Health Insurance Protection Bill-Important!

[helicopper 1,050]

The following was posted in another venue but is extremely relevant to all of us in the police and fire retirement system. Check it out!

A health insurance protection bill - designed to protect against municipalities changing a retirees health benefits after they retire - has passed both the Senate and Assembly and has been sent to the Governor for his signature. The bill is Senate - S6030 and Assembly - A8866.

Given the propensity for munipalities to screw the employees who have already given them their 20-25-30 years of service by cutting their healthcare benefits, this is a great way to get some protection!

Go to www.ny.gov/governor then click 'Contact the Governor' and send an email, or call the Governor at (518) 474-8390. If you belong to another Police or Fire organization please share this info.

[x635 4,066]

As seen in my thread regarding the movie "Sicko", the majority of this forum thinks that the healthcare system in this country is perfect, and that a movie addressing issues such as the one mentioned above were false, just because they had a closed mind and didn't care for the filmmaker.

It's a fact.....health insurance companies are making millions, people are going bankrupt with medical costs and sometimes pay with their lives, and the Goverment comes out with bills like this, instead of addressing the issue at large. This bill, that I am affected by, will also affect employers budgets and possibly taxes. Could even result in staffing and equipment cuts. All comes down to the issues addressed in "Sicko". I wish that so many people could go and see this movie with an open mind, instead of complelty disregarding it based on it's filmaker. It really is a must see movie, you won't regret it.

I support this bill, but I also wanted to reflect that this bill is reactionary to the healthcare industry status in this country. The middle class suffers.

[DOC22 1]

As some members of this board know, my father was a docton in Croton Falls for many years. He died 30 years ago this August, and at least 20 years prior to his death he saw the handwriting on the wall even then he saw this coming.

[Guest partyrock]

As seen in my thread regarding the movie "Sicko", the majority of this forum thinks that the healthcare system in this country is perfect, and that a movie addressing issues such as the one mentioned above were false, just because they had a closed mind and didn't care for the filmmaker.

It's a fact.....health insurance companies are making millions, people are going bankrupt with medical costs and sometimes pay with their lives, and the Goverment comes out with bills like this, instead of addressing the issue at large. This bill, that I am affected by, will also affect employers budgets and possibly taxes. Could even result in staffing and equipment cuts. All comes down to the issues addressed in "Sicko". I wish that so many people could go and see this movie with an open mind, instead of complelty disregarding it based on it's filmaker. It really is a must see movie, you won't regret it.

I support this bill, but I also wanted to reflect that this bill is reactionary to the healthcare industry status in this country. The middle class suffers.

I don't want to hijack this thread, but I had to say something here. No one says that the system is perfect, but people are saying that socialized healthcare is not the answer. Free healthcare for all does not work because it marginalizes the system. The profit based system as much as it has screwed many of the middle class and working poor it has also created an environment where the best doctors, newest procedures, and most advanced technology is consistantly available. Sicko is an a very enlightening film that does highlight many flaws in our system, but it is very one sided and has an agenda.

[TheBuff376 8]

Forget about after retirement, arbitrators are taking back health benefits now. Most of us did not take jobs in law enforcement or the fire service to have our pension pay for our health benefits. Also I have seen younger single members of unions vote to give back some of the health benefits to get a 1/2% extra on their raises since they are health & single.

We need to get the word out & get Spitzer to sign this NOW!!This is one of the reasons why I hope to retire in 27 months because of the rumors about losing a portion of our health benefits in the next contract...

[firebuff08 29]

The proposed legislation talked about in this thread will only give public employees a false sense of security. I am a recently retired public employee (retired two weeks) and I am also an Economist by education. The problem that State and Municipal governments are facing is that current pension and health care benefits for public retirees are NOT sustainable for the long term. Here in the northeast we already have Municipalities paying more in premiums for retiree health care than for current workers and each year the gap grows wider. Retirees with 20 years and out or 25 years and out pension plans are living so long they are earning more in pension benefits than they earned during their working years.

The point is rapidly approaching when a 100% income tax and a 100% property tax will not produce enough revenue to maintain current services and pay for retiree benefits.

When health care for life and guaranteed benefit pensions were first negotiated, many years ago, no one, apparently, looked at what the costs would be 25 and 50 years into the future. Over the years, many municipalities, at least here in CT where I live. found it very easy NOT to set aside the proper amounts of money each year to fund future pension benefits because it would require cuts in services or huge tax hikes. So the unfunded liability has continued to grow and at some point it will bankrupt state and local governments.

Within the next few years, there will be more and more reductions in the numbers of police officers and firefighters and cuts in benefits for retirees will be on the increase as state and municipal leaders struggle to stave off bankruptcy. When they try to raise the already onerous taxes that are in place in the northeast, the flight of businesses and residents to the south and southwest will increase dramatically, further hastening the financial collapse of local and state governments.

A grim picture? Yes, but that is reality. And as for "Sicko", it is in my opinion, an advertisement for the Socialists and their plan to bring Socialized Medicine to the US. Free health care sounds great, but when your take home pay is reduced by 60% from what it is now, Yes that is correct, because that is how much TAXES will have to be raised to pay for FREE Health Care, it won't sound so great! TANSTAAFL "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch".

[Guest]

A grim picture? Yes, but that is reality. And as for "Sicko", it is in my opinion, an advertisement for the Socialists and their plan to bring Socialized Medicine to the US. Free health care sounds great, but when your take home pay is reduced by 60% from what it is now, Yes that is correct, because that is how much TAXES will have to be raised to pay for FREE Health Care, it won't sound so great! TANSTAAFL "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch".

Well said. The timing of the release of this movie and, a presidental campaign are no accident. I agree. The middle class will pay for Socialized Medicine. There is a man in Canada that was told he had to wait seven months to get a MRI for a brain tumor. He drove to the United States to get the MRI and the lifesaving surgery he needed. He paid for it out of his own pocket. He is now suing the Canadian health care system. Was there any mention of that in the movie ? or maby the health care system in Cuba?

[helicopper 1,050]

Thanks, Governor Spitzer! For nothing!

VETO MESSAGE - No. 119

TO THE SENATE:

I am returning herewith, without my approval, the following bills:

Senate Bill Number 6030, entitled:

"AN ACT in relation to affecting the health insurance benefits and

contributions of certain retired public employees"

Senate Bill Number 6031-A, entitled:

"AN ACT in relation to affecting the health insurance benefits and

contributions of certain retired public employees"

NOT APPROVED

These bills - which are very similar to bills vetoed four times by

Governor Pataki - would place limitations on the degree to which public

employers can alter the health insurance benefits of public service

retirees. Under S.6030, which applies to the New York State and Local

Employees Retirement System, the Teachers Retirement System and the

Optional Retirement Program, public employers would be precluded from

diminishing the health insurance benefits given retirees, or employer

contributions made for retirees, unless a corresponding diminution is

made in the benefits of active employees. S.6031, which applies to the

New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement Systems, bars any

diminution of retiree health insurance at all on or after the effective

date of the bill. Both bills would be in effect only until May 15, 2008,

but proponents of the bill undoubtedly will seek to extend them each

year.

These bills seek to advance the laudable and important goal of insur-

ing that retiree health care benefits do not become a unique target of

budget cuts. Supporters argue that these bills are necessary to protect

the health insurance benefits of retirees, since such benefits are

neither subject to collective bargaining under the Taylor Law, nor

protected under the constitutional ban against diminishment of pension

benefits.

While these are strong arguments, there are also powerful countervail-

ing considerations. Employers are deeply concerned that these bills

would significantly constrain their flexibility. Many note that under

the bill, programs that give somewhat different benefits to retirees to

improve compatibility with Medicare, or because of changes in Medicare

rules, could be curtailed. Employers also point to the difficulty of

administering this bill, and determining the benchmark to which retirees

should be compared in cases where a wide variety of employees and bene-

fits are at issue. The Department of Civil Service, in particular, notes

that the New York State Health Insurance Program ("NYSHIP") administers

active employees and retirees differently, and states that the bill

would "severely constrain" its practices in the future.

Proponents of the bills also advance equity arguments, as retirees of

school districts have been governed by similar restrictions since 1994.

I note, however, that enacting these bills would also result in the

application of different rules to different sets of retirees. I am

particularly troubled that S.6031 would prevent any diminution of reti-

ree health benefits, even in a fiscal crisis that required cuts for

active employees. If enacted, other pension recipients would soon seek

the same protection.

In particular, NYSHIP applies a wide variety of different costs and

benefits to a host of different bargaining units. If it sought to change

retiree benefits, it is unclear how it could coordinate such alteration

with a bargained change for every represented group of employees, or how

it could be determined whether reductions in such varied benefits were

equivalent to those applied to retirees.

In any event, the 1994 school district retiree law was enacted follow-

ing a study and report by a Task Force that, among other steps,

conducted an extensive survey of school districts to determine their

health insurance practices vis-a-vis retirees. In contrast, these bills

would put a new set of rules in place statewide whose effect is diffi-

cult to determine, without similar prior study. There is a great deal of

information that is simply not discernable from the submissions on this

bill, and which would be essential to evaluating the best approach to

the serious concerns raised by the sponsors. Among these issues are: (1)

the effect the school district law has had on employer options and

costs; (2) the frequency with which retiree health benefits are reduced

while those of active workers remain the same; (3) whether there are

differences in how school districts and some of the larger entities

addressed by this bill administer health insurance, and whether such

differences require different approaches; (4) whether, because of the

unique set of benefits available to retirees (such as Medicare), there

are circumstances where a parallel treatment of retiree and present

employee benefits is unwarranted; (5) what impact a universal health

care initiative would have on this issue; and (6) whether there are

other statutory or regulatory means for protecting retiree health bene-

fits - such as by changing collective bargaining rules or otherwise -

that would be a better way of addressing the problems articulated by the

bills' supporters.

Given these open questions, I am directing the Division of the Budget,

the Commissioners of Health, Insurance and Civil Service, and the Direc-

tor of the Governor's Office of Employee Relations to work with employee

and retiree organizations to investigate these issues, and to report

back on the potential impact of these bills and other possible legisla-

tive proposals. On the basis of the information presently before me,

however, I think it would be unwise to impose on every public employer

in the State the broad and differing rules mandated by these bills.

The bills are disapproved. (signed) ELIOT SPITZER

__________

[firecapt32 282]

having beeninvloved in contract negoitaions for a long time inthe fire service, One thing stands out--for the longest time we would not give in to any demand that had a decrease in health benifits attached to it. even if it ment a lesser of a raise.. someof us knew years ago that this was coming and tried to protect our firefighters. Then all of a sudden we saw a gradual"let the new guy pay for some of his health insurance" first it was for the first five years--then it was 10 % setting up a 2 tiered syatem that has to come around and bite you where the sun dont shine. We are paying the price now.

Police and fire supported Spitizer from day one but the firght is with the locals and the local administrations. we must stand strong. i stood on a informational picket protesting the reduction of benifits for the fire service- we were sucesfull then and we shoud be sucesfull now

[Guest]

A grim picture? Yes, but that is reality. And as for "Sicko", it is in my opinion, an advertisement for the Socialists and their plan to bring Socialized Medicine to the US. Free health care sounds great, but when your take home pay is reduced by 60% from what it is now, Yes that is correct, because that is how much TAXES will have to be raised to pay for FREE Health Care, it won't sound so great! TANSTAAFL "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch".

Well said. The timing of the release of this movie and, a presidental campaign are no accident. I agree. The middle class will pay for Socialized Medicine. There is a man in Canada that was told he had to wait seven months to get a MRI for a brain tumor. He drove to the United States to get the MRI and the lifesaving surgery he needed. He paid for it out of his own pocket. He is now suing the Canadian health care system. Was there any mention of that in the movie ? or maby the health care system in Cuba?

I havent seen the movie and I am not a Michael Moore fan at all. I was told my health insurance was terminating my sons policy at 2 days old. 5 months in the hospital and 3 million in debt later....... Something is very ,very wrong with the health system here. I am not saying socialised medicine is the answer. Also European countries have private health insurance available I am not sure about Canada. SOrry to hijack your topic