Daily Archives: July 11, 2007

Health Care

Liveblogging from the Senate Health Committee

2 Comments

(I love me some liveblogging. Just so everyone is clear: SB 840 is Keuhl’s single payer bill and AB 8 is the Nunez/Perata bill that stays within the private insurance model. – promoted by juls)

Things are about to get underway as It’s OUR Healthcare! will be liveblogging from the John L. Burton Hearing Room where the Senate Health Committee chaired by SB 840 author, State Senator Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica), will meet at 1:30pm.

Senator Kuehl is setting the ground rules for the hearing. (No cheering, clapping or booing.)

Scheduled to speak are the Speaker of the Assembly Fabian Nunez (D-Los Angeles) and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland).

Check for updates below the fold.

Speaker Nunez has just arrived and will start the discussion on AB 8. Senate Pro Tem seated right beside him.

In front of Senator Kuehl is a white sign with black text: “DO NO HARM.”

Speaker Nunez says that he and Perata are pleased to be here to make a major step in ailing a system that is broken.

Nunez: [Kuehl] You are a champion of healthcare for all Californians.

Nunez: AB 8 built on the idea of shared responsibility between employers, government and individuals. These measures will not fix the entire healthcare market, but improve it. This is a rare opportunity to fundamentally improve our healthcare system. We need to act now; take advantage of this opportunity.

Nunez: All of the uninsured children in California will be covered by this legislation. It will move 3.4 million (of the 6.5 million) under coverage.

Nunez: This is not a perfect plan, but will help pave the way for “real healthcare reform.”

Senator Perata now at the podium.

Perata: “[Bills merged because] we got tired talking to each other. We wanted to talk to the Governor.” Says we should have a national healthcare program. “Scandalous” that the U.S. is “woeful” on healthcare. California must provide the leadership [for the country].

Kuehl: In MA, they just added “affordable” to the name.

Witness: (Speaking of SB 840 support) “It seems like Kuehl’s gang were all over the place.” Kuehl replied jokingly, “Kuehl’s angels, we call them,” and the room chuckled.

Angie Wei, California Labor Fed acknowledged the huge number of IOH supporters that have traveled from across the state today. Provisions supported: Creation of statewide purchasing pool; establishment minimum of healthcare spending requirement; subsidies and discounts for families below 300% poverty level.

Concerns: issue of cost containment (union members have been able to hold on to their healthcare but pay a dear price for that; early retirees face risk of losing their healthcare; current system is unsustainable); affordability (we need to protect families from maximum exposure out of pocket).

Beth Capell, Health Access California: [Legislators] have been receiving healthcare Stories of the Day. Retells her own personal healthcare story involving her husband. “Never once did we worry we whether we could pay for his care. It should be that way for everyone.”

Number of studies released today on employer-based coverage. AB 8 would have a modest, yet positive, impact on California’s economy and not cost jobs.

Capell: We can do something this year that will improve the economy and help with people’s care.

Witness: AB 8 would improve healthcare for low-income Californians.

Mary Hernandez, SEIU: We support AB 8 if amended to control healthcare costs.

Gary Passmore, Congress of California Seniors: Add amendments on two issues for support; truly a work in progress; “we like what we see”

Consumers Union: support if amended; transparency a must;

AFSCME: We want to make sure this bill includes cost controls.

California Medical Association: support if amended; refinement of cost control efforts; inclusion of fiscal transparency

CNA voiced opposition to AB 8, instead favoring SB 840.

Senator Sam Aanestad (R-Grass Valley) suggested to the Speaker that he work with the chair, put a hold on the bill and work on it through the fall.

Kuehl: “I don’t like your bill as much as I like my bill.” (The assembled crowd laughed.)

Kuehl: If we had the right Governor, we’d have it (SB 840). But my responsibility, is to now. Responsibility to push as hard as I can to hammer on the issues at hand. I am going to support this bill today (AB 8). It must keep moving to have a vehicle better than the Governor’s plan.

Nunez: Your bill (SB 840) is not only a bill that I not only support, but enthusiastically support. AB 8 is not perfect but will help a lot of people — 3.4 million.

Kuehl voted in favor of AB 8, vote is currently still open.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Blog Roundup, Health Care

July 11, 2007 Blog Roundup

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. Let me know if I missed anything in comments.

Health and Health Care

Our Environment

Pretty Much Everything
Else

San Diego

Donna Frye Caves on Wal-Mart, San Diego Open to Supercenters

33 Comments

After consistently voting to ban supercenters in San Diego, Councilwoman Donna Frye yesterday switched her vote in a surprise move, killing any opportunity to override the Mayor’s veto.  After years of opposition, Frye said:

I heard from many, many people that want to have that choice, and I think there’s a way to give people that choice, to hopefully put something in place that also protects small businesses by doing an economic impact report and allowing the communities to have a greater oversight of that process

Essentially, she’s decided that the effect of Supercenters can be mitigated by nibbling around the edges, turning her back on the UFCW, the Neighborhood Market Association, and any supporter of responsible growth or sound economic policy in San Diego

The word is that Frye received enough of a reaction from her district in support of Wal-Mart that she was compelled to change her vote, which is a hell of a mixed blessing.  Responsiveness is fantastic, but not at the expense of leadership.  This is a case in which it’s the responsibility of elected officials to actually know better than their constituents, and in that regard, Donna Frye has failed.  The negative impacts of Supercenters on environment, traffic, community development, small businesses and the general economic conditions are well documented.  Indeed, Donna Frye has made the anti-Supercenter case very well herself many times, so she knows what she’s dealing with.

Yet here we find ourselves.  A city with major environmental concerns and traffic congestion problems adding a big, fat, polluting roadblock.  Cheap liquor and guns coming to a community near you. And of course, the replacement of high-paying jobs with low-paying jobs.  Because in all of my experience, cities with more poor people tend to be desirable.  People have clamored for the option of buying cheaper groceries (not that they’re actually cheaper, but whatever), and apparently this swayed Donna Frye.  I wonder though whether people would be as enthusiastic about having no option BUT to buy the cheapest possible products.  Because that’s what happens.

The City government’s job is to manage the growth and development of the city in a wise way.  That’s why, for example, there’s zoning.  Or height restrictions for buildings near airports. Donna Frye has abandoned what’s best for San Diego in favor of what’s popular in San Diego.  That’s not her job, she knows better, and I’m exceptionally disappointed.

The article mentions the suspicion that this might have been a political maneuver to protect the Democratic Party next November.  With this issue gone, Wal-Mart won’t be sponsoring a ballot measure and skewing the Mayor, City Attorney, and four City Council elections with money, advertising and GOTV.  If that’s the case, it’s a pretty tricky bit of maneuvering that she’s playing with.

What I’d like to think (really really like to think), is that this is the first step towards placing so many restrictions on the location of Supercenters that there wouldn’t be any suitable locations in San Diego.  This would be exceptionally difficult and while the folks at Wal-Mart are many unflattering things, stupid isn’t one of them.  They also aren’t going to be shamed out of building a location because of an environmental impact study or public scrutiny.  As long as there’s a lack of political will to stand up to corporations which exist only insofar as they can keep people poor and desperate, Wal-Mart won’t police itself.  One more time, Democrats have rolled over rather than taking on a necessary fight.  I hope there’s another legitimate step coming, but I’m not holding my breath.

Uncategorized

State Legislature Attempts to Eliminate All Local Campaign Funding Limits?

15 Comments

Even though Loni Hancock’s Clean Money bill, allowing for a pilot program to attempt public financing for state elections, was turned into a two-year bill, meaning it won’t be eligible for passage until 2008, I was under the impression that campaign finance reform was making some progress in the state legislature.  And while this shocker legislation is more about the state exerting control on local municipalities more than anything else, it certainly puts a damper on public financing efforts, as it would virtually eliminate any local limits on contributions.

Legislation that opponents said would eviscerate local governments’ ability to limit the size of campaign contributions was approved Tuesday by a state Senate committee.

The bill, backed by a powerful coalition that includes the Democratic and Republican parties, labor unions and the National Rifle Association, cleared the Elections, Reapportionment and Constitutional Amendments Committee on a 3-0 vote.

Special interests and the state parties want to dictate what they can spend on campaigns at the local level, and they want to disallow any reasonable attempts by the local governments to limit their influence.  This is really a blow against federalism in the context of the state vs. the local governments, and I find it distasteful.  If Santa Monica wants to experiment with Clean Money, or limit campaign contributions, why should the state disallow it?  Assemblyman Martin Garrick, the Republican sponsor of the legislation, is using truly devious logic to push this forward:

Garrick said the measure was merely an attempt to clarify current law and avoid a “patchwork of laws” preventing political parties and other statewide organizations from communicating with their members about which candidates the groups support and oppose.

“What I am assuring is that members of a membership organization like the California Teachers Association or the League of Conservation Voters can afford to freely communicate . . . with their members,” he said.

But Ned Wigglesworth, a lobbyist for California Common Cause, said the bill would open up an “enormous loophole” by preventing cities and counties from capping campaign donations that are arranged by candidates and used to pay for mailers sent by political parties to their members.

“It’s about local control over local elections,” he said. “Without such safeguards, local contribution limits would be rendered worthless.”

This would be devastating.  It may even allow organizations to avoid reporting requirements.  What the hell are we doing here?

Ron Calderon, Mod Squad member in good standing, chaired the committee that passed the bill.  Your state senator ought to hear from you on this one.  It would be a major step backward in the goal to remove the influence of big money in state politics.

Uncategorized

Democrats Work on Saturdays – Mission Cleanup on 7/14

Join Democrats Work, the San Francisco Young Democrats, and community volunteers for a Mission neighborhood cleanup event put together by SF Connect and the San Francisco Clean City Coalition.  The cleanup will be around the Mission Firehouse, Mission & Courtland Streets, and Holly Park on Saturday, July 14th from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon.  This is a great community event, so please join your fellow Democrats to plant trees, weed, sweep, paint over graffitti, and generally help improve the neighborhood.

Please meet at the Firehouse at 9:00 a.m. and wear your Democrats Work t-shirt!

Anyone who’s interested is welcome to join SFYDs inDolores Park afterward for food, drinks, and conversation, all on SFYD!

You can sign up here.  See you there! 

Health Care

Sick of Blue Cross? We Are

5 Comments

(Cool new site, even though the graphics make my eyes freak out. – promoted by juls)

For far too long, Blue Cross of California’s standard operating procedures of policy cancellation and denial of coverage have gone on unchecked and unregulated. With healthcare reform a top priority in Sacramento, Blue Cross dropped $2 million on an astroturf “coalition of one” to stifle necessary reform this year.

Today, It’s OUR Healthcare, a coalition of consumer advocates, seniors, health advocates, communities of faith, and labor comprising more than 10 million, says no more and is asking Californians everywhere to stand up and fight back.

We are launching an aggressive online, public information campaign to uncover the real Blue Cross at www.SickOfBlueCross.com.

From our press release this morning:

It’s OUR Healthcare! has been advocating for a number of reforms that would fundamentally change the way Blue Cross and the healthcare industry do business in California:

* Banning the practice of denying coverage for “pre-existing conditions,” including minor conditions such as yeast infections, ear infections and seasonal hay fever.

* Requiring that a fair percentage of every premium dollar be spent on healthcare. There’s no minimum now, and a proposed requirement that at least 85% of every dollar charged be spent on healthcare, would be a radical shift (and increase) for Blue Cross.

* Requiring approval and justification for rate hikes. Because uncontrolled increases in the cost of health insurance have hit businesses and families hard in California.

Blue Cross sent nearly $1 billion in profits back to their corporate headquarters in Indiana last May. Their “coalition of one” — Blue Cross — are using scare tactics with their radio and print ads.

Blue Cross is putting money into stopping reform this year, because real reforms are on the table. It’s OUR Healthcare! and legislative leaders are taking a hard look at how our healthcare needs to be fixed, and those changes will force Blue Cross to make serious changes to its business model, which relies on:

* Spending hundreds of millions of dollars that Californians pay for health insurance each year on high salaries, slick marketing and “dividends” to out-of-state corporate headquarters

* Cherry-picking: denying coverage for pre-existing conditions  and instead seeking to insure only the healthy

* Selling insurance designed to provide limited benefits, coupled with high deductibles and co-pays

* Raising rates however and whenever it chooses

Their slogan says, “Get the power of Blue working for you.” The fact is that it ain’t working and they want to keep it that way.

Don’t let them. Stand up.