Two local papers in Rep. Jerry McNerney’s district yesterday carried full-page ads calling on voters to contact their Congressman and urge him to “stop the cuts” on Medicare and “stand up for the quality skilled nursing care California’s seniors need.”
These ads were placed by the American Health Care Association and the Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care. The AHCA announced this ad campaign in a press release dated August 22:
In response to the $2.7 billion cuts to Medicare that were passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in the Children’s Health and Medicare Protection Act (CHAMP Act), the long term care provider community today initiated an aggressive TV and print campaign in Congressional districts across the country. The campaign warns that proposed cuts will jeopardize ongoing quality improvements in America’s nursing homes, threaten thousands of local health care jobs, and irrationally return Medicare funding levels to those seen almost a decade ago.
In addition to the newspaper ads, AHCA/AQNHC plans to air TV commercials in their targeted districts. Here’s the text of the commercials:
Why?… would politicians in Washington vote to cut Medicare for our most vulnerable seniors?… cutting $2.7 billion in vital funds for skilled nursing care. It’s wrong. Slashing billions will jeopardize quality, threaten thousands of health care jobs, and return Medicare funding to levels of almost a decade ago. Call Congressman [Name], tell him to stop the cuts, and to stand up for the quality skilled nursing care [State]’s seniors need. Time is running out.
So you might wonder exactly who these two groups are. Well, here’s how they describe themselves. According to the AHCA website, the AHCA “represents nearly 11,000 non-profit and proprietary facilities” and the AQNHC is a “coalition of 16 national skilled nursing providers.” In other words, this campaign has ostensibly been launched by two organizations that represent the owners of nursing homes.
But here’s where the story goes sideways. When the CHAMP Act came to a vote, 220 Democrats and five Republicans voted in favor of it. So these two supposed industry groups have announced that they will be targeting the following members of Congress in their districts:
Arizona: Rep. Harry Mitchell; California: Rep. Jerry McNerney; Connecticut: Reps. Joe Courtney, Chris Murphy; Florida: Reps. Tim Mahoney, Ron Klein; Georgia: Reps. Jim Marshall, John Barrow; Indiana: Reps. Joe Donnelly, Baron Hill; Kansas: Rep. Nancy Boyda; Minnesota: Rep. Tim Walz; New Hampshire: Reps. Paul Hodes, Carol Shea-Porter; New York: Reps. John Hall, Kirsten Gillebrand, Mike Arcuri; Ohio: Rep. Zack Space; Pennsylvania: Reps. Jason Altmire, Joe Sestak, Patrick Murphy; Wisconsin: Rep. Steven Kagen.
Now, when I looked at the list of Congressional members this group was targeting, I couldn’t help but notice that they were all Democrats and mostly freshmen. In fact, only the two Congressmen from Georgia, Jim Marshall and John Barrow, are incumbents. But due to a redistricting maneuver in 2005 by the Georgia state legislature, they both barely won their races in 2006. In fact, Barrow won by a mere 864 votes, Marshall by 1,752.
Hmm… freshmen and highly vulnerable incumbent Democrats. I thought I’d go over to consult Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball and found a pretty striking similarity between his list of “Potentially Vulnerable Democratic House Seats in 2008” (the 28 candidates who won their 2006 races with less than 55% of the vote) and the list of Congress members being targeted by AHCA/AQNHC. I’ve copied his chart and added an “X” for those Representatives who are being targeted by the AHCA/AQNHC.
| Congress Member | District | Vote % | AHCA/AQNHC Target |
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Courtney | CT 02 | 50.02 | X |
| John Barrow | GA 12 | 50.30 | X |
| Patrick Murphy | PA 08 | 50.30 | X |
| Jim Marshall | GA 08 | 50.55 | X |
| Tim Mahoney | FL 16 | 50.97 | X |
| Steve Kagen | WI 08 | 51.07 | X |
| John Hall | NY 19 | 51.22 | X |
| John Yarmuth | KY 03 | 51.24 | |
| Carol Shea-Porter | NH 01 | 51.32 | X |
| Dave Loebsack | IA 02 | 51.43 | |
| Nancy Boyda | KS 02 | 51.77 | X |
| Ron Klein | FL 22 | 51.92 | X |
| Jason Altmire | PA 04 | 51.93 | X |
| Harry Mitchell | AZ 05 | 52.05 | X |
| Baron Hill | IN 09 | 52.37 | X |
| Leonard Boswell | IA 03 | 52.74 | |
| Tim Walz | MN 01 | 52.81 | X |
| Chris Carney | PA 10 | 53.04 | |
| Kirsten Gillibrand | NY 20 | 53.10 | X |
| Jerry McNerney | CA 11 | 53.27 | X |
| Paul Hodes | NH 02 | 53.61 | X |
| Melissa Bean | IL 08 | 53.63 | |
| Julia Carson | IN 07 | 53.76 | |
| Heath Shuler | NC 11 | 53.79 | |
| Joe Donnelly | IN 02 | 53.98 | X |
| Ciro Rodriguez | TX 23 | 54.24 | |
| Peter Welch | VT AL | 54.44 | |
| Mike Arcuri | NY 24 | 54.52 | X |
The only Congress members who have been targeted by AHCA/AQNHC who do not appear on that list are Zack Space (OH-18), Chris Murphy (CT-05) and Joe Sestak (PA-07). But look what other list both Space and Sestak DO appear on.
Why, yes, it’s Karl Rove’s hit list. In fact, of the 20 Democratic seats targeted by Karl Rove, 14 of them have also been targeted by AHCA/AQNHC.
Here’s where the story gets REALLY interesting. You see, there are two Congressmen whose names appear on all three of these lists: Jim Marshall and Baron Hill. They are Numbers 2 and 15 of Sabato’s most vulnerable Democrats; they are both targeted by Karl Rove; and they are now being subjected to a full-on media onslaught in their districts calling them out for “voting to cut Medicare for our most vulnerable seniors.” But there’s one really big problem: They both voted AGAINST the CHAMP Act.
But there’s more. In 2006, Christopher Shays (CT-04) won with 51.71% of the vote, making him Number 17 on Sabato’s list of most vulnerable Republican incumbents. Shays is also one of the five Republicans who voted in favor of the CHAMP Act. But the AHCA/AQNHC has made nary a peep in Shays’ district.
So in summation, the AHCA/AQNHC has targeted 22 vulnerable Democrats for voting in favor of the CHAMP Act, including two who voted against it, while totally ignoring the five Republicans, including Shays, who voted in favor of it. And we’re supposed to believe that they have no blatantly partisan agenda? Meanwhile, FEC records show that the AHCA has reported zero in independent expenditures from 2006 to the present. Sheesh, you’d think there’d be some kind of law against this sort of behavior.
UPDATE: Per babaloo in the comments, a slight correction on two of the targeted Dems:
My mistake was in assuming that the list of targeted Dems was for negative advertising. Turns out that AHCA/AQNHA has actually targeted Hill and Marshall for a positive campaign.
Nevertheless, it doesn’t answer the question of why they are attacking only vulnerable Dems who voted for the CHAMP Act and not Republicans who supported it…
Thanks to babaloo for the update on that. — CHS
Related posts:
- GOP Will Target Blue Dogs Who Vote “Yes” on IMF, Senior Republican Campaign Official Confirms
- A Public Option in the Democratic Platform?
- FDL Action Launches 40,000 Call Phone Bank to Nevada Democrats Targeting Harry Reid and the Public Option
- Democratic Staffer: Blue Dogs are “Hell Nos” on Public Option
LeadershipWhite House Threatens Freshmen Who Won’t Vote For Supplemental





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Lovely.
John Barrow is a fucking scumbag, period.
Isn’t it funny how despite their claims that America is a “conservative country,” Republicans have to constantly lie to get people to support them?
these people have no shame
If this part
is true, then shouldn’t the laws prohibiting political activity on the part of non profits be in effect? Shoot, the dog rescue group I work with is careful not to do political endorsement so as not to jeopardize that 501(c)3…
I need to make a clarification. I tried to contact Jane to make a change to this piece in just the last few minutes and was unable to reach her. My mistake was in assuming that the list of targeted Dems was for negative advertising. Turns out that AHCA/AQNHA has actually targeted Hill and Marshall for a positive campaign.
Nevertheless, it doesn’t answer the question of why they are attacking only vulnerable Dems who voted for the CHAMP Act and not Republicans who supported it…
KKKARL ain’t going away easily.
Hmmmm. The target list is indeed interesting — but there’s another question I’m surprised you didn’t mention: Is any of the ads’ descriptions of the CHAMP act accurate?
I confess, I wasn’t aware that the Children’s medical provisions cut anything in old folks’ care. I kind of find it hard to believe,actuallly. But, given, that our representatives themselves, who presumably have access to the texts of legislation, keep voting without having read said texts, I could be all wet.
Hmmm . . . I wonder what the California Nurses Association folks think of these two groups. They have been the strongest political force on health care in California for at least the last five years. Even Gov S. is scared of them. Might be worth trying to get in touch with someone there, Babaloo.
Gee, it couldn’t be that these groups have members who want more money from Medicare, could it?
My mother talked to the CA ombusdsperson for here areas about reants and fees in independent living/assisted living facilities. Seems they aren’t regulated, and can be raised as much as the operator wants, regardless of COLA adjustments. This is something that states and Congress might want to take action on … but probably won’t, because it’s ‘old people’.
When your rent goes up ten percent in one year, and eight or ten more the next year, you can get really poor really quickly. Don’t even ask about the fees for ‘assistance’.
tejanarusa @ 8
It’s my understanding that it cuts back on privatization which costs us more money.. Somebody with more info than I please add to this.
Mr. Rove is quite an operator. Reminds of the ‘list technique’ Rove used with the U.S. Attorney firings. Karl Rove is a cancer on the American people.
The dems need to combat this with a “there you go again” ad quickly because it’s unfair.
Busted
tejanarusa @ 8
I addressed the underlying issue of the allegations made by these ads at a post on my own blog, The Progressive Connection.
But in a nutshell, the CHAMP Act extends SCHIP to 5 million previously uninsured children by cutting funds to the Medicare Advantage program. Now, Medicare Advantage is a program that was instituted by Republicans to privatize Medicare. Seniors can use Medicare Advantage to sign up with private insurance companies. And, needless to say, those private insurance companies have been providing inferior care while earning obscene profits.
That’s why the CHAMP Act was endorsed by both AARP and the AMA.
But the private organizations aren’t about to give up without a dirty fight.
I’m not sure I am sophisticated enough with the inside politics to follow all the details. But, sounds like at least part of Karl Rove’s political genius consists of cutting and pasting out of election political science blogs. And AHCA/AQNHC are running partisan political hit pieces under cover of non-partisan health care reform issues?
And it should be a crime. Or maybe it is a crime. I guess that is what I don’t understand -you saying these groups should be investigated for clear illegal activity, or that they are just disgusting slime walking as close as they can to the line?
OT:
Tauscher is heading in the right direction. I like her advice to the generals. I wish the Democrats would give Tauscher’s advice to Cheney and Bush, very loudly and publicly every day, since the generals do not have it within their control to deliver on Tauscher’s three demands. Cheney and Bush could have half a chance at delivering if they would adopt sane policies (but they won’t unless forced to).
[Tauscher] said she conveyed three things to Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker: 1) “the American people don’t want to see some kind of Saigon-like helicopter liftoff trying to remove people out of Iraq,” 2) they don’t want to see “ethnic cleansing and devastation of Iraqis” after we leave, and 3) they “don’t want the status quo.”
Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA), who recently returned from Iraq as well, said his experience led him to believe the escalation should be sustained until next year. Asked to address Baird’s comments, Tauscher suggested he had become a victim of the “green zone fog”:
“ I will tell you that when you get in the Green Zone, there is a physiological phenomenon I think called Green Zone fog. … It’s death by powerpoint. … It’s always that their argument is winning. “
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/…..from-iraq/
H/T to Punaise:
…The Republican Party – a thousand points of blight…
ahhh tweety just admitted he’s one of gary bauer’s crowd….. well well well
uhhh gary bauer is not a gayyy…. ok i cant stop myself
Rumor has it that behind the scenes, Rove’s expertise is in high demand from all GOP candidates. It is imperative that the Democrats keep digging into the ‘missing emails affair’.
juslin @ 18
please explain
i need to get to my laundry – back in a flash oh baby FDL is HOT!!!
wesgpc @ 16
I guess I’m personally a little unclear on where that line is, too. What they’re doing is either just incredibly sleazy or downright illegal.
I was off on the Hill/Marshall aspect to it, but nonetheless, the fact that they’ve targeted only vulnerable Dems while failing to criticize vulnerable Reps should expose the purely partisan political nature of their attack. Seems to me anyway.
Very nice work, Babaloo!
juslin @ 19
I was told by a die hard Republican, the kind that went to CPAC conferences, that Gary Bauer had a problem with a young female
gay bauer moral majority crowd that ilk – he ran for repug pres a few years ago in other words a “family values” kinda guy
TheOtherWA @ 24
yes, Hi Babaloo!
babaloo says August 29th, 2007 at 2:15 pm:
The CHAMP proposal just cuts the subsidies going to Medicare Advantage plans right?
I haven’t followed whether the Advantage plans affected are teh ones getting gravy on top of cost just for being private and those funds are being cut, or does it cut into what is supposed to be cost of care?
babaloo at 6 — You can send me the correction if you like and I’ll add it into the text. Send it to ReddHedd AT aol DOT com.
wesgpc @ 28
The CHAMP Act only cuts funds to Medicare Advanage. Regular Medicare is left untouched.
And what part will Ralph Reed play in electing Republicans in 2008?
Have you ever seen the insides of a “rest home”? Many of them are just human warehouses of impending death.
babaloo said:
Ahhh. It’s becoming clearer.
Well, it seems that most (all?) of the ad backers are nursing home operators – wonder how many are actually non-profit? For-profit nursing home operators have a pretty bad rep w/ me — there’ve been a number of investigations and lawsuits against them in Texas for providing abysmal “care.”
Thanks for the explanation. I’ll try to cruise over to your blog to read more. (it’s just so hard to keep up, y’know? Always some new outrage to deal with)
Oklahoma kiddo @ 32
I know.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 31
Nader, do you mean?
AP) Karl Rove and Gonzo seen moving into the Harriet Meyers safe house. Spotter says they packed lite.
PB (peanut butter) @ 35
Nader better stay under that rock.
Eureka Springs @ 36
Must be getting ready to go down Paraguay Way.
Apparently, they’re not new to this sort of thing. This according to Source Watch:
There’s more… god, are they sleazy.
Here’s a look at the ad campaign in Tim Walz’s district, with more information about the claims in the ads and the groups behind them.
Basically, if I understand it correctly, MEDPAC (the government agency charged with Medicare oversight, not a political action committee) recommended freezing payments to skilled long-term care facilities and that’s what the bill does–it’s not a cut as claimed.
Thanks for the correction on Hill and Marshall.
Brisingamen @ 17
10,000 points of blight!
SanderO @ 14
Yes?
Will we now see if the New Dems and Blue Dogs step up and help defend Jerry?
Oklahoma kiddo @ 32
As in Up From the Skies?
If anyone’s interested, their 2005 IRS Form 990 has these tidbits:
* Total Revenue: $24,699,697
* Net Assets: $6,678,117
* Revenue from membership dues: $17,783,240
The only salaried employee listed on the form is CEO Hal Daub – $787,927 (40 hr/week) with $1,083,333 going to his Employee Benefit Plan. There’s another $6M plus in salaries/wages that’s not detailed, though.
I’d imagine they have some pull in certain circles.
All on a Jimi break?
Ripley @ 45
Anyone have a read on Hal Daub?
And here’s an article from the Palm Beach Post exploring who’s “Behind Those Nursing-home Ads”:
Oklahoma kiddo @ 32
They smell like death – I think that’s why dogs freak out when they have to go to the vet because they have that great nose. Vets should make housecalls.
GordonM @ 46
I was :)
So I guess that health care, for those at risk does matter, yet when a hospital makes a mistake and medicare refuses to pay fore the correction, its more a lack of accountability, but thats what this is all about. until your sick or injured you can’t really know how these laws impact everyday folks. And no data is collected on how fast people die as a result, but… its just the way things go. Talk and more talk, if you have the money you get treated and if you don’t well tough luck. I really can’t see any action, and its my guess that none will be forth coming.
Former Nebraska Congressman Hal Daub?
Wiki page here
With former President Jimmy Carter by his side, Edwards visited Georgia Southwestern State University to discuss his vision for America and his plans to build One America. Edwards began his speech with an attack on Bush’s request for more money to fund the surge in Iraq. Using his fingers to make quote marks while saying the word “surge,” Edwards dismissed the idea as a good plan.
“What the Congress should do when they come back next week is make it absolutely clear, no timetable, no funding. And there should be no further excuses. The Congress needs to stand their ground. They had a mandate from the American people in the election in November in 2006 and they need to meet that mandate.”
Jonathan @ 47
Looks typical [Wiki]:
Jonathan @ 47
I dunno if this is the chappie but it seems like it: wiki: Hal Daub.
I am more and more confused. A form 990 means a non profit — reporting their “taxes” (which most do in order to prove how they’re using their monies within both the law and their own articles of incorporation). So what we have here is a non profit group, representing or lobbying for a cartel of for-profit nursing homes, and employing a fellow who used to be a US Representative and who is currently considering running for Senator? (Assuming this is the right person.)
This just doesn’t sound at all kosher. Is this one of those loophole organizations that shot into prominence as a way of funding partisan politics without running afoul of campaign contributions?
Brisingamen @ 17
Oh, I really like that one!
I suppose its too late to enter into the DSCC’s slogan campaign.
Bob in HI
*snort* I love it, we all stampede off and come up with the same wiki page…
Gordon at 54
A republican turd, in other words.
Good to know that when these sorts of guys are flushed, they land in a good place.
Babaloo, I’ve been looking at the year-end FEC report (from your last link), trying to make sense of your comment.
True, the summary sheets list zero “independent expenditures” (p. 4, line 24) but the line above it lists quite a few disbursements to candidates and PACs — $6820 in Dec 2006, and $879,170 for all of 2006 (line 23).
I wonder: have they shifted their operating practice rom candidate/PAC support to direct ads, or did they funnel money to AQNHC to pay for these ads?
Also: for 2006, they took in $665,775 in receipts and spent $896,771. I’m guessing that they are sitting on a hefty bank account, to have gone $231K in the hole — or expenses ran to about 135% of income.
Must be nice . . .
argosfalcon @ 51
Here’s a report on Hospital Infections in Pennsylvania and the costs (human and dollar)
Pennsylvania Releases First-In-The-Nation Report On Patient Infections For Each Hospital in State
peanutbutter @ 55
Well, and according to the Palm Beach Post article, in between stints as chair of the RNC and governor of Mississippi, Haley Barbour functioned as the group’s spokeman.
Jonathan @ 58
Yeah. I was particularly taken with “collection attorney for Standard Chemical”. In Nebraska that probably means taking farmer’s land away when they are late in their fertilizer payments.
Remember the 3 dead GOP consultants in Florida…the story is getting weirder:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/29/9114/64392
Seriously OT, but maybe a relief.
Just listened on original vinyl to:
Candida – Tony Orlando and Dawn
Indiana Wants Me – R. Dean Taylor
Hair – Cowsills
Lay Down Candles in the Rain – Melanie
Woodstock – CSN & Y
If these Dems. are being targeted by the other side, I would say it’s a way to teach the Blue Dogs how to act like Dems. The ad may just turn them around in time for the next vote on the Iraq war spending bill..knowing that they will need real Dems. to come to their rescue soon or later… for now I am not worried.
Oh, and one more thing from that FEC report. At the end, they detail their disbursements. I counted about 25 or so different campaigns and PACs, from all over. Then I noticed that for about 2/3rds of them, the disbursements were actually negative amounts, with a comment “void” alongside.
I’m new to going through a report like this, but it looked to me like those were contributions made earlier but which were now being returned at the end of the year. If it were one or two, I’d say “gosh, must have been a mixup.” But 16?
What’s up with that? Were the earlier contributions wink-and-a-nod loans, that the campaigns paid back at the end of the year? Were they provisional gifts, where the campaign said “we’ll send it back if we raise more that $X elsewhere”? They’re gifts to a mix of R’s and D’s, so it’s not a strict party-related issue.
Curiouser and curiouser . . .
According to the AHCA website, the
The owners of nursing homes.
The people who spend millions in
bribescampaign contributions to stop us from caring for our loved ones at home.Ever wonder why Medicare and Medi-cal don’t pay for long term care in the home?
The nursing home owners bribed Congress to stop it.
The other developed democracies provide taxpayer subsidies for at-home care, the goal being to keep the long-tem care patient – your paren, spouse, or grandparent – in their own home.
The US provides taxpayer subsidies for the ghouls who make billions stuffing our seniors in the hideous warehouses called “long-term care”.
These ghouls – they’re the ones paying for the ads.
LS @ 63
when it rains, it pours.
New Thread.
And Jonathan? TO & D???
Well thats great news, but the new rules with regard to the refusal to pay for mistakes stands as a blight. And well the system is more filled with problems than a copy of windows me, I just don’t see may lives being saved now (given the balance sheet is for the future not the present)and as some one effected I do care whats happening now, not some mythical future.
Peterr @ 59
Well, since their filings only cover the period up through 6/30/07, it’s hard to say if or how they’re reporting this current ad campaign. But I have a hard time understanding how this amounts to anything other than a political IE campaign.
I checked AQNHC’s FEC filings, and they only show $5,000 in receipts for the year. So clearly, AHCA is the money arm.
I’m in Mike Arcuri’s district. Haven’t seen the ad yet, but I don’t watch that much tv. His election was hard fought and dirty. His opponent had a fund raiser with Cheney. This was Boehlert’s district (moderate repub-resigned). They really didn’t want to lose it. Arcuri is very popular-former DA. And, FWIW, his voting record is very progressive. In every well-publicized vote, he has voted as a true dem.
babaloo @ 71
Clearly, indeed. I wonder what their August and September 2007 reports will show.
Something does not meet the smell test here.
Paging Stephen Parrish, CPA.
Stephen Parrish, CPA to the White Courtesy Phone . . .
babaloo @ 15
When I read about the “cuts” that the CHAMP bill was supposed to make, and that 220 Democrats voted in favor of it, I became confused. Why would they do that? The ads seemed to be making a good point.
Ah, welcome to the Hall of Mirrors. Or is it Alice’s Wonderland? Thanks to Babaloo @ 39 & 48, and Ollie Ox @ 40, and Peanut Butter @ 55, I discovered that all that glitters is not gold! (Duh!)
It would also be a good idea to look at parallel bills that address the same issue but channel the money in a different way.
There ought to be a special arm of congress, equivalent to the GAO, that takes proposed legislation and re-writes it in plain cat-caught-the-mouse prose with short sentences and words of no more than 3 syllables, and also writes the title in plain non-Orwellian language. Also, there should be a plain Constituent Impact Statement for each bill that reveals in plain, simple language who benefits, and who suffers adverse consequences.
Until then, there’s FDL!
Bob in HI
Why it is so easy to take advantage of the elderly. They are easy prey for the unscrupulous. Most people don’t really care what happens to them. Or, perhaps it is just the unthinkable. That is an open invitation for the Karl Roves.
The two most vulnerable groups of people are abandoned children and elderly seniors. Neither have advocates. They are dependent on someone willing to plead their case and speak and act on their behalf otherwise they are at the mercy of very unsavory people.
Most elderly seniors don’t have an advocate. When placed in nursing homes, so many are left there and forgotten. Sometimes they have no immediate relatives left to check on their care. They are totally at the mercy of the facility. Most facilities are there with the express purpose of making money.
When my sister and I had to place my Mom in a home because she was in full blown dementia and there were so few medical facilities and doctors in New Orleans after Katrina, we did tremendous research before finding a home we felt was suitable. Bless my sister, she visited every day at different times. She made friends with the staff. She brought homemade cookies to them. Several times a week she stayed for dinner and ate with my Mom or came early in the morning and had coffee with her. Other members of the family visited two/three times a week. I called frequently talking with her and talking with the staff. Simply put, we were in their face.
My Mom received good care. We also observed so terribly many folks were always alone. No visitors. No advocates. We also noticed their quality of care was different. That entire industry reminds me of a scene out of Zorba the Greek. The vultures strip the infirm of every things they have and complete their task at the time of death.
LS @ 63
Yeah, this story is going to keep giving I think. It’s got it all. Of course, may those killed RIP.
babaloo @ 15
Babaloo, tejanarusa, and most of all Christy…
Thanks for shining a light on this steaming pile of lobbyists and megacorps.
Freaking Medicare Advantage – IIRC – pays private HMO companies (who are already providing Medicare HMO plans) even more money than market ratess.
Yep, can’t let Big Insurance suffer with merely free market gouging – subsidize it.
Part of the Rethugs’ two-pronged strategy to divert public funds to their cronies and destroy the public sphere in the process.
Medicare Adv. drains the Medicare Trust Fund to give a big sloppy megacorp reacharound – with not net return.
Medicare is delivered by “Parts”: Part A is inpatient insurance, Part B is outpatient care (roughly), Part D is drugs.
[Formally, “Part C” doesn’t exist - informally, this term is used for the Big Insurance private plans that (kinda) cover the gap between Medicare and what the hospital/doctor charges. (These “gap plans” are known as either “Medicare Choice” or a different critter called “medigap” that do the same sort of stuff.)]
Part D is new – like Med Adv, set up by the Bushies.
Part D is an even sloppier jucier wet orifice by which megacorps may explore our Treasury.
Part D gives huge public subsidies to:
Big Pharma, for providing drugs without volume discount.
Big Insurance, for being paid massive overhead (15? 25? percent) to administer the same medication programs state plans used to run – for less than one percent overhead.
Oh – and my public clinic patients who used to get their essential psych meds without fail under Medi-Cal (the CA state program for medical ins) now often go without meds.
The new megacorps running Part D drop and change coverage for individual meds all the time – with no warning.
For patients, this means they show up at the pharmacy and their meds aren’t covered. Under Medi-cal, the pharmacies had work-arounds.
Part D is so rigid work-arounds fail, so now my patients often get told “no meds”. These are (non-abused) drugs which can case seizure when abruptly discontinued.
Oh – aside from withdrawal, people’s severe disabling psych symptoms can abruptly return.
Really great for the patient – and their family. And the public hospitals and ER’s.
But – hey – makes money for the Bushies’ pals.
What more do we want?
Clarification:
The Medicare Adv. subsidy for Big Insurance is part of the “Part C” group…
On a practical level, this means when shopping for “gap plans”, the Medicare Adv. plan regs were written by the Bushies.
Just knowing that makes me think the previous “medigap” plans will be less of a gouge.
Kirk Murphy @77
Many thanks for telling it like it is and not squirreling around “the doughnut hole” excuse. What a crock that is! What an insult to people’s intelligence that is!
LS @ 63
Wha-a-a?
(ok, back from skimming articles) Man! You justcan’t make this stuff up!
My late aunt actually worked for AHCA. Let me tell you; she was a glock-toting conservative. They’re a small outfit, too. Like four or five folks.
Quaker Girl, thanks to you and your sister for loving your mom.
Wish everyone were like you both.
Good on ya!
kirk murphy @ 77
Oh – and my public clinic patients who used to get their essential psych meds without fail under Medi-Cal (the CA state program for medical ins) now often go without meds.
I’ve heard of this happening. The word unconscionable springs to mind…Beyond that, I’m semi-speecchless. Once again, of course, we who said, before the Rx “coverage for seniors”, that it was a really bad plan, were absolutely right. Seems to be doing us (liberals, dems, etc) about as much good as being “right” about it being your turn at the 4-way stop.
As a former NYS Long Term Care Ombudsman I can tell you that many people go from being able to pay nursing home bills to Medicaid very quickly. Often they are dumped by the facility and families, if they have a family, are left with less desirable facilities that are filled with “Medicaid” payees and the conditions can be horrific. Nursing home care is a blight on this country and generally forgotten until someone you know is involved.
Politically I agree with your assessment, but it is impossible to overlook the needs.
You can judge a society by the way they treat their young and their old.
So far we are not doing this well
EPU, but this is bound up with all of the somewhat, um, ambiguous ads promoting Medicare Advantage (i.e. the advantage to corporate pigs is that it’s not Medicare) on the cable news channels, placed by private nursing home operators and other trough-slurpers.
This is yet another of those wingnut welfare operations run by a few people on a slush fund of tax-deductible dollars, that gets revived for GOP duty. The FEC reports aren’t the motherlode here: the GuideStar links to Form 990s are. Others have pointed out how much Hal Daub made as President/CEO in 2005.
What a great opportunity for those targeted members to get OUT IN FRONT of this issue with a coordinated, reasonable and well framed stance on not only health care, but also the special interests in politics, campaign finance reform, the importance of Medicare and even a couple of others.
I’d like to see the Democrats take these bulls by the horns more often. That alone, almost certainly would help the “favorables” for the new Congress.