The federal government began shutting down at midnight and over 800,000 government workers and half as many temps and consultants are out of a job this morning. This shutdown will cost in excess of two billion dollars per day extra over the cost of a continuing resolution. And why exactly do we find ourselves in a position where our own government could potentially drive us back into a recession?
One word – Obamacare.
While the republican controlled house has voted to repeal the affordable care act 42 times the irony about these votes is that the affordable care act was previously about a deeply held republican belief of personal responsibility. This deeply held republican belief about personal responsibility reasons that the government should not be picking up the healthcare tab just because someone chooses to not contribute to their healthcare costs. Another irony about this is that all of those moderate and even progressive political fence sitters who consider themselves independent voters by and large also buy into the theory that we should not be picking up this tab either.
Not only is this about a deeply held republican belief but the affordable care act was and has always been the much touted alternative to single payer healthcare, better known in some circles as socialized medicine that is currently the law in most first world countries. The affordable care act in fact is based on “Romney-care” which was a republican launched initiative in Massachusetts to get everyone covered in that state without having to resort to single payer healthcare. It was touted, sold and passed as an issue of personal responsibility. The convenient term for such coverage is an individual mandate. You have the choice of opting out but you must still contribute to the healthcare system for doing so in the form of a penalty.
So how is it working out in “Taxachusettes, the pay state”?
Insurance costs have risen, yet not at or near the double digit annual increases experienced by the rest of the nation including here in California. If you are a small employer here in California and you have just one worker get sick, insurance companies will sack your companies health insurance or skyrocket the premiums just to get out from under the claim. This isn’t the case with large employers and it isn’t the case with Calpers, who negotiates one (sky-high) rate for all individuals covered by the state, be they age 18 or age 99. It would appear that Calpers assumes everyone is 66 with their rates.
Our current system clearly isn’t working and we need a change. A result of this is moderates getting together with both the left and right wing and eeking out a solution that does no harm the 500 billion dollar a year economic juggernaut known as our healthcare system but manages to get more people – but not everyone – covered by private insurance. And it is based entirely on what has been implemented by mostly moderate republicans in Massachusetts.
Republicans got exactly what they asked for. Now they seek to derail what they asked for by shutting down the government because a faction of the republican party known as the tea party views the mandate as a new tax, yet discounts the crushing costs of healthcare on government already.
Sure, the individual mandate is inconvenient if you have to resort to purchasing insurance yourself but we’ve sampled the costs compared to current insurance costs against some current insurance policies in effect. While the platinum coverage amounts to a higher rate than what is currently being paid by most, yet still half the costs of a comparable CALPERS plan, the benefits outweigh the costs for those with healthcare issues. The Gold, Silver and Bronze coverage are all less expensive than current healthcare coverage but you share a greater percentage of the costs. The most important aspect however is that insurance companies must enroll and cover you even if you have a preexisting condition.
And if you, like the majority of us files tax returns, then you can prove your income and may qualify for healthcare subsidies. Perhaps this filing a tax return is what the tea partiers really object to because they don’t want the government all up in their business. For an entrepreneur who might be looking to leave their current employer and go start a business the Affordable Care Act is a bonanza of achievable, affordable healthcare coverage that might otherwise be unobtainable without preexisting exclusions. Today, people are stuck in their jobs because of a lack of affordable portability and preexisting conditions of themselves or family members. Sure COBRA coverage exists for some but the costs of platinum coverage via covered Covered California can amount to a mere 25% of COBRA conversion rates and that’s nothing to sneeze at.
When the clock struck midnight last night the federal government and all agencies lost their spending authority. This will unquestionably impact California government who relies upon the feds to keep a myriad of programs afloat including judicial branch programs. The last federal shutdown cost an extra two billion dollars per day to shut the government down than it would have cost to just keep it running. After just a few weeks California coffers will be decimated by unemployment insurance claims adding insult to an already injurious system that is resuming paying claims after a state computer SNAFU.
Wait until they stop getting federal reimbursements.
Most reading this post have world class healthcare coverage provided by Calpers. I would guess there are over 2,500 people who have lost their jobs in the branch that are straining under the expense of cobra coverage or who just can’t afford insurance. And when you really think about all of the damage the boondoggler leadership in San Francisco has done and continues to do, your job and your insurance coverage remains at risk. You deserve an affordable alternative to COBRA coverage and that can be found at covered California.
We vehemently disagree with a few ill intentioned people hijacking the government over a plan that they rolled out as a viable alternative to single payer healthcare and then changed their minds about because a democratic president got it passed. Both the left and the right passed the plan and made it the law of the land. It is wrong to make everyone suffer just because you have a change of heart and believe that personal responsibility actually means you can rely upon the state, the insurer of last resort because you choose to not contribute.
What we think is behind all of this is that a large host of insurance companies don’t participate in the affordable care act because the care they offer isn’t affordable and on the first day of enrollment today they’re watching their customers start to disappear.
The state of California has done an amazing job at simplifying the affordable care act implementation over at covered California. What they offer is going to cause a whole lot of customers to change their coverage. That’s grinding a whole lot of insurers that don’t participate in state health insurance exchanges because their coverage sucks and their rates are too high. Please take a moment to compare your current coverage and what’s being paid for that coverage with what’s available at covered California. Think about all of the excluded insurers and then think of the timing of the current debacle in Washington DC. I’m sure you’ll agree with a bit of research that this is all less than coincidental.
Related articles
- You: GOP will stop at nothing to deny Obama his due on healthcare reform (latimes.com)
- Obamacare could save large employers billions in COBRA coverage (dailykos.com)
- A single-payer system, like Medicare, is the cure for America’s ailing healthcare (huffingtonpost.com)
- Rep. Chris Van Hollen: Stop the Anti-Obamacare Hypocrisy (huffingtonpost.com)
- Obamacare launch poised to reach millions despite shutdown drama (news.in.msn.com)
MaxRebo5
October 1, 2013
Nice of JCW to remember those who lost their jobs and have no health care. It is very scary having no insurance and I know when I was laid off from the courts I could not afford the cobra payments so I went for several months with no health insurance at all. I just took my chances and tried to get a new job ASAP to get health benefits again.
My view is many court employees were laid off because Ron George’s JC made a political calculation to push for 5 billion dollars on “infrastructure” bonds durring a recession instead of living with what they had and fighting to protect the regular General Fund dollars for the branch. Arnold was all for getting new courthouses going to “prime the pump” (must have sounded a little like “Pumping Iron” for him) and he said he wanted to create construction jobs. It was very Keynsian some might say and I would respect that point if it was implemented fairly (from the top down).
What I don’t respect is Team George selling this idea of having it all. Clearly they couldn’t and the Legilslature had to cut the courts. The cost of the political choice to seek spending on courthouses was 2,500 laid off court workers at the bottom all collecting unemployment. The Legislature was going to have to make painful cuts to the branch and Team George knew this could happen when they pushed for the bond money. It was a calculated/managed risk that they were willing to make (it wasn’t their jobs on the line).
I believe Team George pushed for courthouses over court employees because they see courthouses as a long term infrastructure need and it could be argued it is better to do major construction projects when labor is cheaper in a recession. It could also be argued it is better to lose some (2,500) court workers to help fund many more private sector workers build needed courthouses for the branch.
I would respect that view if the 1,000 employees at the AOC showed the way to the unemployment line and the trial court staff were cut only after the AOC “leaders” walked the walk. That’s why I don’t respect “Team George” at all. They let the little people in the trial courts take the fall and get laid off while they remain and pretend to “serve” others. As Wendy Darling says they are just serving themselves.
My view is the loss of human dignity a parent feels when their child sees them unemployed is to be avoided at all costs! The dignity of 2,500 CA court employees and their families was abandoned and that choice should not be forgotten. I say forget AOC raises until money is restored to rehire thoses who were let go in the trial courts through no fault of their own! Get them back their dignity and their health care!! Where are those rehire lists? Lots of reforms needed still in CA Courts.
Tony Maino
October 1, 2013
In November of 2009 I wrote to the Modesto Bee to counter an assertion by two members of the Judicial Council who were saying that we had to proceed with CCMS even if it meant furloughs of court staff.
Stanislaus County had about 20 judges at that time. I said that I did not think a computer system that was going to cost about 1.7 billion dollars or about one million per judicial position was a viable business plan.
At that time I said that these two gentlemen preferred computer systems to open courts.
Now that CCMS is dead ( sort of) the Judicial Council and the AOC have made it clear that they prefer new courthouses and pay raises for AOC employees over open courts.
The more things change the more they remain the same.
Wendy Darling
October 1, 2013
Sad to say Judge Maino, but the trial courts are talked about, and viewed, with open derision and contempt at 455 Golden Gate Avenue.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
carl
October 2, 2013
Wow. Way off mission statement, wouldn’t you say?
Judicial Council Watcher
October 3, 2013
Yes, we’re roaming off the range in part because what happens in Washington DC stands to have a profound effect on those who haven’t yet lost their jobs and in part because what’s happening represents the height of hypocrisy.
unionman575
October 3, 2013
http://www.courts.ca.gov/23618.htm
2015 Language Need and Interpreter Use Study, RFP# CLASP LNS2015
The Judicial Council’s Court Language Access Support Program (CLASP), formerly known as the Court Interpreter Program (CIP), seeks a single consultant to conduct a study of language need and interpreter use in the trial courts. The preferred consultant will have staff with experience in quantitative and qualitative research methodologies and trends. Findings and recommendations from this study will assist in the designation of languages to be included in the California Court Interpreter Certification Program.
Questions regarding this RFP should be directed to Solicitations@jud.ca.gov by 9:00 am Pacific Time, October 21, 2013.
Proposals must be received by 3:00 pm Pacific Time, October 31, 2013.
Hard copy proposals must be delivered to:
Judicial Council of California
Administrative Office of the Courts
Fiscal Services, Business Services Unit
Attn: Nadine McFadden, RFP # CLASP LNS2015
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
wearyant
October 3, 2013
The AOC can’t find someone within their bloated bureaucracy to fold, spindle and mutilate the results of their mutant quantitative and qualitative research methodologies and trends? Amazing!
Wendy Darling
October 3, 2013
Plenty of money for more consultants. Money to keep the trial courts open? Not so much.
Still serving themselves to the detriment of all Californians.
Long live the ACJ.
Michael Paul
October 3, 2013
Unlike everywhere else I worked the AOC won’t let their employees conduct studies. By contracting it out they have an arms length from the result and can claim independence, though they still hold the power of the purse strings. If they want a particular result, they will verbalize that to the consultant and the study results will reflect that.
unionman575
October 3, 2013
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/oc13-Oct_2.pdf
wearyant
October 3, 2013
C’mon, AOC numbers molesters. We all know that statistics can be massaged and deformed to say whatever the massagers wish them to convey. Is this their sick way of apologizing for the mass layoffs of our valuable trial court employees? Are they trying to say we just don’t need ’em anyway because filings are going down? Ridiculous!
unionman575
October 3, 2013
http://www.modbee.com/2013/09/30/2951085/another-snag-in-the-modesto-courthouse.html
unionman575
October 3, 2013
http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/SP13-08.pdf
Nathaniel Woodhull
October 4, 2013
Back in 2000, (when dinosaurs roamed the earth) on of the first BIG studies was undertaken by the AOC in conjunction with the National Center for State Courts. The underlying focus of this “study” was an important one, Judicial Needs Assessment. The idea was to have judges and staff keep detailed records of their activities over a two month period. The resulting data was supposed to assist State leaders determine which local trial courts throughout the State were understaffed and/or overstaffed; both respect to judicial positions and staff positions.
The AOC contracted with a firm in Denver to oversee the project. Detailed guidelines for completing the “data collection forms” were provided. People were assigned confidential identification numbers. 28 case types were identified and 7 event types were identified. Whatever we did, we were supposed to record our activities, to the actual minute spent, on collection forms.
To start out, many of us noticed that the identified “event types” did not match many of the activities that we performed in real life. There were portions of the collections form that asked for conflicting data. No one cared to have any input from those of us filling out the forms with reference to these problems.
After having dutifully completed the forms on a daily basis (7-days a week) for two months, the materials were submitted to the AOC’s Research and Planning unit and their gang of contractors. Months past, when suddenly….we were notified that the circus was coming to town!
With calliopes playing loudly in the background (the gas provided by Vickrey) a herd of AOC types and their contractors entered our courthouse. (Did you ever notice that folks from the AOC have to travel in packs of at least 5 for any meeting?) Contractors set up computers, Nomad type projection equipment. The lights slowly were turned down…and the show began. For about 20-minutes, graduates from the University of Jabberwocky, Denver campus, put on their presentation. The rapid-fire auctioneers chant was amazing. Most people in the audience, several with IQ’s above that of a hot rock, understood about every third or fourth word that the contractors said. Most of the presentation was complete jibber-jabber. Beautiful four-color area charts, box charts, step charts, high-lo charts, pie charts (no cherry) were used during the presentation. At the end of the presentation, these “experts” told us that the research revealed we had slightly more judges than we needed and that our staffing was just fine. They also revealed some fascinating information that those of us actually doing the job were never aware of! For example, a homicide case in our court took 5-days “to handle”. A family law case took 1.5 days “to handle.” This was the type of “data” upon which they based their assessments.
After about half the audience stopped laughing and other half stopped catching flies, we sheepishly raised our hands to ask a few questions. When some judicial officers with over 20-years experienced pointed out that they handled dozens upon dozens of murder cases in their careers and could not think of one that was “handled” in 5-days, we heard a few harrumphs from the presenters. When it was pointed out that the study did not ask any questions that would have allowed them to determine that family law cases took 1.5 days to “handle”, the harrumphs got louder and louder. Suddenly, the contractors and AOC herd started packing up their tents and heading for the exits. We were told this data was “preliminary” and they would be back once they had an opportunity to review our comments. Nothing was ever heard from these people again.
I understand that “study” cost somewhere between $250-500,000, cheap at twice the price!
🙂
Wendy Darling
October 4, 2013
Does this mean, General Woodhull, that you didn’t buy a half dozen or so of the snake oil bottles they were selling?
As an FYI, these “studies” and “surveys” are routinely discussed and designed as “make work” projects at 455 Golden Gate Avenue.
Long live the ACJ.
wearyant
October 5, 2013
Thanks for the fine memories, General! The top of my skull still has the dents from the AOC hammers attempts to pound me, a square peg, into a round hole. It reminds me of the time our court administrator — now he would be dubbed a “CEO” — asked the court reporters to provide the time codes when the judges were on the record in the courtroom versus when the judges were in chambers. Ahh-hem. The court reporters politely refused to provide this info. We were still a part of a team working together in the trenches at that time. Thereupon the pointy-headed bureaucrats began a campaign to break up the working courtroom team of the courtroom clerk, bailiff, courtroom reporter and judge by rotation. The rotation system did aid the evil administrators by making the trial court workers feel less than human, accomplishing a part of the evil pointy-headed bureaucrats’ desires! You’d think the team spirit and pride of doing a fine job would be valued!
R. Campomadera
October 6, 2013
To an insecure leader, team spirit and pride of doing a fine job are not only not of any value, but actually viewed as a threat. Why? Because teams are powerful — there is power in numbers; individuals, kept off balance, are easier to control — divide and conquer is the strategy to be used. Also, you can’t have your worker-drones feeling any pride in their work, because that diminishes your luster as the all-knowing, all seeing top of the pyramid. It’s sick, but it’s everywhere.