice and those Cities and Towns were reviewed. When one reads the report available here at mass.gov, in PDF one finds that the towns in 2012 (through August) had a total of $32,016,151.32 in Unemployment Claims “charged” by public employees.(Page 89 of 102)

Now it is understandable if someone is collecting a small pension, is over 65 and working part time, that they may not be able to meet expenses, considering inflation of food and fuel (which is not counted by the Federal Government as it is considered “too volatile”.) Therefore, if someone has a pension of $35,000 annually and is not eligible for Social Security compensation (as is the case for most government employees – in some cases they are eligible but for a smaller percentage of their overall SSI benefits, which, are reduced even if that individual worked thirty years outside of the Federal Government) they should, if working full time, and find themselves laid off, be able to collect unemployment. That said, if someone is making a decent pension, then working in their previous field to fill a “need” by the government, that additional salary should be considered a bonus.

The fact that election officials, those who work the week of an election, are collecting unemployment insurance based on $1,000 in stipends, boggles the mind. $32,016,511.32 in unemployment claims filed by public employees in all Massachusetts towns and hamlets, for half of 2012 – while most homeowners and taxpayers that are left in said communities are having problems buying hamburger at the grocery store leaves one without words.(Almost)

It is not that teachers, or safety workers, or school bus drivers, or crossing guards are intentionally bilking you and yours, it’s a law that allows this to happen. Add to that the fact that due to the Federal Government extending unemployment insurance for years, and what’s a public employee to do? They follow the law and collect. (That’s sarcasm in case one is interested.) One would think that teachers, especially, would be smart enough or moral enough to understand they get three months of paid vacation (summer), in which they can work part time if they choose. Apparently not. The fore, first the city or town kicks in (because they have to) according to state law, then they have to kick in further, due to Federal Laws. Is it any wonder our cities are broke? Is it any wonder in some cities and towns they cannot afford to give the students “text books” due to the expense? Perhaps the aforementioned resolves the questions as to why our students are so - uneducated.

Prof. Stuart Altman, Universal Health Care Proponent, and Appointed by Gov. Patrick to head MA Oversight on Health Care Delivery – Objective: Control the Cost – Universal Health Care.

Image of Tea Party Protestors before the 2012 Election - they may have read the bill - Irony - image from Media Matters.

Dr. Stuart Altman has been appointed by Governor Deval Patrick to “lead the way for the nation” by instituting the Health Care Reform Act in Massachusetts . Altman explains his stance on and belief structure on Universal Health Care in two video’s below, and it is clear that he is a proponent of Universal Health Care, but that his views and stance on “progressive” history run counter to the current delivery system American’s enjoy. Currently, those with health insurance are given care, which are paid for through insurance premiums and out of pocket expenses. Those who are without health care insurance are not necessarily denied care, rather they are given care through state Medicaid programs. Those that fall through the “cracks” (i.e. Make enough money on paper to afford health care, but in reality cannot afford the premiums, so go without) are not addressed. (Those who pay the fee to the state because they are a) unable to afford the high premiums , and b) are mandated by the State to pay, which is a tad less than the actual costs of the Premium. This is primarily due to lack of competition in the state’s Health Insurance Providers, though no Progressive would admit that free enterprise would drive costs down, that has been proven true with the broader availability of Auto Insurance carriers in the state, reducing the costs of premiums!).

In the first video, Altman explains the plans to implement the new system of oversight based on economics first. The program places the onus on the provider to spend to a limit, therefore, as Professor Altman explains, some procedures that “may be a little useful, but are very expensive”, simply will not be performed.

Additionally, if the system is working as such where a patient is being denied care, because of the restrictions set in place by the state to control costs, then Altman’s logic is that the bureaucracy will be able to see this taking place, and alert the patient – assuming it’s not too late.

In the second video, the Professor speaks to the History of Health Care in the United States, which is not as good as the Health Care Delivery systems in other nations (this is the Professors Opinion – based on costs – obviously, not quality of care). In this video one learns that the Professor, who has written a book on the subject, believes that the unions were responsible for health care reform in the early part of his one hundred year walk through progressive history. He also lauds President Nixon for his liberal stance on healthcare reform, some of which are included in the Obama Health Plan. Altman worked for Nixon, Clinton, and Obama.

When asked why health care deliver in the United States was a mess, he replies that (paraphrasing) “American’s aren’t willing to commit to a single payer system”.

It is apparent that we most likely will not have a choice.

What happens when theses “oversight Committees” who are focused on cost containment, rather than both cost containment and delivery of quality health care, force a provider to contain costs through denying “expensive” tests and procedures which may be life saving (i.e. a little useful)? The residents of Massachusetts will find out sooner or later, and so will those states who have decided to implement the Health Care Act. Of note, the good professor apparently does not either address or perhaps is unaware, as the bill is rather lengthy, what happens to those persons who fall under the limit, or who’s “unions” are exempt from having to comply with the health care law? The balance of those who are in current private pay systems, or are going to be forced into a government system, will reap the rewards of cost-controlled health care. The videos should be watched in full, as this man is now in charge of the Massachusetts health care delivery systems. Death Panels? Cost over care most certainly will result in those who are denied an “expensive, but slightly useful procedure, meeting their demise. This premise is based on human objectivity and human error. If one were to be honest about why the costs of medicine is through the roof, one might want to take a look at the high costs of malpractice insurance providers must pay and the costs of burdensome government regulations. Those are the root, both brought on by government, yet ignored completely. There is no doubt that reform is necessary on several levels, but, if one fails to address the entire delivery system, then that system will fail. It is a question now of who will that system fail? The heavy bet is on the patient.

Video 1



Video 2



Power Politics and Universal Health Care

Interesting article from Kaiser Health News, regarding Nixon and Obama entitled: “Obama's Health Care Dilemma Evokes Memories Of 1974”

NYC Still Suffering – Power outages continue to Affect Elderly - National Outrage?

From CBS New YorkApparently, the trauma over “Sandy” continues for residents in New York – especially those living in a high-rise that still has zero power in – Manhattan. This travesty of the lack of attention to the suffering in NYC by the national press, who are still celebrating their recent victory – is beyond disgusting. Those residents trying to keep warm and healthy are the elderly.