[lbo-talk] letter of resignation from SEIU: screwing UHW, screwing homecare workers

Chuck Grimes cgrimes at rawbw.com
Tue May 12 12:38:20 PDT 2009


I am no fan of SEIU, but this story and the implication that SEIU is to blame for the feds taking back or withholding Medicaid funding is mostly nonsense. The Medicaid or rather MediCal system has build-in share of cost formulas across the board. The SEIU wage deals with the counties is just one part. The same problem of state and country contributions mandated by federal guidelines has been an on-going battle for years.

MediCal reimbursements and their documentation requirements for claims have become the worst of the worst in a systemic denial of service. Many doctors and private hospitals who have a choice will not take MediCal patients because the fee schedules are so low, the paper work so high, and the likelihood of a denial so high. The average time between between providing service and getting paid runs above 120 days. More progressive counties like Alameda have made up the state budget contribution difference for years, and slowly the counties have had their own budget problems, partly because of it. Every year since I can't remember when, California Republicans have held up state budgets on the starve the beast line of reasoning. From about mid-May to about October MediCal claims are stalled out and dribble through, while the legislature and governor battle over the budget.

I have absolutely no doubt the, ``bill includes a `maintenance of effort' clause to prevent states from using the new federal dollars to lower their spending on healthcare at counties' expense. The SEIU argued that California's cuts violated that clause...''

``That stance is unreasonable, and Washington should drop its threat to rescind the extra Medicaid dollars.'' Nonsense. If the feds let California off the hook, they will likely face a sea of state level complaints around the country about the same problem. Several states don't even subscribe to the Medicaid system because they don't like the share of cost guidelines. The states, counties, and feds have been cost shifting for decades under endless battles over taxation. This is one of those battles. And so now, it's the union and working class demands for higher wages that is the problem?

No. It's the public policy of `starving the beast' by cutting taxes and cutting public service support that is the problem.

All of this is very similar sounding to the banks that complain about regulation but want the money anyhow. And it also smacks of the forced wage cutbacks in the auto industry.

The whole state system is on the verge of collapse exactly because it will not raise the appropriate tax levels in a progressive system so it can no longer afford any social safety net. It is the wage demands from the lowest level of labor that is to blame for the crisis? I don't think so.

CG



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list