The SOPRANOS
Posted on 09/06/2009 11:46:57 AM PDT by Eva
Kevin Mooney: Union bosses get major role in Obamacare management
Union officials are likely to fill key positions on committees making major decisions if President Barack Obama's government-run health care reform proposal becomes law, according to a new study by the National Right to Work Committee.
Sections 123 and 2251 of H.R. 3200, the version of Obamacare being pushed by House Democratic leaders, are of particular concern, according to NRTWC, because they could put union-backed appointees on new government committees that recommend mandatory health insurance benefits provided by private insurers, and personnel policies the bill describes as necessary "to ensure quality and adequacy" of the nation's health care workers.
Such provisions could put labor officials in positions to influence health care policies across the country, said Greg Mourad, director of legislation for the NRTWC, and to mandate that health care workers join unions.
"Big labor is guaranteed a place on the various committees, and that's something we see as a dangerous sign," said Mourad, the principal author of the NRTWC study. "The idea is to get the whole country on a model where you have teams of union stewards telling doctors what to do."
"In every section we cite, unions are guaranteed a place on the various boards, but the compositions of the boards are very flexible, and with Obama and his appointees naming the members of the various committees and commissions, all could easily be stacked by Big Labor sympathizers," he added.
For example, section 2261 of H.R. 3200 states that the Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment is to have 15 members, which must include no fewer than one representative each of health professionals within the health work force, health care patients and consumers, employers, labor unions, and third-party health payers.
"That's 15 members, all appointed by Obama's [Health and Human Services] Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, and the only one guaranteed not to be a union plant is the guaranteed employer representative," Mourad said.
The arrangement Kaiser Permanente Health Care Institute now has with 11 national unions to organize health care workers into work-unit based teams has been cited by labor bosses as a possible model for forced unionization, Mourad said.
He also pointed to section 124 of H.R. 3200 as another potential avenue for unions to increase forced unionization. The section grants the secretary of health and human services vast authority to set terms for health care providers.
The Health Benefits and Advisory Committee created by section 124 would forward recommendations to the HHS secretary. Obama would appoint 17 of the 27 members on the committee.
Mourad said there was no limit to how many of his appointees could come from the ranks of labor union activists such as the Service Employees International Union.
"It's not at all a stretch for the HHS secretary or some other left-wing HHS secretary to say people have to be organized in a certain way for their plan to qualify," Mourad said. "The administration will first stack this committee and then use this power to force doctors, nurses and other medical professionals into these unionized plans."
The Senate version of H.R. 3200 includes language that could force home health care workers to join unions, according to the NRTWC study.
The Personal Care Attendants Workforce Advisory Panel created under section 3209 of the Senate bill is similar to those now used in California, where home health workers are forced into unions "under the false pretext of making sure they are compensated fairly," the study said.
No specific numeric representation is listed, but HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is free to stack the board with labor personnel, Mourad said.
The study performs an important public service, David Almasi, executive director of the National Center for Public Policy Research, told The Examiner.
"It's amazing how many items they are trying to push through in this massive bill, and they don't want the people to have a good look at it," he said. "Unions are getting benefits with the health care bill, just as trial lawyers. This means they are also a prime mover behind the policies."
But Michael Tanner, a senior fellow with the Cato Institute, said the NRTWC was overstating the case concerning union appointees and their potential influence on health care.
"There are many good reasons to condemn the bill," he said. "There are too many boards and commissions, and there's too much bureaucracy. But I'm not sure why it's any worse if a union official is appointed to one of these boards than, say, the CEO of a drug company. Unions are not inherently bad. I just can't go where they're going. There's an assumption here that union members should never be in any government position, and I just don't hold to that."
A spokesman for SEIU did not return a telephone call seeking comment.
Kevin Mooney is a Commentary staff writer for The Washington Examiner.
More stinky fish in the trashcan.
Mafia-Care is just around the corner.
The SOPRANOS
The SEIU take over of the whole health care industry would create a permanent voting block for the Democrat Party. Obama would be President for life.
Like I just told another poster, this is not your grandfather’s union that we are talking about. The SEIU is actually much more sinister than the AFL-CIO. The AFL is run by gangster thugs, the SEIU is run by political thugs.
ok here is the real story...what do gangstas and chicago politics have in common with union bosses.....Mafia....this is what we really got with obama....this is all about taking over the insurance and healthcare in this ocuntry..one of the few things they dont own 100%...Obama just handed them the auto industry on a silver platter....and now they have healthcare and they dont care who dies...
How about real election reform.....no perks or money from lobbyist or special iterest group
The list, ping
Atlas Puked...
No, this is different and much worse. The SEIU is out to replace the AFL-CIO in importance. They will far out number the AFL members if Obamacare succeeds. The only reason that Obama gave the UAW the control of the auto industry was to buy their support for Obamacare. It’s a symbiotic relationship, that the AFL doesn’t fully understand because the reality won’t hit them until the SEIU supplants them in power. Obama and ACORN control the SEIU, they don’t control the UAW or any other AFL union.
that makes sense...now how do we keep republicans from endorsing healthcare/insurance reform....we dont need a trigger either.
The only answer is to spread the word that the goal of Obamacare and the public option has little to do with health care, death panels or rationing and everything to do with the forced unionization of the health care system.
None of the pundits will broach the subject because they are all afraid of the unions. This news needs to be spread on a grass roots level. Send a link to the WA Examiner article to the head of your county Republican party and every other group that you can think of, especially the head of your local tea parties.
There are huge numbers of health care workers that are not unionized. It is fertile grounds for the unions.
In our large multispecialty practice, the Steelworkers had to organize some healthcare workers to offset the declining enrollment of workers in the union they were supposed to represent.
I had not thought of this angle before and it really shines some light on the entire stinking mess. It is typical Chicago politics.
Thanks for posting this article.
If Obamacare passes with the government option, the Cap and Tax bill will be next because they planned on funds from that the Obamacare.
wasnt the post office in the black til it went union?
I think that you might be right about the post office, I hadn’t really thought about it.
I just can’t imagine a less efficient combination than a government worker who is also a union member. The problem is that most of the pundits are scared to death to mention anything critical of unions, even Hannity and Rush. I have even heard Hannity say that he did not blame any of the auto industry problems on the union workers. GM was one of his long time sponsors, so I guess money still buys a certain amount of loyalty.
Good find, Eva
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.