How Life Insurance Companies Learn Your Best-Kept Secrets

June 9, 2016, 9:38 pm

≫ Next: Playing Offense on Voting Rights

≪ Previous: While Congress Spends Its Time Trying to Undercut Retirement Security, a Long To-Do List Awaits

By Barbara Marquand

Some of the things you might hide from friends are fair game to insurers when you apply for life insurance. And thanks to the streams of electronic data available today, life insurance companies can gather information on you faster than ever before. The prescription drugs you've taken, that DUI a few years back, a bankruptcy -- all these pieces of information will likely come to light and affect your life insurance rates.

Life insurers are increasingly relying on big data resources to speed up the application process and reduce their costs to issue policies.

When you apply, insurers can buy data from a variety of sources. Here's some of what's available.

*Prescription drug histories*

ExamOne, a part of Quest Diagnostics, and Milliman IntelliScript gather prescription claims data from pharmacy benefit managers and sell reports to insurers. Milliman says it can deliver a report within seconds, including the drug name, dosage, fill date, pharmacy and physician information.

The prescription histories sold to life insurance companies probably don't date back more than about 10 years because it's been only in the past decade or so that such information has been captured electronically.

*Lab test results*

With the help of Quest Diagnostics' clinical laboratory database, ExamOne's "QuestCheck" service gives insurers results from doctor-ordered lab tests.

*Driving record*

DUI or reckless driving convictions can make it difficult to qualify for life insurance, and multiple moving violations, such as speeding tickets, in the past few years may make you ineligible for the best prices. Companies such as LexisNexis Risk Solutions and ExamOne offer insurers motor vehicle reports from any state.

*Information from previous health and life insurance applications*

The MIB Group Inc. has a data-sharing service for its member life and health insurance companies. When you apply for an individual policy, the insurer can share certain pieces of medical information about you with MIB. That information -- say, for instance, that you have high blood pressure -- is given a code, which other insurers can see if you apply for coverage again. The information is limited; medical records or whether you've been declined for coverage are unavailable. MIB has information about you only if you've applied for individual life, health, disability, long-term care or critical illness insurance in the past seven years.

*Public records*

Companies like LexisNexis scan public records to help insurers screen applications. A public records search would turn up a bankruptcy, for instance. A recent bankruptcy, particularly if it's undischarged, would make it harder to qualify for life insurance with some companies.

*Inside the data evaluation process*

Almost all life insurers use data collected by MIB, and about six in 10 use prescription databases, lab results and motor vehicle records to help decide whether to issue policies, according to LIMRA, a financial service research group.

Using automated data and algorithms can reduce the need for life insurance medical exams or blood tests as part of the application process, says Timothy Rozar, CEO of RGAx, a subsidiary of Reinsurance Group of America Inc., and a Society of Actuaries fellow.

"It makes the process literally less painful, but also less painful from the time and frustration perspective," he says.

Already, 48% of life insurance companies surveyed by LIMRA say access to electronic data has reduced the need to order attending physician statements -- reports from doctors or hospitals about applicants' health.

*With your permission*

All of this is legal. The life insurance application that you sign asks for your consent to collect the information.

The process is consistent with privacy laws such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act, says Dennis Moynihan, an ExamOne spokesman.

Evaluating your "risk" as a customer is like putting together a puzzle, LIMRA president and CEO Robert Kerzner says. No single piece of information tells the whole story; rather, each contributes to the big picture.

Information from data reports, such as prescription histories, can speed up approval of most applications, Kerzner says. In a small portion of cases, the reports might reveal discrepancies between what applicants disclosed and the data, prompting the insurer to ask for more information.

"If you said you're in perfect health and nothing has ever gone wrong, but you're taking a medication for a condition, then clearly there's a discrepancy," Kerzner says.

The data could help you, too, Rozar says. A medication history check could show you've been filling a prescription consistently to keep a condition under control, which could help you qualify for coverage.

*Why life insurers want to move faster*

Life insurance companies see using big data to streamline the process as a key to enticing more people to buy coverage.

When a life insurance medical exam, blood test and attending physician statement are required, it can take 30 days or more to buy a policy. "In today's world, that doesn't cut it," Kerzner says.

Barbara Marquand is a staff writer at NerdWallet, a personal finance website. Email: bmarquand@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @barbaramarquand.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 5 hours ago.

↧

Playing Offense on Voting Rights

June 10, 2016, 2:25 am

≫ Next: Even if you have health insurance you may want to pay cash

≪ Previous: How Life Insurance Companies Learn Your Best-Kept Secrets

AP Photo/Robert E. Klein

Former Rhode Island Secretary of State Matt Brown, left, is given a demonstration of the new electronic voter registration system for the Rhode Island Department of Motor Vehicles by RIDMV clerk Kathy Lussier, center, and administrator Charles Dolan at the West Warwick Registry.

For much of this election cycle, voting rights advocates have been playing defense. Seventeen states have enacted new curbs on voting, including voter ID laws, that weren’t in place for the last presidential election. These new laws build on a rash of electoral restrictions enacted in in 22 states between 2010 and 2012, and follow on the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling to invalidate key parts of the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965.

All this has made defending the right to vote from further erosion a central preoccupation for advocates of democracy. But advancing voting rights is about more than just blocking new restrictions and warily protecting the franchise. It’s about expanding access to the polls. A good voting rights offense—one that equitably broadens mass participation—is especially important for voting populations of color and in poverty.

Too often, states disenfranchise these voters not by actively limiting their access to the polls, but by failing to implement federal laws aimed at adding them to the rolls. The main tool to expand voter expansion is the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. The linchpin of this law was its “Motor Voter” component. Under that provision—Section 5—states were required to integrate the process of voter registration with that of applying for a driver’s license.

The goal was to boost political participation by linking voter registration to a widespread aspect of daily life, namely getting a license. Yet, in the 23 years that this policy has been in effect, the number of voter registration applications processed at motor vehicle agencies (DMVs) has remained stagnant, despite significant growth in the voting age population. This is because many states are simply not complying with the law. One estimate suggests that nearly 18 million additional voter registration forms would be processed biannually at DMVs if states did even a moderately better job of signing people up to vote.

Compounding this shortcoming is another missed opportunity to strengthen our democracy: the failed implementation of a lesser known aspect of the National Voter Registration Act that required public assistance agencies to serve as voter registration sites. This provision—Section 7—mandated that states offer voter registration services to every person applying for or renewing public assistance benefits.

The objective was to ensure an equitable expansion of the electorate by reaching beyond DMVs to the disproportionately poor and minority populations that sometimes have difficulties obtaining a driver’s license. Because of Section 7, public assistance agencies that offer food, health coverage, and other life necessities must now also be equipped to register voters by providing registration forms, helping people fill them out and sending them to the necessary officials. These services could help low-income Americans overcome the significant barriers they face in registering to vote. However, the potential of this law is largely unfulfilled, due in large part to the racial bias and partisan politics that have hampered its implementation.

In 1993, voting rights advocates had high hopes that Section 7 would catalyze political engagement among low-income voters. And while the NVRA did make the electorate slightly more representative, the initial expectations that accompanied the law have not been realized. For example, in 1995 and 1996, more than two-and-a-half million Americans submitted voter registration applications to public assistance agencies. But in 1997, those numbers began to plummet, and by 2005 state public assistance agencies registered just over half a million people.

After 2006, voting rights advocates sought to reverse this decline by suing some of the states that were the least compliant with Section 7. The suits did bear some fruit. During the 2014 election cycle, approximately 1.6 million Americans submitted voter registration forms at public assistance agencies. Nevertheless, this represents only a small slice of the more than 50 million Americans receiving help from the government each year.

Why aren’t states registering more low-income people? Diminished levels of voter registration at social service agencies are not, as some might speculate, because low-income people are already registered, or because they do not want to vote. My own analysis of agency-based registration between 1995 and 2012 shows that partisanship and race were the biggest factors determining states’ compliance with the requirements of Section 7.

When a Democratic president occupied the White House, states were more likely to comply. Similarly, when Republicans were in control of the legislature, states were substantially less likely to register voters via social service agencies.

State compliance also decreased in direct proportion to the size of the black population. As the black proportion of state residents increased, compliance went down. Compliance also decreased when whites had higher rates of voter registration relative to African Americans and other people of color. Essentially, increased black populations and lower levels of political engagement among those populations discouraged compliance with Section 7.

Ordinary government employees—the folks who work at public assistance agencies—were also vital players. This is important because even if politicians support compliance by ensuring that registration forms are readily available or by enforcing oversight, people who work at the “street level” must ultimately ask those who walk through their doors if they would like to register. Compliance was significantly higher when those people were African American. This is not surprising given that black government employees have a well-established history of viewing their work through political lenses.

African Americans play a substantial but variable role in America’s welfare bureaucracy. In states like New York, Michigan, Illinois, and Florida, they account for anywhere from one-quarter to nearly one-half of all public assistance administrators. The patterns revealed in my research suggest that when black government employees reach such critical masses, compliance increases. However, many states employ relatively few African Americans. Without better training and oversight to ensure that all government workers comply with the law, these locales will continue to fall short of enacting the promise of agency based registration.

In an election marked by toxic racial rhetoric and heated debates over income equity, it’s crucial to ensure free and fair access to the ballot box, especially for people of color and folks grappling with poverty. Equal access does not simply mean freedom from being barred at the polls. It also implies an affirmative obligation to actively and evenhandedly incorporate Americans into the political process. Section 7 of the NVRA aimed to do precisely that, by giving low-income Americans opportunities for voter registration. That effort has been stymied by anti-democratic, racialized political maneuvering.

There are things that we can do to change this. Legal intervention against states with particularly bad track records has proven an effective strategy for spurring compliance with Section 7. Voting rights advocates concerned with oversight would also do well to remember that the state health insurance exchanges set up under the Affordable Care Act are covered by the NRVA and should be held accountable for offering voter registration services.

States can also take action to draw voters into the political process, and many are moving in that direction. But given the poor track record of the National Voter Registration Act—Section 7 especially—voting rights advocates would best not count their chickens before they hatch. As both online and automatic voter registration grow in popularity, advocates must take care to ensure that these systems work effectively for indigent Americans.

Finally, the job of expanding access to voter registration should not be left solely in the hands of fragmented state governments, particularly considering their history of non-compliance. Alternative institutions like community organizations, political groups, and social movements must be vigilant, both in challenging electoral disparities and in extending and deepening mass political engagement. In the face of intensifying racial divisions and widening partisan polarization, both state and non-state actors must work to ensure that race and poverty don’t become obstacles to a basic American right.

This article was posted in conjunction with the Scholars Strategy Network.

This essay is based on findings from, “Race, Poverty and the Redistribution of Voting Rights,” forthcoming in the June issue of the Journal of Poverty and Public Policy. Reported by The American Prospect 5 minutes ago.

↧

Even if you have health insurance you may want to pay cash

June 10, 2016, 3:04 am

≫ Next: Feds take aim at short-term and critical-illness coverage

≪ Previous: Playing Offense on Voting Rights

Five blood tests were performed in March at Torrance Memorial Medical Center. The hospital charged the patient’s insurer, Blue Shield of California, $408. The patient was responsible for paying $269.42.

If that were all there was to this -- which it’s not -- you’d be justified in shaking your head... Reported by L.A. Times 1 day ago.

↧

Feds take aim at short-term and critical-illness coverage

June 10, 2016, 9:59 am

≫ Next: Corporate Social Responsibility in Health Care: No Such Thing

≪ Previous: Even if you have health insurance you may want to pay cash

Proposals from three federal agencies would curtail the use of short-term health insurance to three months. -More- Reported by SmartBrief 17 hours ago.

↧

Corporate Social Responsibility in Health Care: No Such Thing

June 10, 2016, 10:54 am

≫ Next: New Date Announced for AIS’s Webinar With Three Experts on Medicare-Medicaid Dual Eligibles

≪ Previous: Feds take aim at short-term and critical-illness coverage

We have some long unanswered questions in U. S. health care--Is health care in the public interest based on medical need, not ability to pay? Is it a commodity on an unfettered for-profit, largely investor-owned corporate marketplace? Is it different from other commodities? and Who is the health care system for--providers of services or patients?

The questions have not received much public or policy debate over the last 50 years, but the answers have been solidly entrenched in the medical-industrial complex over that period. Economist Milton Friedman, the University of Chicago's guru of market capitalism, set the pattern as early as 1967 in these words:
Few trends could so thoroughly undermine the very foundations of our free society as the acceptance by corporate officials of a social responsibility other than to make as much money for their shareholders as possible. (1)
Over the years there have been serious warnings about the lack of social responsibility of health care corporations and its negative impacts upon our society. In 1988, as president of the Association of Academic Health Centers, Roger Bulger foresaw these challenges with privatized health care:
Under the deregulated, decentralized systems approach to health care evolving in the United States, the main problem will be how to guarantee a requisite level of care for the poor and underinsured. How we answer that problem will be the true measure of our values, of our national character, and of the quality of our beliefs. (2)
So what has happened on this critical subject over the last 50 years? Any progress?
These examples show only acceleration of the predictable adverse impacts upon health care getting worse, and still without relief on the horizon.

• Corporate alliance against health care reform
As the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was being debated in Congress during 2008 and 2009, at least 3,300 registered lobbyists were lobbying for their special interests, plus another 90,000 to 120,000 unregistered people working on one or another aspect of the ACA's provisions--168 influence peddlers for every member of Congress. (3)

• Private health insurers
Although insurers are required by the ACA to offer coverage without regard to pre-existing conditions, they have many ways to profit from their expanded, subsidized markets, including high-deductible plans (ranging upwards of $5,000 a year), narrow networks that exclude a majority of hospitals and physicians in an area, continued increases in premiums to what the market can bear, high- coinsurance for specialty drugs, manipulation of risk scores to get higher reimbursement, and leaving markets that are not sufficiently profitable.

• Hospital systems
Expanding hospital systems game the new system by mergers that limit competition, having wide latitude to charge what they want, shifting some services to affiliated outpatient settings that cost more, using "observation days" to count toward CMS's rules requiring a minimum of three inpatient days before follow-up nursing home care will be covered, and having very high administrative costs (25 percentof total hospital expenditures) (4).

• Pharmaceutical industry
In large part driven by intense direct-to-consumer advertising since the 1990s (banned in most advanced countries), the use of prescription drugs by Americans has reached an all-time high, with many people taking five or more medications. The industry has successfully avoided negotiated drug prices through ongoing lobbying efforts (the Veterans Administration is an exception, having for many years achieved discounted prices down to about 58 percent of what we pay). Drug manufacturers raise prices to enormous levels, make false claims for R & D costs, and frequently conduct biased research of their products' effectiveness. Pharmaceutical companies have defrauded federal and state governments by $35 billion over the last 25 years, most commonly by marketing drugs for unapproved uses.(5) We pay much more for these drugs than other industrialized countries, and the industry has long resisted cost-effectiveness research.

• Medical device industry
Prices of medical devices can vary widely from one part of the country to another without transparency. Confidentiality clauses in many of the industry's purchasing agreements prohibit hospitals from sharing prices with third parties, including physicians, insurers and patients.(6) Manufacturers often continue marketing their products after they have been found defective, gaming a regulatory loophole not requiring evidence of safety and effectiveness; one example is the all-metal ASR hip replacement of the DePuy orthopedic division of Johnson & Johnson that led to some 5,000 lawsuits against the company. (7)

• Investor-owned care
We have seen a long track record over many years that investor-owned hospitals, HMOs, dialysis centers, nursing homes, and mental health centers cost more than their not-for-profit counterparts while providing lower quality care. (8)

• Wall Street intrusion and conflicts of interest
Recent decades have seen increasing links between physicians and Wall Street, filled with conflicts of interest and devious practices. A new industry has emerged to facilitate consultation by physicians to the investment industry. These "consultations" typically relate to the conduct, status, and preliminary results of ongoing clinical trials of drugs. Some physicians have leaked critical information about their drug research to Wall Street firms (9), while some stock analysts have posed as physicians conducting a trial. (10)

In a recent analysis of "value creation" vs. "value shifting," Princeton University's economist Uwe Reinhardt showed us how corporate executives and their advisors exaggerate social value of their products and shift their costs to patients through so-called "value pricing." (11) Dr. Don McCanne, leading U. S. health policy expert, summarizes this problem:
Bringing us new beneficial health care services and products creates value, whereas extracting more revenues from the ill without providing any further health benefit shifts value, creating more wealth for the owners of capital (rent-seekers). Value shifting is pervasive throughout our health care system and has been detrimental to the health and finances of middle- and low-income individuals and families. (12)
This situation is not sustainable. Our corporatized system is failing the public interest and continues on without any semblance of social responsibility. There is a fix--single-payer national health insurance, with a larger role of government to rein in corporate abuses, coupled with a private system to deliver health care services. This will challenge our democracy vs. the ruling oligarchy as the stakes get higher every day.

John Geyman, M.D. is the author of The Human Face of ObamaCare: Promises vs. Reality and What Comes Next and How Obamacare is Unsustainable: Why We Need a Single-Payer Solution For All Americans

*References: *

1. Friedman, M. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago. University of Chicago Press, 1967.

2. Bulger, RJ. Technology. Bureaucracy and healing in America: A postmodern paradigm. Iowa City, IA. University of Iowa Press, 1988.

3. Kroll, A. Lobbyists still run Washington. The Progressive Populist, October 15, 2009.

4, Himmelstein, DU, Jun, M, Busse, R et al. A comparison of hospital administrative costs in eight nations: U. S. costs exceed all others by far. Health Affairs, September 2014.

5. Almashat, S. Pharmaceutical industry continues to defraud federal, state governments. Public Citizen News, May/June 2016, p. 7.

6. Dolan, E. Price variation and confidentiality in the market for medical devices. The Health Care Blog, February 14, 2012.

7. Meier, B. Hip implants U. S. rejected sold overseas. New York Times, February 12, 2012: A1.

8. Geyman, JP. The Corporate Transformation of Health Care: Can the Public Interest Still Be Served? New York. Springer Publishing Company, 2004, p. 228.

9. Kaiser Policy Report, August 9, 2005.

10. Anand, G, Smith, R. Trial heat: biotech analysts strive to peek inside clinical tests of drugs. Wall Street Journal, August 8, 2002:A1.

11. Reinhardt, UE. 'Value creation' and 'value shifting' in health care. Health Affairs Blog, June 1, 2016.

12. McCanne, D. Uwe Reinhardt: 'value creation' and 'value shifting' in health care. Quote of the Day. June 6, 2016.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 16 hours ago.

↧

New Date Announced for AIS’s Webinar With Three Experts on Medicare-Medicaid Dual Eligibles

June 10, 2016, 10:46 am

≫ Next: What Black And Latina Women Want You To Know About Hillary Clinton

≪ Previous: Corporate Social Responsibility in Health Care: No Such Thing

In AIS’s upcoming webinar, two health care executives and a state Medicaid official will detail what they’ve learned so far from Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligibles programs, and how that will translate into changes inside and outside the demo.

Washington, DC (PRWEB) June 10, 2016

Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) is pleased to announce the date for its rescheduled webinar, “Medicare-Medicaid Dual Eligibles: Translating Lessons Learned Into Strategies for Future Programs.” On June 21, three industry experts will provide an in-depth look at lessons learned by the health plans and states working with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) in the Financial Alignment Initiative (FAI) for Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibles.

Melanie Bella, senior vice president of policy and strategy at Alignment Healthcare; Sarah Brooks, deputy director, health care delivery systems for the California Department of Health Care Services; and Lisa Rubino, senior vice president, strategic products at Molina Healthcare, will provide answers to key questions such as:· What has worked in getting duals beneficiaries engaged to participate in duals programs? What has not worked?
· What techniques have reduced (or are likely to reduce in the future) the degree of provider misgivings about the duals demo? How can plans and states overcome resistance to new training and collaboration requirements for providers?
· How have plans in the demo changed programs to deal with the behavioral health needs of the duals? With what success?
· What do the initial data suggest about the potential for achieving cost savings in the future? Which adjustments could lead to greater future savings?
· What has been California’s experience in using the FAI as a means of moving duals out of institutions and avoiding institutionalization?
· How have states and plans fostered the movement to interdisciplinary care teams serving duals populations? Where has this been most successful? Least successful?
· What is the likelihood that demo states will remain in and adopt the two-year extension in the FAI? What milestones will help determine this?
· What new initiatives are some states developing either in lieu of or in addition to the demo, especially in managed long-term services and supports?
· How can what has been learned so far from the FAI be translated into permanent program changes?

Visit https://aishealth.com/marketplace/c6a09_062116 for more details and registration information.

About AIS
Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) is a publishing and information company that has been serving the health care industry for nearly 30 years. It develops highly targeted news, data and strategic information for managers in hospitals and health systems, health insurance companies, medical group practices, purchasers of health insurance, pharmaceutical companies and other health care organizations. AIS products include print and electronic newsletters, databases, websites, looseleafs, strategic reports, directories, webinars and virtual conferences. Reported by PRWeb 16 hours ago.

↧

What Black And Latina Women Want You To Know About Hillary Clinton

June 10, 2016, 12:42 pm

≫ Next: Rally Health to Present Unified Approach to Health Care Cost Transparency and Search at AHIP Institute & Expo 2016

≪ Previous: New Date Announced for AIS’s Webinar With Three Experts on Medicare-Medicaid Dual Eligibles

WASHINGTON -- On Tuesday, Hillary Clinton became the first woman to be named the presumptive nominee of a major political party. Let that sink in: Ninety-six years after American women won the right to vote, the U.S. may finally be on the verge of electing its first female president. On social media and in regular media alike, women around the world rejoiced.

But I was conflicted. And I wasn't alone.

There's no doubt that Clinton’s achievement is breathtaking and historic, as the former secretary of state herself noted in a speech Tuesday night.

“Tonight’s victory is not about one person,” Clinton said. “It belongs to generations of women and men who struggled and sacrificed and made this moment possible. In our country, it started right here in New York, a place called Seneca Falls, in 1848. When a small but determined group of women, and men, came together with the idea that women deserved equal rights.”

But the specific racial context of the suffrage movement certainly doesn't do Clinton any favors with black women and other women of color. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who read "The Declaration of Sentiments" at that gathering in Seneca Falls, was a well-known racist who didn’t believe that all women were created equally.

"The fact that even with all the discussion around racial equality and [Clinton] being challenged repeatedly by Black Lives Matter on race that she missed an opportunity to acknowledge [that] black women could not vote is telling of where we stand on the feminist agenda,” Tiffani Cordova, a 41-year old black woman from Illinois, told The Huffington Post via Twitter.

It’s tempting to invoke feminism and say that non-white women should be happy for Clinton because she is a woman. And certainly, many of women of color are happy for her. But for some of us, identity politics just aren’t that simple. Many non-white women have taken issue with Clinton's choice to put her achievement in the context of women’s suffrage, with the implication that it's a victory that should resonate with all women equally. It's a move that for many women only confirms their feelings that Clinton has a blind spot when it comes to race.

“It was a glaring omission. Hell, my grandmomma wasn't part of the group Hillary was referring to and I don't feel a part of that group today,” Cordova said. “A lot of times you'll hear the suffragette struggle being compared to the black civil rights struggle. It’s not the same. They don't want to acknowledge that their movement was steeped in a lot of racism and even today with ‘new’ racism.”

My great-great-granny wasn't included either (I’m black, in case you haven’t noticed). In 1920, Vinnie Click couldn’t walk into a North Carolina voting booth and cast a ballot. Though the 19th Amendment had that year legally extended the right to vote to all women, black women still faced opposition -- mainly in the South -- and weren’t effectively enfranchised until the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965.

And for some women of color, the wait for enfranchisement was even longer. Not until 1975, 55 years after the first white women cast their ballots, was the Voting Rights Act officially expanded to end discrimination against non-English speakers.

“My thoughts on Hillary being the nominee are simple. It is extremely historic for white women,” Kara, a 21-year-old black University of North Carolina student who did not want to provide her last name, told HuffPost via Twitter. “However, her win does not pave the way for black women. It does not open doors and shatter glass ceiling for women of color. The only people who will truly benefit from this are other white women.”

“Clinton is not paving the way for black women," she went on. "Period."While Clinton attracted far more black voters during the Democratic primary than her principal rival Bernie Sanders, she's also come under scrutiny for her attempts to woo voters of color, which have struck some people as clumsy and tone-deaf, if not outright cynical. It began in December with a Rosa Parks tribute that turned many people off, followed by Clinton's campaign bizarrely declaring that the candidate is "like your abuela." Clinton later told a crowd at Harlem's Apollo Theater to “raise the roof,” and a held a rally on Cinco de Mayo to discuss immigration -- complete with a mariachi band.

In April, Clinton claimed on Power 105’s “The Breakfast Club,” a hip-hop-focused radio show with a solid black listening base, that she always carries hot sauce with her -- a remark that many listeners took as a nod toward the Beyonce lyric “I got hot sauce in my bag / Swag,” from the insanely divisive song "Formation."

Granted, Clinton may have loved hot sauce long before Beyonce bestowed the condiment’s name upon the bat she uses to smash patriarchy. But some black women still saw the interview as an example of Clinton's readiness to pander to voters of color.

Keyonda Proctor, a 24-year-old black woman from North Carolina, said instances like that are part of the reason she's skeptical of Clinton’s dedication to the black community.“As a feminist, I'm completely here for Hillary ‘invading’ a space that is historically male dominated. I will give her a standing ovation for that feat,” Proctor said. “On the other hand, Hillary Clinton in my eyes is just a white woman with a white woman's perspective pushing a white woman's agenda fueled by white feminism.”

“She's unable to fully grasp the experiences of those that are not white," Proctor continued, "[which is] evident in her continuous pandering for the black vote but support of policies that negatively affect the black community and her inability to provide real solutions for issues facing the black community.”

Many black women who spoke to HuffPost echoed Proctor’s feelings. They are well aware of Clinton’s policy platform -- mainly her stated intentions to end mass incarceration, improve community relationships with police and disassemble the school-to-prison pipeline. These and other policy proposals -- such as building on the Affordable Care Act and protecting voting rights -- are one reason why Shannon McKinley, a 36-year-old black woman from California, is ecstatic about Clinton’s win.

“These issues are important to me as an African American woman because I remember sitting in county clinics and emergency rooms for hours as a child because we didn’t have health insurance,” McKinley said in an email. “I am a product of public school. I know the value of quality public education and support Clinton’s policy to make sure every child has the opportunity to learn and thrive regardless of his or her socioeconomic status or neighborhood.”

McKinley argued that Clinton has even accepted her past mistake of lobbying for and defending the 1994 Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act. The bill has been heavily criticized for its role in swelling the American prison population by adding the “three strikes” provision, which incarcerates anyone convicted of a violent crime for life if they have two or more priors.

“More importantly for me, however, is that Clinton listens and she has engaged with those who have protested her,” McKinley said. “She has demonstrated that she will work with people to make change happen, so I believe that things will improve under her administration.”Some women in the Latinx community have questions about Clinton's commitment to people of color, both in and outside of the U.S.

“Her foreign policy, since her days as a Senator, has been to push for coups, militarism and more war," Raquel Saldierna, a 30-year-old Latina from Texas, said in an email. "We risk more war and death under a Hillary presidency.”

Saldierna went on to list a slew of decisions Clinton has made at various points in her career, including her support for the Iraq War and her dreadfully slow trudge toward supporting marriage equality when she was a U.S. senator for New York. Saldierna also pointed to the removal of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya while Clinton was secretary of state, a move that created a “power vacuum that wreaked havoc on civilians.”

“I simply cannot trust her judgement," Saldierna said.

Ana Maria Hernandez, a 20-year-old Afro-Colombian, doesn’t find Clinton relatable, and said she's not sure where Clinton stands on immigration. Hernandez noted that Clinton has claimed she won’t deport undocumented children -- but in 2014 she was on board with sending unaccompanied minors back to their native lands.

"Although she is proposing a promising immigration reform that leads to a path to citizenship, she hasn't been consistent," Hernandez said. "And for me, that matters because we aren't here to just get her into the White House."

"She is proposing life changing policies that matter to millions of people," she went on. "Whether or not she will follow through is crucial to how people will live their lives, and it must be taken seriously."

Hernandez also isn’t fond of how Clinton handled youth activist Ashley Williams. In February, Williams interrupted a fundraising event to bring Clinton to task for her 1996 comments on “super predators,” a racist term referring to black youth who are supposedly incapable of feeling empathy. As Clinton delivered a speech on racial justice, Williams held a sign referencing Clinton’s prior comments. When Clinton paused to look at the sign, Williams asked her to apologize for mass incarceration and informed the candidate that she was not a “super predator.”

Clinton asked Williams if she could talk following the event. When Williams continued making her case, Clinton dismissed her.

“When she dismisses a young black woman who is trying to ask her about her offensive and insulting past remarks about black youth in cities, when she doesn't seem to understand the Black Lives Matter movement, and when she think she's 'like my abuela,' it makes it incredibly difficult to stand with her," Hernandez said.

Clinton later apologized for using the term "super predators," telling The Washington Post that she “shouldn’t have used those words” and wouldn’t say them today. But to Hernandez, the fact that Clinton said them in the first place is a sign of a disconnect.

“She most definitely doesn't understand me or my experiences,” Hernandez said. “These are issues that are closest to my identity and as a woman. So, as a woman of color, it's difficult to connect with and trust her.”

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 14 hours ago.

↧

Rally Health to Present Unified Approach to Health Care Cost Transparency and Search at AHIP Institute & Expo 2016

June 10, 2016, 12:37 pm

≫ Next: Gov. Brown signs bill that could help immigrants get access to health insurance

≪ Previous: What Black And Latina Women Want You To Know About Hillary Clinton

SAN FRANCISCO & WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Rally Health, Inc., a digital health company focused on increasing consumer health engagement, will present at the annual conference of America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) on trends in health care cost transparency and search. The AHIP Institute & Expo 2016 will be held Wednesday-Friday, June 15-17, in Las Vegas. Rally Health’s session at AHIP Institute & Expo 2016 will focus on how an integrated search and cost transparency experience ca Reported by Business Wire 14 hours ago.

↧

Gov. Brown signs bill that could help immigrants get access to health insurance

June 10, 2016, 3:06 pm

≫ Next: Brown signs bill to help illegal immigrants buy health insurance

≪ Previous: Rally Health to Present Unified Approach to Health Care Cost Transparency and Search at AHIP Institute & Expo 2016

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill Friday that could make it easier for people in the country illegally to buy health insurance.

Immigrants here illegally can’t purchase coverage through the healthcare exchanges set up under the Affordable Care Act. Under SB 10, the state will formally ask the federal... Reported by L.A. Times 12 hours ago.

↧

Brown signs bill to help illegal immigrants buy health insurance

June 10, 2016, 10:08 pm

≫ Next: California governor signs bill letting undocumented immigrants buy insurance

≪ Previous: Gov. Brown signs bill that could help immigrants get access to health insurance

The state will ask the federal government to allow illegal immigrants to buy insurance through Covered California, without cost to the state or federal governments. Reported by San Jose Mercury News 5 hours ago.

↧

California governor signs bill letting undocumented immigrants buy insurance

June 10, 2016, 10:27 pm

≫ Next: Do I Need Medicare If I Have Insurance?

≪ Previous: Brown signs bill to help illegal immigrants buy health insurance

↧

Do I Need Medicare If I Have Insurance?

June 11, 2016, 4:06 am

≫ Next: What Catholic leaders are saying about Paul Ryan's poverty plan

≪ Previous: California governor signs bill letting undocumented immigrants buy insurance

The age of eligibility for Medicare is 65, but what if you already have health insurance? Reported by Motley Fool 23 hours ago.

↧

What Catholic leaders are saying about Paul Ryan's poverty plan

June 11, 2016, 5:35 am

≫ Next: California governor signs bill allowing undocumented immigrants to buy insurance

≪ Previous: Do I Need Medicare If I Have Insurance?

Washington D.C., Jun 11, 2016 / 06:14 am (CNA).- After U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan announced a task force on poverty this, Catholic leaders and economists weighed in, saying that it was a good starting point, but that more needed to be done.

Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami voiced hope that the proposal would be a conversation-starter on poverty, saying it “ought to be a catalyst for strong bi-partisan dialogue about our brothers and sisters in need and our obligations to give them priority in our policymaking.”

Speaker Ryan’s 35-page plan, A Better Way: Our vision for a confidant America, proposes changes to the welfare system, more cooperation between faith and community-based initiatives and the federal government, and a more results-based critique of federal anti-poverty programs.

“No amount of government intervention can replace the great drivers of American life: our families, friends, neighbors, churches, and charities,” the introduction states. “And Americans do not need more one-size-fits-all, top-down government programs that limit their ability to get ahead. Instead, they need opportunities to help them escape poverty and earn success.”

Among the plans proposals are work requirements for welfare recipients, letting workers avoid the welfare “cliff” by keeping some benefits as they accept wage increases, giving states and local governments more freedom to tailor welfare benefits and incentives to the needs of specific communities, promoting the use of data and information technology to determine the effectiveness of anti-poverty programs, and working with community programs for at-risk youth, to prevent incarceration.

“All too often, our current system of welfare programs and education programs are too complex, or don’t provide the assistance that individuals need in their unique circumstances,” the plan stated. “This is the beginning of a conversation.”

Ryan, who ran for U.S. vice president in 2012, has publically described his budget principles as being based on the Catholic pillars of solidarity and subsidiarity.

Prominent Catholics voiced gratitude to the House Speaker for raising the issue and starting a dialogue on the matter, although they added that the conversation is only beginning.

“It is time for a major national discussion on the moral challenge of overcoming poverty in the richest nation on earth,” John Carr, director of the Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life at Georgetown University, told CNA. “I think Speaker Ryan’s proposal is a contribution to that, and I hope it will encourage others to offer their own plans and priorities.”

Carr was glad that the plan avoided touching “block grants, Medicaid, and food stamps,” noting that to do so “posed major practical and political problems” and did “not help the poor, in my view.”

Archbishop Wenski agreed. “Commendably, the plan does not seek to be a blunt instrument with regard to the social safety net,” he stated.

However, John Médaille, an adjunct professor of theology at the University of Dallas, said many of Ryan’s proposals “turn out to be aspirational at best, and contradictory at worst.”

The document “concentrates on symptoms, not causes” of poverty, he argued. “Poverty is the result of not having a job” or of “not having a job with a sufficient wage,” he said, but Ryan’s plan has “no wage-support programs” like a minimum wage hike, and has “no jobs program” to create jobs and bring people out of poverty.

Work requirements for welfare can only be a part of policies fighting poverty, Archbishop Wenski said. Lawmakers should look at other possible causes of poverty and symptoms “like access to nutritious food for people of all ages,” he said.

“While work is crucial for the flourishing of those who are able-bodied – and here St. John Paul II reminded us that work constitutes a foundation for the formation of family life – we need to account for the current state of our job training and the availability of actual, good paying jobs,” the archbishop stated.

And according to a study cited in the poverty report – a 2012 Census Bureau report on Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States – “the poverty programs actually do ease poverty” in that “people who didn’t have them would be starving,” Médaille noted.

Many people who are poor and receiving welfare benefits are actually “working very hard,” he said; in many families both parents are working and having to pay high daycare costs which can be second only to rent in monthly budget expenses.

The “effect of wage stagnation on family life” has had a very deleterious effect on families’ livelihoods, Médaille continued. Young white men earn “about the same” as in the 1970s, he noted, and “household income” has stayed about the same for almost 20 years. It’s definitely “part of the cause” of poverty, he said, but it receives “not even honorable mention in this document.”

One area Médaille agreed with the plan on was support for the Earned-Income Tax Credit. It should be “expanded radically” or even replaced with a guaranteed income, he said, noting that experiments in Canada and India show that people with a guaranteed income are “more likely to take a risk” and “become entrepreneurs.”

Photo credit: Christopher Halloran via Shutterstock.com Reported by CNA 21 hours ago.

↧

California governor signs bill allowing undocumented immigrants to buy insurance

June 11, 2016, 6:21 am

≫ Next: It's Time To Blame Obamacare For Losing So Many Full-Time Jobs

≪ Previous: What Catholic leaders are saying about Paul Ryan's poverty plan

California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill into law allowing unauthorized immigrants to buy health insurance on a state exchange created under the U.S. Affordable Care Act, making the state the first in the country to offer that kind of coverage. The law lets the state request a waiver from the f... Reported by Raw Story 21 hours ago.

↧

It's Time To Blame Obamacare For Losing So Many Full-Time Jobs

June 11, 2016, 9:39 am

≫ Next: California Moves To Extend Health Insurance To Undocumented Immigrants

≪ Previous: California governor signs bill allowing undocumented immigrants to buy insurance

It's Time To Blame Obamacare For Losing So Many Full-Time Jobs

Submitted by Edward Morrissey via The Fiscal Times,

*Had a sinking feeling about the economy of late? It may not be your imagination.* Economic indicators have flashed yellow for much of 2016, and the latest jobs report shows further depletion of the work force and a dearth of job creation. *That trend, says one major bank, may be attributable to President Barack Obama’s signature legislation. *

Last Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released the worst jobs report in almost six years. The US economy only added 38,000 jobs, less than a tenth of the estimated 458,000 Americans who left the workforce. In fact, thanks to revisions made to the March and April reports, that exceeds the number of jobs created in the past three months (348,000) by more than 100,000. The workforce participation rate dropped back to 62.6 percent, near a 40-year low, and more than three full points below its level at the start of the recovery in June 2009 (65.7 percent).

*To call this a wide miss is an understatement.* Economists had predicted a moderate jobs gain, with Reuters forecast. The unemployment rate dropped to 4.7 percent, but analysts widely noted that this was a result of the large exodus from the workforce. That included an increase of 130,000 among those who have left the workforce but still desire employment, outnumbering the jobs added in May.

The news on jobs might possibly be worse than even this indicates. An economist at Johns Hopkins called into question the seasonal adjustment calculations used by the BLS. Jonathan Wright recalculated the data and concluded that the economy had lost 4,000 jobs. Instead of a three-month average jobs gain of 116,000 – well below the 131,000-jobs-added level needed to keep up with population growth at a workforce participation rate of 62.6 percent -- the three-month average was actually 107,000, and 114,000 for all of 2016.

On top of that, the second estimate of first-quarter GDP growth came in at an annualized rate of 0.8 percent, just short of contraction. The jobs market and the economy have both stalled. We have not experienced annual GDP growth above 2.5 percent in any year since recovery began in June 2009, making this the weakest recovery in the post-war period.

*One data point in particular might give at least some indication why.* *The number of part-time workers in jobs for economic reasons shot up by 468,000, apart from the 458,000 that left the workforce altogether. Slack work or business conditions accounted for 181,000 of these jobs, while another 77,000 could only find part-time work.*

Analysts at Goldman Sachs have noticed this trend for some time, and put the blame on Obamacare.

*“The evidence suggests that the [Affordable Care Act] has at least modestly elevated involuntary part-time employment,”* Goldman Sachs economist Alec Philips wrote in a research note published on Wednesday. Obamacare had the greatest impact on industries that traditionally do not offer strong health insurance coverage, such as retail stores and the hospitality industry. Phillips noted that these have the highest levels of involuntary part-time workers, and believes that the *ACA has forced “a few hundred thousand” to take cuts in hours or accept part-time work as a result.*

That may not seem like a high number, given the amount of people in the US workforce. However,* as we approach the seventh anniversary of the Obama recovery, the continued rise in involuntary part-time workers demonstrates a fundamental weakness in the economy*, Phillips argues. As Joseph Lawler noted for The Washington Examiner, the number of people forced into part-time work has grown by over 600,000 people in the last seven months. It’s not getting better – it’s getting worse.

*One key area has grown exponentially in the recovery period, though – regulation at every level. *Hudson Institute fellow Marie-Josée Kravis wrote in Friday’s Wall Street Journal that federal regulation twists incentives and punishes small businesses, which provides the engine of job creation in the American economy. In 2010, Kravis notes, federal regulation put a burden on small businesses that cost 20 percent more than it did large companies, thanks to economies of scale.

*Obamacare makes that situation even worse. *Larger companies can distribute the costs of increased health insurance costs and the employer mandate more broadly. Smaller employers, which have less market clout and smaller room for error, feel the shock of the employer coverage mandate more directly. The ACA directly incentivizes employers to use part-time rather than full-time workers, and smaller businesses have the necessity of grasping at any competitive advantage they can get. *Six years after its passage and almost three years after its implementation, Goldman Sachs still sees Obamacare as a prime driver of forced part-time employment.*

As Kravis concludes, *what we have been doing for the last seven years of the weakest recovery on record clearly hasn’t worked. It’s time to try something new – like getting rid of job-killing regulation, with Obamacare first on the list to go. * Reported by Zero Hedge 17 hours ago.

↧

California Moves To Extend Health Insurance To Undocumented Immigrants

June 11, 2016, 5:11 pm

≫ Next: California Gov. Jerry Brown signs bill letting undocumented immigrants buy insurance

≪ Previous: It's Time To Blame Obamacare For Losing So Many Full-Time Jobs

(Reuters) - California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill into law allowing unauthorized immigrants to buy health insurance on a state exchange created under the U.S. Affordable Care Act, making the state the first in the country to offer that kind of coverage.

The law lets the state request a waiver from the federal government that will be needed to allow unauthorized immigrants to purchase unsubsidized insurance through Covered California, the state's healthcare exchange.

"Today we ask the federal government to remove another barrier to health insurance access that discriminates against some of our residents on the basis of their documentation status," said Senator Ricardo Lara, the bill's author, in a statement.

Brown, a Democrat, signed the bill on Friday, according to the governor's website. His office was not immediately available for comment.

The Los Angeles Times reported that if the waiver is approved, it would allow as many as 390,000 immigrants to purchase healthcare insurance through the state's exchange.

Opponents of the legislation have said it would unnecessarily cost California taxpayers and strain the state's healthcare system.

About 7 percent of California's population, or 2.6 million people, lack legal immigration status. In 2012, the state spent more than $600 million on emergency room and other health-related services for people living in the state illegally.

(Reporting by Brendan O'Brien in Milwaukee; Editing by Muralikumar Anantharaman)

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 10 hours ago.

↧

California Gov. Jerry Brown signs bill letting undocumented immigrants buy insurance

June 11, 2016, 8:13 pm

≫ Next: Proposed Premium Hikes Rattle Consumers Paying Their Own Way

≪ Previous: California Moves To Extend Health Insurance To Undocumented Immigrants

↧

Proposed Premium Hikes Rattle Consumers Paying Their Own Way

June 12, 2016, 5:51 am

≫ Next: Proposed premium hikes rattle consumers paying their own way

≪ Previous: California Gov. Jerry Brown signs bill letting undocumented immigrants buy insurance

Millions of consumers paying the full cost of their health insurance will face the sting of rising premiums next year without financial help from government subsidies Reported by ABCNews.com 21 hours ago.

↧

Proposed premium hikes rattle consumers paying their own way

June 12, 2016, 7:08 am

≫ Next: 20 incredible perks companies like Facebook, Disney, and Google offer their employees

≪ Previous: Proposed Premium Hikes Rattle Consumers Paying Their Own Way

WASHINGTON (AP) — Millions of people who pay the full cost of their health insurance will face the sting of rising premiums next year, with no financial help from government subsidies. President Barack Obama's health law provides income-based subsidies for consumers who buy individual policies on HealthCare.gov and state insurance markets. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas is seeking an average premium increase of nearly 60 percent for 2017, and Smith says his monthly bill of about $350 is already about as much as a car payment. [...] he's had to drive to a neighboring county for medical care because he couldn't get an appointment close to home. Back in 2010, the Obama administration used public anger about premium increases as leverage to win passage of the health law. Many people respond to premium hikes by switching to skimpier coverage, yet that leads to bigger medical bills if they need treatment. Some insurance brokers encourage customers to get plans linked to a health savings account. Reported by SeattlePI.com 20 hours ago.

↧

20 incredible perks companies like Facebook, Disney, and Google offer their employees

June 12, 2016, 11:06 am

≫ Next: 'A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand': Ken Burns' Stanford Commencement Address

≪ Previous: Proposed premium hikes rattle consumers paying their own way

20 incredible perks companies like Facebook, Disney, and Google offer their employees

Most of us spend a majority of our waking hours at work, so it's only natural that we want to enjoy our time in the office as much as we can. And perks help — a lot.

According to career site Glassdoor, more than half (57%) of all workers say perks and benefits are among the top things they consider when deciding whether to accept a job, and almost 80% of employees say they would prefer new benefits – like health insurance or paid time off — over a pay raise.

That's why some employers are raising the bar and going beyond free food, on-site gyms, and 401(k)s to attract new talent. Companies like Airbnb and Facebook are offering unique and surprising perks like travel stipends and "Baby Cash," according to Glassdoor's new list of the "Top 20 Employee Benefits and Perks."

"Benefits and perks matter because they're an added piece of the total compensation puzzle," says Scott Dobroski, Glassdoor's career trends analyst. "Job seekers should understand what benefits and perks an employer may be offering, and do their research ahead of time to find companies that offer benefits that matter most to them."

Glassdoor's list is based on the hundreds of thousands of benefits reviews shared on Glassdoor by employees.

Through research and surveys, Glassdoor has found that benefits and perks affect recruiting efforts "in that they certainly help get prospective talent interested in a company and through the door," Dobroski explains. "However, once people are hired, our research shows culture and values, career opportunities and senior leadership, not perks, are the leading factors that impact employee satisfaction, which directly affects a company's talent retention rates."

Here are 20 of the most incredible perks companies are offering right now:

*SEE ALSO: Here's how to respond to weird interview questions you may hear from major companies like Google and Apple*

-Google: death benefits-

Google provides the surviving spouse or partner of a deceased employee 50% of their salary for the next 10 years.

*Overall benefits rating:* 4.6 / 5-Netflix: year-long paid parental leave-

Netflix offers one paid year of maternity and paternity leave to new parents. The company also allows parents to return part-time or full-time and take time off as needed throughout the year.

*Overall benefits rating:* 3.7 / 5-REI: 'Yay Days'-

REI encourages its employees to get outside by offering two paid days off each year, called "Yay Days," to enjoy their favorite outside activity.

*Overall benefits rating:* 4.0 / 5

See the rest of the story at Business Insider Reported by Business Insider 16 hours ago.

↧

Latest Images