Healthcare

WellPoint dividend is questioned;

May 26, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>State officials say Blue Cross' $950-million payout to its parent may have violated a deal with regulators.</h3><p class="source">Los Angeles Times</p> <p>State regulators are investigating whether a $950-million dividend Blue Cross of California sent to its Indianapolis-based parent violates an agreement the companies made to limit such payments to keep premiums down and maintain the quality of healthcare benefits, officials said Friday.</p>

Arnie’s secret visit;

April 26, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Schwarzenegger to come to Pasadena Monday for a no-Democrats AARP health care forum</h3><p class="source">Pasadena Weekly (California)</p> <p>"If you're an insurance company, you'd have to be breaking out a cigar in celebration over the fact that none of these three new proposals is going to do anything to regulate health insurance rates or make the finances of the for-profit insurance companies any more transparent," said Judy Dugan, research director for the Santa Monica-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights.</p>

HMO Regulator Finds Blue Cross Batting Average Is Zero in Proving Patients Lied Before Retroactively Canceling Coverage

April 9, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Managed Care Law Weekly</p> <p>"Out of 90 cases reviewed to determine whether Blue Cross abided by state law, Blue Cross struck out 90 times. This survey is damning evidence that Blue Cross has put patients at risk of medical bankruptcy by flagrantly violating state patient protection laws," said Jerry Flanagan, health care policy director for FTCR. </p>

Retroactively Canceling Insurance Lands Blue Cross in Flurry of Litigation

April 5, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Los Angeles Daily Journal</p> <p>Jerry Flanagan of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights was not surprised. "Generally, plans get caught red-handed, and they want to settle," he said. "The last thing they want is to have this exposed publicly in the courts."</p>

Stem cell grant OKd for L.A. center linked to allegations

March 27, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Los Angeles Times</p> <p>Critics of the closed-door grant reviews arranged by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine say the decision is a reason to open the process more to public scrutiny. "Had everyone known that a grant was being discussed to that organization, things would have gone slower and questions would have been raised then," said John Simpson of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica.</p>

Delay is urged on stem cell cloning grant

March 23, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">The San Francisco Chronicle</p> <p>Separately, the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica sent a letter to Dr. Zach Hall, president and chief scientific officer of the stem cell agency, also calling for an investigation.</p>

Chains weigh in on access;

February 26, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>The FAH joins the throng offering proposals to solve the uninsured crisis, but some say their plan lacks a key element.</h3><p class="source">Modern Healthcare</p> <p>A few dismissed the plan outright, pegging it as little more than an effort by profit-driven hospitals to protect their own interests at a time when Congress is looking to overhaul the healthcare system. "The biggest players in the for-profit healthcare world, or those that have the most to lose from significant reforms, are simply attempting to write themselves into the solution,'' said Jerry Flanagan, a healthcare advocate with the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a consumer group. "They're seeing the writing on the wall and they're trying to get in front on the issue by saying: Eureka! We have the answer.''</p>

Beware what the medical-industrial complex loves

February 22, 2007  ·  Jamie Court

<p class="source">The San Francisco Chronicle</p> <p>The "shared burden" proposals of both Schwarzenegger and Perata would require Californians who don't have health insurance through an employer or incomes low enough to qualify for government subsidies to buy it on the open market, or face punishment at tax time. Yet the yearly income cutoff for a subsidy would be $52,000 to $60,000 for a family of four, and the average annual cost of market-rate insurance for that family today is about $11,000, not counting co-pays and deductibles. Mom could take a night job, but there's no other way to squeeze almost an extra $1,000 a month from an already tight family budget.</p>

Beware what the medical-industrial complex loves

February 22, 2007  ·  Jamie Court

<p class="source">The San Francisco Chronicle</p> <p>The "shared burden" proposals of both Schwarzenegger and Perata would require Californians who don't have health insurance through an employer or incomes low enough to qualify for government subsidies to buy it on the open market, or face punishment at tax time. Yet the yearly income cutoff for a subsidy would be $52,000 to $60,000 for a family of four, and the average annual cost of market-rate insurance for that family today is about $11,000, not counting co-pays and deductibles. Mom could take a night job, but there's no other way to squeeze almost an extra $1,000 a month from an already tight family budget.</p>

Influential coalition backs universal health care;

February 7, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>Players Urge Compromise, Quick Action</h3><p class="source">The San Jose Mercury News (California)</p> <p>The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a Santa Monica-based consumer group, suggested that the motive of at least some of the coalition's members was to prevent state regulation of health insurance rates. "Any universal reform that includes private insurers must require them to justify current rates and proposed premium charges," the foundation said in a letter to Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland. "California needs an effective regulatory review like that required of auto and property/ casualty insurers...."</p>

Erlanger increasing executives’ salaries 3.5 percent to 36.5 percent

January 28, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<p class="source">Chattanooga Times and Free Press (Tennessee)</p> <p>Jerry Flanagan, health care policy director for the Santa Monica, Calif.-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, said hospitals are in an "arms race" as they keep increasing salaries to stay competitive. And this is money that could be spent on patient care, he said. "When we spend more on salaries, patients are in effect spending more of their dollar for overhead," he said.</p>

GOV. OFFERS BOLD PRESCRIPTION — $12-BILLION PROPOSAL

January 9, 2007  ·  Consumer Watchdog

<h3>All Californians would be required to carry medical insurance. Critics include doctors, hospitals, insurers and some legislators.</h3><p class="source">The Los Angeles Times</p> <p>Because so many parts of Schwarzenegger's plan hinge on one another, deleting the areas of greatest disagreement could unravel the entire plan. "Health insurance reform is as delicate as an egg," said Jamie Court, president of the Foundation of Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, a Santa-Monica based watchdog group. "One little crack and the egg is lost."</p>