DES MOINES – A left-wing political group says the Branstad administration continues to spend the Iowa budget on tax breaks while regular Iowans are left behind.
In response to Governor Branstad’s tax cut proposal that may cost the state more than $348 million over 5 years, Matt Sinovic, Executive Director of Progress Iowa, issued the following statement:
“This is just the latest example of the governor’s severely misplaced priorities. If you’re mentally ill, a public school student or cannot afford health care, Governor Branstad doesn’t care about you. But if you’re a business asking for a tax break, Branstad is willing to do anything you need.”
“While shutting down mental health care facilities, underfunding public schools and attempting to privatize Medicaid, Branstad continues to award special favors to friends and practice political cronyism. These aren’t Iowa values, and it isn’t the leadership Iowans deserve.”
Progress Iowa is a nonpartisan multi-issue progressive advocacy organization with a network of nearly 60,000 progressives. Year-round, Progress Iowa advocates for a stronger middle class, first-class public education, and fairness for all Iowans under the law.
10 thoughts on “Progress Iowa rips Branstad on “tax giveaway and failed priorities””
Part 3 –
My brother said his instructions were generally to deny any procedure the first time it came through. He didn’t know the patient, he didn’t know the circumstances. If the doctor and/or patient was persistent, and asked for a review, then he sent the request to another desk, where another non medical person would look over the claim. He would then decide to accept or deny the procedure. If denied, a 3rd review would then be in order. After 3 reviews, it was over. This could take 2-4 weeks to complete. If a patient required an immediate reaction to his medical needs, he was screwed. This is what Branstad is setting up in Iowa. If you think it is in your best interests, you must have a monetary interest in the company. There is no other reason to believe this is good for Iowa.
@Bodacious-This is the best explanation I have seen. I have a relative on Medicaid and I have been concerned over this. Being on Medicaid is hard enough but if you end up in a nursing home it is pretty much all there is. Very few people have the resources to pay what the nursing homes charge. I talked to the nursing home last week and they do not think this is going to happen. I hope they are right. A lot of people depend on Medicaid for their health needs.
Part 2-
On the other hand, it increase the work load on a doctor’s office in that they have to call the company every time a prior authorization is required. If you have ever been around a nurse or doctor when they make that call, they are usually on the line for 20-30 minutes. 10 calls a day might take upwards of 3 hours a day. That is money and time wasted. And the person who makes that decision is not a doctor or a nurse. More often than not, they are medically trained people. (I know this for a fact because my brother worked for an HMO as an adjuster His job was to decide if a procedure was necessary. His degree was in social work).
meant to say they are NOT medically trained people.
On the other hand, it increase the work load on a doctor’s office in that they have to call the company every time a prior authorization is required. If you have ever been around a nurse or doctor when they make that call, they are usually on the line for 20-30 minutes. 10 calls a day might take upwards of 3 hours a day. That is money and time wasted. And the person who makes that decision is not a doctor or a nurse. More often than not, they are medically trained people. (I know this for a fact because my brother worked for an HMO as an adjuster His job was to decide if a procedure was necessary. His degree was in social work). My brother said his instructions were generally to deny any procedure the first time it came through. He didn’t know the patient, he didn’t know the circumstances. If the doctor and/or patient was persistent, and asked for a review, then he sent the request to another desk, where another non medical person would look over the claim. He would then decide to accept or deny the procedure. If denied, a 3rd review would then be in order. After 3 reviews, it was over. This could take 2-4 weeks to complete. If a patient required an immediate reaction to his medical needs, he was screwed. This is what Branstad is setting up in Iowa. If you think it is in your best interests, you must have a monetary interest in the company. There is no other reason to believe this is good for Iowa.
I had my last post here deleted before it even made it to site. Branstad cares only about his priorities which aren’t the majority of Iowans priorities. His Medicaid privatization decision is a great example of it. This morning’s Des Moines Register had an opinion piece on whether or not this was a good idea. One side was a doctor who works with a lot of Medicaid patients. The other was an administrative person with one of the companies Branstad graced with a contract. The doctor was concerned with the care that these companies provide. He feels this will make more work for him and less care for his patients. The companies have an incentive to provide less care and the incentive is that they get to keep the money that is left over. The companies tend to require more prior authorizations than in the past. This is good in that it is cautionary. The providers (doctors, clinics, etc) tend to be a little less reactionary and might not order tests that are not essentially necessary.
I had my last post here deleted before it even made it to site. Branstad cares only about his priorities which aren’t the majority of Iowans priorities. His Medicaid privatization decision is a great example of it. This morning’s Des Moines Register had an opinion piece on whether or not this was a good idea. One side was a doctor who works with a lot of Medicaid patients. The other was an administrative person with one of the companies Branstad graced with a contract. The doctor was concerned with the care that these companies provide. He feels this will make more work for him and less care for his patients. The companies have an incentive to provide less care and the incentive is that they get to keep the money that is left over. The companies tend to require more prior authorizations than in the past. This is good in that it is cautionary. The providers (doctors, clinics, etc) tend to be a little less reactionary and might not order tests that are not essentially necessary. On the other hand, it increase the work load on a doctor’s office in that they have to call the company every time a prior authorization is required. If you have ever been around a nurse or doctor when they make that call, they are usually on the line for 20-30 minutes. 10 calls a day might take upwards of 3 hours a day. That is money and time wasted. And the person who makes that decision is not a doctor or a nurse. More often than not, they are medically trained people. (I know this for a fact because my brother worked for an HMO as an adjuster His job was to decide if a procedure was necessary. His degree was in social work). My brother said his instructions were generally to deny any procedure the first time it came through. He didn’t know the patient, he didn’t know the circumstances. If the doctor and/or patient was persistent, and asked for a review, then he sent the request to another desk, where another non medical person would look over the claim. He would then decide to accept or deny the procedure. If denied, a 3rd review would then be in order. After 3 reviews, it was over. This could take 2-4 weeks to complete. If a patient required an immediate reaction to his medical needs, he was screwed. This is what Branstad is setting up in Iowa. If you think it is in your best interests, you must have a monetary interest in the company. There is no other reason to believe this is good for Iowa.
Read the Des Moines Register this morning. There is an opinion page article that discusses the pros and cons of Branstad’s decision to privatize Medicaid. One side is taken by a doctor who will be directly affected by the decision. The other side is by a director of one of the 4 companies who Branstad gave the business to. The doctor sees more work for him and less care for the poor. The director sees better care for the poor and doesn’t address the amount of work doctors will have to do. Essentially it breaks down to this – If the company who is handling the claim can lower the costs – by refusing or reducing service – that extra money goes to them. So, if your doctor tells you a prescription is needed but the cost of it is high, the company will ask you to get an ok from them for the prescription. You are then turned over to a person who knows nothing about you or your condition. That person then decides, without consulting the doctor, if you need that prescription. This person is not a doctor nor do they have medical training. (I know that to be true because my brother was an adjuster for an HMO and it was his job to determine whether or not care was to be provided as prescribed by the doctor-his degree was in social work). More often than not, the person will deny your claim. If he decides aspirin will solve your problem, he suggests that you try it. He has just saved his company big bucks. If Medicaid pays $20,000 for the treatment, but the company denies $7000 of the claim, then they make $7000 and they still get their contracted fee. Branstad knows this and he doesn’t care.
Progress Iowa Is a Liberal Organization that is just up set because the money went to support small business and not to the public and teachers unions to waste.
Progress for Iowa (BS) is refering to the property tax break Mr. Branstad and the iowa legislature gave to small business owners in Iowa. This outfit along with the public servant jokers (teachers union included) is pizzed because they figured the should have this money for theirselves – FAT CATS. Go F yourself. VOTE FOR DONALD TRUMP and make America great .