Tag Archives: Massachusetts

Massachusetts firms canceling health coverage due to rising costs

From the Boston Globe. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

The relentlessly rising cost of health insurance is prompting some small Massachusetts companies to drop coverage for their workers and encourage them to sign up for state-subsidized care instead, a trend that, some analysts say, could eventually weigh heavily on the state’s already-stressed budget.

Since April 1, the date many insurance contracts are renewed for small businesses, the owners of about 90 small companies terminated their insurance plans with Braintree-based broker Jeff Rich and indicated in a follow-up survey that they were relying on publicly-funded insurance for their employees.

In Sandwich, business consultant Bill Fields said he has been hired by small businesses to enroll about 400 workers in state-subsidized care since April, because the company owners said they could no longer afford to provide coverage. Fields said that is by far the largest number he has handled in such a short time.

“They are giving up out of frustration,’’ Fields said of the employers. “Most of them are very compassionate but they simply can’t afford health insurance any more.’’

[…]The Massachusetts Division of Health Care Finance and Policy annually surveys employers and found no significant drop in coverage as of the end of 2009, when more than three-quarters of companies offered health insurance.

But insurance brokers say the pace of terminations has picked up considerably since then among small companies, of which there are thousands in Massachusetts. Many of these companies — restaurants, day-care centers, hair salons, and retail shops — typically pay such low wages that their workers qualify for state-subsidized health insurance when their employers drop their plans.

“Those employers are trying to keep their doors open, and to the extent they can cut expenses, they will cut health insurance because they know their people can go to Commonwealth Care,’’ said Mark Gaunya, president of the Massachusetts Association of Health Underwriters, a trade group representing more than 1,000 brokers and other insurance professionals.

Remember, Obamacare is patterned after these state-run health care plans from Massachusetts and Tennessee. These plans try to cover more people, which increases demand. But supply is the same. What results is a shortage. Prices rise. And when prices price, employers can no longer afford to pay for health care coverage for their employees. You can’t keep your health care plan when the state takes over health care. They are going to have to cut costs and you are going to have your coverage limited.

Here’s what the ultra-left-wing New York Times has to say about the move by companies to reduce health care choices and cut costs.

Excerpt:

As the Obama administration begins to enact the new national health care law, the country’s biggest insurers are promoting affordable plans with reduced premiums that require participants to use a narrower selection of doctors or hospitals.

The plans, being tested in places like San Diego, New York and Chicago, are likely to appeal especially to small businesses that already provide insurance to their employees, but are concerned about the ever-spiraling cost of coverage.

But large employers, as well, are starting to show some interest, and insurers and consultants expect that, over time, businesses of all sizes will gravitate toward these plans in an effort to cut costs.

The tradeoff, they say, is that more Americans will be asked to pay higher prices for the privilege of choosing or keeping their own doctors if they are outside the new networks. That could come as a surprise to many who remember the repeated assurances from President Obama and other officials that consumers would retain a variety of health-care choices.

[…]But choice — or at least choice that will not cost you — is likely to be increasingly scarce as health insurers and employers scramble to find ways of keep premiums from becoming unaffordable. Aetna, Cigna, the UnitedHealth Group and WellPoint are all trying out plans with limited networks.

The size of these networks is typically much smaller than traditional plans. In New York, for example, Aetna offers a narrow-network plan that has about half the doctors and two-thirds of the hospitals the insurer typically offers. People enrolled in this plan are covered only if they go to a doctor or hospital within the network, but insurers are also experimenting with plans that allow a patient to see someone outside the network but pay much more than they would in a traditional plan offering out-of-network benefits.

It’s happening, folks. The only choice that liberals want you to have is the choice to kill unborn babies and to marry anyone or anything you want. They don’t want you to have a choice to keep the money you earn, or to spend the money you earn on whatever you want. You can’t buy health care products and services unless they allow you to buy health care products and services. They believe that the economy works better when you spread the wealth around.

Gay rights activist accused of sexually assaulting 17-year-old boy

News story from the Worcester Telegram, a local Massachusetts newspaper. (DaTechguy via ECM)

Excerpt:

Local gay activist Albert M. Toney III has been charged with sexually assaulting a 17-year-old youth last month in the locker room of the YMCA.

A criminal complaint was issued June 28 charging Mr. Toney, 43, of 36 Fairview Ave., Holden, with two counts of indecent assault and battery, according to Central District Court records.

The 17-year-old told investigators he was standing in front of a fan in the locker room of the YMCA at 766 Main St. June 15 when Mr. Toney, who was nude, approached him from behind, grabbed his buttock and pressed himself up against him without his consent, according to a statement filed in court by police Sgt. John W. Lewis. Mr. Toney, a former Worcester police officer, then allegedly invited the 17-year-old to join him in the steam room.

[…]A longtime gay activist and advocate for gay and lesbian youth, Mr. Toney is president of AK Consulting Services, an education/diversity training and consulting company.

He was active in the campaign for same-sex marriage rights in Massachusetts and was the first openly gay candidate to run for Worcester City Council.

Do not even think about commenting on this post while Obama’s hate crime law is still in force.

Related posts

Public schools hand out condoms to 5-year olds without parental consent

The story is here.(H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

An elementary school in Provincetown is constituting a controversial condom distribution policy…

The new policy, which the school board voted unanimously to pass, requires students in the elementary school and the high school to speak with a school nurse or trained counselor before receiving a condom.

This will allow students of all ages to learn information on proper use.

The policy also directs school leaders not to honor demands from parents who object to their kids receiving protection.The school feels that this would infringe on the kids’ right to inform parents.

“We’re talking about younger kids. They have questions they need answered on how to use them, when to use them,” School Superintendent Dr. Beth Singer said.

The video within the story is a MUST SEE. The superintendent explains why 5-year olds have a right to privacy, and that parents have no right to stop the schools from doing this.

Remember, parents are forced to pay for these schools – they have no choice. And if they have no choice to prefer an alternative to mandatory funding of public schools, then the public schools have no reason to care what parents want. They get paid anyway. Service/product providers only care what consumers want when consumers can walk away from the deal and go to a competitor. Public schools are a monopoly – they don’t care what parents think. They get paid anyway.

Watch this:

Parents are not trained professionals with 4-year degrees in “education”, you know. So just leave your children to the educational experts, will you please? Leave the education of your children to the “experts”. Just drop your money on table and walk away from your children. The Nanny State will take care of everything – just trust them.

What about Canada?

In liberal Quebec, the liberal Ministry of Education is appealing a judge’s decision to block them from indoctrinating children in all schools including private schools in religious pluralism – that all religions are equally sound – and moral relativism – that all moral points of view are equally valid. They want to teach this to children in all schools, public and private with no opt-out for taxpaying parents. Understand? You are paying for public schools and education bureaucrats to indoctrinate your children and your neighbor’s children with epistemic and moral relativism, not to mention religious pluralism.

I think the problem with people who vote for more funding for public schools is that no one ever looks into what these unionized educrats really believe and school administrators really believe.

And this is why money matters to a family. You need money to afford private school tuition or homeschooling. Money doesn’t grow on trees, you know. And the higher the tax rates, the more you pay, and the less freedom you have to fight the system.