For years, we’ve heard from political ideologues and ambitious district attorneys about how much waste, fraud and abuse there is in state programs like Medi-Cal. Whenever there is a case in which a low-income recipient is charged or convicted, the right-wing cheering section is quick to applaud and point to the case as proof of rampant fraud.

But where was the applause when Attorney General Kamala Harris recently announced a $241 million settlement in a case of Medi-Cal fraud by Quest Diagnostics, the state’s largest provider of medical laboratory testing?  

The settlement resulted from allegations that Quest systematically overcharged the state’s Medi-Cal program for more than 15 years and gave illegal kickbacks in the form of discounted or free testing to doctors, hospitals and clinics that referred Medi-Cal patients and other business to the labs. Here’s what AG Harris said:

“In a time of shrinking budgets, this historic settlement affirms that Medi-Cal exists to help the state’s neediest families rather than to illicitly line private pockets. Medi-Cal providers and others who try to cheat the state through false claims and illegal kickbacks should know that my office is watching and will prosecute.

Where is the outrage from these right-wing politicians and ambitious district attorneys at this massive theft of taxpayer dollars? Why can’t these hypocrites muster the same fervor for going after big white-collar firms that score lucrative government contracts, whose taxpayer rip-offs dwarf the meager amounts possibly scammed by a few low-income elderly and disabled Californians?

“No More Cuts.”

It’s a sentiment you’ll see at many a Democratic rally.  But, not so much with the Republicans.  Shane Goldmacher’s got this one:

Flanked by people in wheelchairs and protesters in green union T-shirts, the Republicans echoed Democratic talking points in opposing Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposal to slash in-home care for hundreds of thousands of elderly, blind and disabled.

“Why is Paul Cook here?” the GOP assemblyman from Yucaipa began, asking the question on everyone’s mind.

Because, Cook said, slashing the care program would actually drive up costs, forcing the frail into more costly nursing homes. Sure, he was “never going to convince” some of his GOP colleagues. But he was ready to fight for the unionized program that most Republicans made a favored bogeyman for government largesse. (LA Times)

Asm. Silva (R-OC) goes on to say that, hey, in fact cutting this program would end up costing more than it saves in the long run.  Wow, that makes sense.  There’s some partisanship I can believe in.

Even lifelong Republicans who recognize the importance of the IHSS program are voting for Jerry Brown for Governor.

Check out these comments from Meg Whitman’s own website:

“I’m being forced to vote Democrat for the first time in my life…. I am shocked that a Republican would make me go to the Dem side, but I have been informed that you intend to do away with or seriously cut “I.H.S.S.”  K. Jones, Roseville

“Meg Whitman doesn’t get it…. Every day I have to feed my daughter and help with toileting and think about what Meg says about us ‘criminals’. It is despicable. At least Jerry Brown can do the simple math and he knows that this is one program that saves money. ”  C. Rose, Riverside

“I am a single father with a son who suffers a disability and needs round the clock care. IHSS provides me the resources to act as my son’s caretaker…. I make less today (a little over minimum wage) than I did 20 years ago, but the important thing is that my son is properly cared for…. Just as current governor Schwarzenegger has repeatedly attempted to dismantle the IHSS program, Meg Whitman threatens to do the same. I will be voting for Brown this November!”  A. Fietz, Grass Valley

This is NOT a partisan issue.  IHSS was signed into law by Republican Gov. Ronald Reagan and has been supported by legislators from both parties ever since.

But Meg Whitman wants to follow in Arnold Schwarzenegger’s footsteps by continuing to attack IHSS, one of the most humane and cost effective programs in state government.

Last year, when Schwarzenegger claimed that the fraud rate in the IHSS program was “as high as 25 percent,” his claim was disproven and widely ridiculed. The Sacramento Bee accused the governor of “spouting misleading rhetoric about waste and

fraud,”  while the San Jose Mercury-News called his allegations “phantom claims.”

Yet in her campaign commercials this year, Whitman pledges to “save $1 billion” by eliminating IHSS fraud. Since the total budget for the program is $1.4 billion, she is telling us that the fraud rate in IHSS is more than 70 percent!  That would be funny if it wasn’t so unfair and nasty.

The future of IHSS is at stake on November 2nd.

Kenneth Jones, a homecare provider from Roseville, mounts a strong defense of the IHSS program and says that Whitman’s attacks on the program will force him to vote for Jerry Brown for governor.

And he does it on Meg’s own web site.  

Here’s Mr. Jones’ powerful post:

Guess I’m Being Forced to vote Democrat for the 1st time of my life !

Posted by kenneth jones on October 6, 2010 at 6:08pm on TalktoMeg.com/ Forum

I am shocked that a  republican would make me go to the dem side, But I have been informed that you intend to do away with or seriously cut  “I.H.S.S”.

Well I will tell you that  is one program I have thanked and praised the state for – BECAUSE my daughter was hit by a worthless repeat affender still out driving when she was just 14. She had to have part of her brain cut out because of the injuries. She has been disabled since and requires help with everything physically but surprisinly is very mentally aware and remembers being normal.

I have given up the home I owned at the time, my marrage, and have struggled with many head on challanges to keep her at home with me and family just to get her whatever therapy and care possible so that I can persue the things she needs to  improve her life instead of excepting her condition when she came home as perminit as we were told. She has come a long ways now 29 and is happy to be with us instead of stuck in a care home surrounded by non-caring strangers and lots of other sick people

SHE didn’t commit a crime to be condemed to that which by the way would even cost the state more than it does now for the I.H.S.S. I did’nt commit a crime but I excepted my role as her dad to be there for her no matter the cost, I had to except not being able to grow my business any longer, down sized to be able to make sure she is my priority as she desirves,

I am  50 now and have nothing towards retiring but that is my problem and except the worries. However The “only” way I have been able to make it as long as I have and afford to keep her home and not abanden her for full time employment is I.H.S.S.  I can’t make the money iI use to and we are always barely making the bills month to month but with out I.H.S.S.

I would not be able to afford being available for my daughters needs and she would have to go into a care home . For us it’s not about money – WE WOULD BOTH GIVE UP EVERYTHING TO HAVE HER BACK ON HER FEET AGAIN AND LIVING A NORMAL HEALTY LIFE !!  But we don’t get that choice so we are stuck with major changes and challanges to our lives that neither one of us ask for or want.

I can’t believe that you would distroy our lives futher  SO am I to vote for Brown to save my daugters life as she knows it now?

http://talktomeg.ning.com/foru…

Not wishing to be overshadowed by the aggressive anti-fraud tactics in Stanislaus County  (California’s War on the Elderly and Disabled: A Dispatch from the Front Lines) Sacramento County District Attorney Jan Scully is publicizing the exploits of her own “fraud squad” in the struggle against what she claims is “massive fraud” in the In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program.

In a breathless announcement to the County Board of Supervisors, Ms. Scully’s team proclaimed that her anti-fraud Task Force has been responsible for criminal cases against 60 defendants for about $780,000 in fraud in the past year. “There are many opportunities for fraud in this program,” declared Deputy D.A. Laura West. She claimed that the Task Force, as well as other factors, has helped save the county about $1.1 million in local funds.

Supervisor Roger Dickinson, for one, was not impressed.

According to the Sacramento Bee, Dickinson “pointed out that the fraud amount is miniscule when compared to the overall size of the program.”

The money allegedly saved represents less than one percent of the total cost of the program, he said.

Noting that 60 criminal defendants represent less than half a percent of all care providers, Dickinson said that the figures reported by the DA’s Office “would seem to refute the argument made by those who assail IHSS-often those on the right seeking to slash the program-which is that as much as 25 percent of the costs of the program go to fraud.

“These numbers don’t even start to scratch the surface of that figure,” he said.

You may recall that DA Scully was one of the cheerleaders at Gov. Schwarzenegger’s 2009 news conference when he claimed that the IHSS fraud rate was as much as 25 percent.  (She must be doing cartwheels over Meg Whitman’s pronouncement of a 70 percent fraud rate in the program.)

Only problem is that no one has ever found conclusive proof of widespread fraud in IHSS.  Even Schwarzenegger’s own Quality Assurance Task Force report in 2007 found a fraud rate of only about two percent in the program.

But this hasn’t stopped the anti-fraud crusade. Attacking the low-income elderly and disabled IHSS recipients and those who care for them as fraud criminals scores political points for right-wing ideologues and helps pad the budgets of county DA’s.  So why should they let the facts get in the way.

Any fraud in IHSS is wrong and should be investigated.  But perhaps the Sacramento Supervisors should stop and compare the amount of “savings” ($1.1 million at most) with the costs of setting up and running Scully’s “fraud squad.”

My name is Tyrone Dickens and I am a union healthcare worker.

I have worked as a homecare provider in San Francisco for almost six years. My work involves cleaning, cooking and caring for patients in their homes who cannot do these things for themselves. For some of my homecare consumers who don’t have family any more, I am the only companion in their lives.

This week I have attended a civil lawsuit in which the officials of the union that currently represent me are suing the former leaders of my local union, leaders that I elected and that I still support. I know that may sound confusing, but I think I can explain it clearly so that you can understand.

Despite my and other members’ protests, officials from SEIU removed the former leaders of my union, SEIU-UHW, from office in January of 2009 and since that time have pursued a civil lawsuit against 28 defendants who used to work for SEIU-UHW asking for $25 million. You can read more about the lawsuit and the defendants here.

Like thousands of other healthcare workers in California, I support the former leaders of my union and the new union we are building together, the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW). NUHW is a democratic union that we, the union members control.

That principle, workers having a democratic voice in our own union, has always been the primary disagreement between the officials of the SEIU and tens of thousands of healthcare workers and the leaders we have elected to represent us.

For that reason, I want the public to understand some facts about this lawsuit. This is a civil lawsuit. For as much as SEIU wants to make this trial seem like a criminal proceeding. It is not.

Despite SEIU making claims to my co-workers that this civil trial is the result of the defendants “stealing” money or that actions taken by the defendants hurt union members bargaining or grievances, the truth is that SEIU’s lawyers, some of the highest-powered attorneys in the country, are not making those claims at all.

However, SEIU is not explaining that to my coworkers.

SEIU is also not telling my coworkers that the scope of their civil lawsuit has shrunk. In fact, Judge Alsup, the federal judge overseeing this trial, reduced the scope of the trial to one fifth of SEIU’s previous charges. Even then, SEIU will have to prove its case in court.

What I’ve seen so far has not impressed me. Today we found out that SEIU staff who took over our union and who were supposed to be looking for and securing files didn’t do a very good job.  The people who are saying that stuff is missing didn’t even try to see if someone else had them. They just said “Oh, well” and let it go.

One of the other things that I have learned about this trial that disturbs me is that the lawyers for SEIU are being paid an estimated three times more than what the civil suit is asking for. Since SEIU’s lawyers are being paid out of my dues money, I think our dues could have been better used fighting Arnold Schwarzenegger and protecting healthcare workers.

Finally, I would also like to share my personal experience of the civil trial. I attended the trial because I wanted information and to see for myself what was being said in court. Sitting alongside me in support of the defendants this week were other homecare workers, nursing home workers, hospital workers, community members, labor allies and friends and family. But don’t take my word for it, come to court and find out for yourself.

Thank you for reading,

Tyrone Dickens, IHSS, San Francisco

::

{NUHW, the National Union of Healthcare Workers, is a vibrant and democratic movement of healthcare workers, dedicated to dignity, justice, and healthcare for all. NUHW Voice features blog posts by workers from NUHW’s Our Voices page. You can follow NUHW on Facebook and Twitter.}

An editorial from Saturday’s Sacramento Bee: High-tech fix won’t stop IHSS fraud

In an effort to cut what Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger claims is rampant fraud in the state’s In-Home Supportive Services Program, the Department of Social Services is pushing a pilot program to assess the efficacy of an expensive high-tech system to fingerprint and photograph care providers and their recipients.

The MorphoTrak device, which the state is testing in three counties, including Sacramento, has been used by the military in Iraq. It can fingerprint, snap a photo and transfer data instantaneously. The machines cost up to $5,000 a copy. If deployed statewide, the state would need 600 to 1,000 of these devices potentially. But let’s hold on a minute.

Before the state commits to buying this expensive equipment and building yet another expensive police bureaucracy that treats all IHSS recipients and their caregivers as potential criminals, it needs to perform a far more thorough assessment of the potential for fraud within IHSS and the best way to address it.  

In the welfare realm, fingerprints and photo IDs are used primarily to prevent duplicate fraud, cases in which aid recipients go to different counties and apply for welfare or food stamps under different names. IHSS services are delivered in recipients’ homes. It’s hard to conceive of an elderly frail or disabled IHSS recipient traveling from Sacramento to Yolo to apply for help bathing or feeding him- or herself at two different addresses.

To the extent that IHSS fraud exists, the vast majority involves caregivers claiming payment for services that were not provided, or elderly and frail IHSS recipients exaggerating the extent of their disabilities.

An expensive bureaucratic apparatus to capture and store fingerprints and photos of recipients and caregivers does nothing to address those problems. A $5,000 camera-fingerprint device would pay for 500 hours of in-home care to poor elderly and disabled people.

Although the administration needs to look out for taxpayers, it shouldn’t waste money on anti-fraud efforts that make little sense.

Here’s the latest “high tech” weapon in Gov. Schwarzenegger’s war on 450,000 elderly, blind and disabled Californians.

Without any authority from the Legislature, the Schwarzenegger Administration is planning to purchase up to $5 million worth of military/security cameras to take pictures of the 465,000 seniors and people with disabilities who receive In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) homecare.

The “MorphoTrak” cameras are currently being used in Iraq and other military locations. According to their manufacturer, they are also recommended for, among other things, “border crossings, gang enforcement, and airport/maritime security.”  The camera itself costs $4,200, plus hundreds of dollars more for docking stations and other equipment.

Last year, the Legislature approved the administration’s demand that county social workers must fingerprint all IHSS consumers as part of a so-called anti-fraud initiative targeting the program.  However, the Legislature neither discussed nor approved photographing consumers. Nor has the administration provided any evidence of how much fraud would be stopped by photographing/fingerprinting these consumers. Under the law, all IHSS consumers must be visited and assessed at home by county social workers before being approved for the program.

The Administration has projected that it will need to purchase 600 to 1,000 of these cameras, costing between $3 million and $5 million. It has borrowed several of these devices from the manufacturer and has solicited Sacramento and San Diego Counties to use them in a pilot project beginning April 1.

The District Attorneys in these two counties have been among the strongest advocates for the administration’s anti-fraud campaign.  However, a recent report from Sacramento County found a total of 19 potential cases of IHSS fraud out of more than 20,000 consumers.

Each $5,000 used to buy a “MorphoTrak” camera would purchase nearly 500 hours of IHSS homecare.

Herb Mayer, 79 year old IHSS consumer, chair of the IHSS coalition and a Korean war veteran, said “My social worker knows who I am without needing a $5,000 camera. How can the administration find money for these cameras but no money to keep the IHSS program going?”

Assemblymember Hector De La Torre (D- South Gate) said: “I am outraged that this administration is again targeting our lowest income seniors and people with disabilities as if they were criminals we need to monitor. How is that we can afford millions for cameras yet we continue to cut their services and the money they live on?”

“This Administration’s misguided attack on alleged fraud in the IHSS program has already caused major disruptions to IHSS services for 450,000 elderly Californians who depend on these services,” said Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco). “The small investment in home support for the elderly keeps consumers out of expensive nursing homes and saves the state money. We intend to use our legislative oversight power to ensure the Governor does not waste government resources and harm elderly Californians who desperately need In Home Support Services.”

“The Administration’s proposal to spend $5 million on cameras is ridiculous,” said Assemblymember Dave Jones (D-Sacramento).  “The money for each $5,000 camera could instead be used for 500 hours of IHSS care. The Administration has asked Sacramento County to begin a pilot program with loaner cameras on April 1. I am calling on Sacramento District Attorney Jan Scully not to participate in this misguided program

.”

“It is bad enough that the Schwarzenegger Administration treats 450,000 of our most vulnerable citizens and the people who serve them like common criminals,” said Doug Moore, executive director of UDW Homecare Providers Union. “Now, to add insult to injury, the administration wants to waste millions of taxpayer dollars on these unauthorized and totally unnecessary cameras. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic.”