Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CA: Governor wants workers, patients to pay more for care
Bakersfield Californian ^ | 5/2/04 | Tom Chorneau - AP

Posted on 05/02/2004 9:13:12 AM PDT by NormsRevenge

SACRAMENTO (AP) - With state health care costs soaring, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has proposed more than $1 billion in spending cuts next year for public health programs along with caps in enrollments, new copayments for patients and lower reimbursements for providers.

But he appears to have far fewer ideas for reining in the billions spent on employee benefits - the fastest growing part of the state's medical bill.

Medi-Cal, the state's version of the federal Medicaid program, would lose about $900 million in funding next year. About half that money would come from a $454 million cut in support for in-home caregivers, although the administration is seeking additional federal money to replace the lost state dollars.

But Schwarzenegger also wants to overhaul the cumbersome Medi-Cal system. He has called for simplifying the eligibility process to make it easier to manage. He said he wants to "promote personal responsibility" among patients when they are deciding whether to seek care by imposing higher co-payments and limiting the choices of those who can pay the least.

The governor has proposed a more restrictive system for managing care of the blind and disabled and he wants to cap enrollments in the state's Healthy Families program, a subsidized health insurance plan to cover children in low- and moderate-income families.

Some health care advocates say it's not fair for the governor to ask low-income patients to pay more.

"Asking people to share costs doesn't work when you're talking about high-end users like the disabled and the elderly," said Kristen Testa, director of the California Health Program, a nonprofit advocate supporting children health care. "Even a $15 copay is a lot, some of these people have five or more prescriptions each month. You're asking them: Which drugs can I afford?"

Nicole Evans, spokeswoman for the Health and Human Services Agency, said Schwarzenegger's Medi-Cal reform plan is still evolving as the administration aims to be more efficient in providing care.

Meanwhile, the governor has made little progress in redoing union contracts to save the state money.

Although the cost of providing medical care through Medi-Cal, Healthy Families and other programs represents by far the largest slice of state health services spending - it is not growing as fast as employee insurance premiums. Worker health care costs have more than doubled in the past five years, costing the state nearly $2 billion annually.

Lowering health care costs is a key administration goal in the labor negotiations, said Lynelle Jolley, spokeswoman for the state's Department of Personnel Administration. She declined to cite specifics in order to protect negotiation strategy.

J.J. Jelincic, president of the California State Employees Association - the state's largest union representing more than 90,000 workers - said there are no specific talks scheduled to consider health care costs for any of the units he represents.

He pointed out that until January, the state paid a fixed portion of the health care premium and workers were required to make up the difference. That arrangement, which began several years before, meant that worker contributions varied year to year.

In some years - especially during the early 1990s, health care costs dropped and thus many workers had to pay little or nothing toward the premium. When costs began to rise, however, beginning in 1998 - workers had to shoulder a greater share.

The latest contact shares the costs, with the state paying 80 percent and workers paying 20 percent of health care premiums. That's an improvement for workers, Jelincic said, because health care costs are expected to keep rising.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: calgov2002; california; governor; healthcare; patients; paymore; wants; workers

1 posted on 05/02/2004 9:13:13 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *calgov2002; california
California - (long overdue) ToTal ReFoRm in progress
2 posted on 05/02/2004 9:15:05 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi Mac ... Become a FR Monthly Donor ... Kerry thread archive @ /~normsrevenge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Unfortunately, the cost of living is so high in California I just don't see how they can start cutting salaries. I'M NOT SAYING IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN. I'm just saying that salaries have not kept up with housing, food, etc. The average house price in San Diego is no something like $495,000. That's the Average, including crappy houses and condos. So a starter home is something like $450,000.
3 posted on 05/02/2004 9:18:10 AM PDT by Hildy (A kiss is the unborn child knocking at the door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
Cutting salaries, but not coverage for illegals or barebacking gays with AIDS.
4 posted on 05/02/2004 9:24:49 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Asking people to share costs doesn't work when you're talking about high-end users like the disabled and the elderly,"

This is the raising of an exception to defend the continuation of totally free service. The facts are that many people getting public health assistance can afford to pay something. And when they are required to pay, they use the service more judiciously.

-Little Johnny or Susie has the sniffles. Should we take them to the doctor? Why not, it's free.

- Little Johnny or Susie has the sniffles. Should we take them to the doctor? Why don't we wait, they started charging a co-pay of $20.00 a visit. Let's give it a day and see if thier common cold gets better.

5 posted on 05/02/2004 9:59:42 AM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
Well said, BJungNan: "The facts are that many people getting public health assistance can afford to pay something. And when they are required to pay, they use the service more judiciously."

I was a member of the military, which has totally free health care for the active duty force and their dependents. Totally free service results in a lot of people rushing to the military hospitals for colds and other minor, non-life-threatening issues. The only possible result of totally free care is overcrowded hospitals leading to rationed or poor-quality service for all!

Co-payments are a great idea for reducing costs. It is a common trick of the bleeding hearts to bring up exceptions to try to invalidate an entire conservative concept, yet we know the "elderly", for example, includes everything from incredibly wealthy to very poor people! Most, I would argue, could and SHOULD pay a greater share, even if that means they have less money for other uses, which are mostly likely "wants" and not necessarily "needs."
6 posted on 05/02/2004 10:19:32 AM PDT by CitizenUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
They should stop whining. I pay $200 a month for my HMO premiums. Arnold is asking those subsidized by the taxpayers to pay a small share of their health bill. Even when the state will still pick up more of the tab, there's no gratitude. Imagine that from folks who'll still get health care at rates well below what most of us who don't get governmental assistance have to contribute. A little personal responsibility shouldn't be too much to ask of people.
7 posted on 05/02/2004 10:25:14 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
How many people live in California? At 20 Million, $1 Billion would only add up to $50.00 per person for the year. That doesn't seem too draconian...
8 posted on 05/02/2004 10:46:11 AM PDT by trebb (Ain't God good . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
Unfortunately, the cost of living is so high in California I just don't see how they can start cutting salaries.

The government certainly has no right to cut YOUR salary if you work in the private sector, but it certainly has the right to determine the salary of State of California workers. Either lower pay or lay off the unneeded.

9 posted on 05/02/2004 11:10:07 AM PDT by ClintonBeGone (John Kerry is the Democrat's Bob Dole)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
I agree with you. However, it's going to be a huge financial mess for California either way.
10 posted on 05/02/2004 11:25:57 AM PDT by Hildy (A kiss is the unborn child knocking at the door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
I agree with you. However, it's going to be a huge financial mess for California either way.

Painfull, yes, but not a mess. Imagine your own family budget. Imagine if you simply didn't spend your discressionary income? Would you be in a huge financial mess? Or is it when you spend that money and MORE that the mess really happens?

11 posted on 05/02/2004 11:41:17 AM PDT by ClintonBeGone (John Kerry is the Democrat's Bob Dole)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
You're not understanding what I'm saying. People are buying houses that are $500,000 or more based on their salaries. If the State, which is at least one of the biggest employer cuts salaries, we are going to be in a huge financial mess. I'm just stating a fact. I'm not saying it doesn't need to be done, but I'm looking at what's going on around me in California, and it's frightening. We're actually going to Arizona next week to find a new place to live. I want to sell my home and get top dollar before this mess crashes in around me. That's how strongly I feel that the bottom is about to fall.
12 posted on 05/02/2004 11:48:33 AM PDT by Hildy (A kiss is the unborn child knocking at the door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
You're not understanding what I'm saying. People are buying houses that are $500,000 or more based on their salaries. If the State, which is at least one of the biggest employer cuts salaries, we are going to be in a huge financial mess. I'm just stating a fact.

You make a valid point, but I hardly think the level of state employment is going to effect you unless you actually live in the capitol area. Where do you think all that money is going to go if not to state government employees? It will stay in the pocket of the taxpayers - you, your friends and your neighbors. They'll spend it in a much more rational way than the government.

Think about it. California has 36 million people. There are 222,000 state employees. It's a drop in the bucket.

13 posted on 05/02/2004 12:07:29 PM PDT by ClintonBeGone (John Kerry is the Democrat's Bob Dole)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
"A little personal responsibility shouldn't be too much to ask of people."
Bravo! you would THINK that to be the case now wouldn't you! Unfortunately, even many of the Prescriptions out there are to help take away personal responsibility for actions - or just the need for a personal action ( like diet or exercise). What EVER happened to the human body's ability to heal without a massive amount of supplementary chemicals? it seems like we need a pill just to smile in the morning ...
14 posted on 05/02/2004 4:49:46 PM PDT by Principessa_libertas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
I want to sell my home and get top dollar before this mess crashes in around me. That's how strongly I feel that the bottom is about to fall.

You've reached the threshold that I reached in 2000. I was watching small businesses close all over because of the cost of electricity. My company parking lot went from overflowing into two satellite lots to half full at the main building location. I wanted to get out while there was a sufficient number of qualified buyers in the marketplace.

My home in Mira Mesa was purchased for $105,000 in 1983. I sold it for $242,000 in Feb 2001. The going price would be in excess of $400,000 now. The equity that I extracted in 2001 allowed me to buy at the bottom of a glutted market in the Pocatello, ID area. There were 560 homes on the market. I picked off a 3900 sq ft house on 1/3 acre for $179,900. Property taxes are higher here. If you gross over $100,000, the state income tax is $7249 + 7.8% of the amount over $100,000. After factoring in the effect of federal taxes, the tax burden is pretty low. The cost of goods is much lower than San Diego. While we have a very severe drought going here, we don't have 1 million illegals spilling over the borders each month. The water supply in the southwest is dependent on the Colorado river. That source is heavily oversubscribed. Our population is Pocatello can manage just fine on the groundwater from our local snow pack.

I wish you success in moving the San Diego property. My son is selling 5 or more houses each month. His fluency in Spanish has doubled the access to potential buyers. I frankly think the real estate bubble is going to pop in California. Any rise in interest rates is going to reduce the number of qualified buyers in the marketplace. Even if that doesn't depress prices, it may leave you sitting on real estate that nobody can afford to purchase.

15 posted on 05/02/2004 4:53:18 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin
Thank you. I truly do think this is the top of the market. If you follow what the big boys are doing, Doug Manchester and wealthy businesspeople in San Diego, you'll see that they're selling real estate holdings. That's a clue.
16 posted on 05/02/2004 5:18:59 PM PDT by Hildy (A kiss is the unborn child knocking at the door.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson