PDA

View Full Version : Florida Gov. IS A LIAR AND A CROOK!



Gayle in MD
03-25-2011, 07:30 AM
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/rick-scott-florida-medicaid-solantic



<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Rick Scott's Medicaid Overhaul to Benefit…Rick Scott?

Florida's governor is pushing a privatization plan that could be a major boon for health care companies. Like his.



Republican governor Rick Scott's push to privatize Medicaid in Florida is highly controversial—not least because the health care business Scott handed over to his wife when he took office could reap a major profit if the legislation becomes law.

Scott and Florida Republicans are currently trying to enact a sweeping Medicaid reform bill that would give HMOs and other private health care companies unprecedented control over the government health care program for the poor. Among the companies that stand to benefit from the bill is Solantic, a chain of urgent-care clinics aimed at providing emergency services to walk-in customers. The Florida governor founded Solantic in 2001, only a few years after he resigned as the CEO of hospital giant Columbia/HCA amid a massive Medicare fraud scandal. In January, he transferred his $62 million stake in Solantic to his wife, Ann Scott, a homemaker involved in various charitable organizations.

Florida Democrats and independent legal experts say this handover hardly absolves Scott of a major conflict of interest. As part of a federally approved pilot program that began in 2005, certain Medicaid patients in Florida were allowed to start using their Medicaid dollars at private clinics like Solantic. The Medicaid bill that Scott is now pushing would expand the pilot privatization program to the entire state of Florida, offering Solantic a huge new business opportunity.

"This is a conflict of interest that raises a serious ethical issue," says Marc Rodwin, a medical ethics professor at Suffolk University Law School in Boston. "The public should be thinking and worrying about this."

Advertise on MotherJones.com

With Scott's blessing, the Florida statehouse is currently hammering out the final details of the Medicaid bill, with a vote expected in the upcoming weeks. In the meantime, Scott has moved forward on another front that could also bring new business to Solantic. On Tuesday, he signed an executive order requiring random drug testing of many state employees and applicants for state jobs. He's also urged state legislators to pass a similar bill that would require drug testing of poor Floridians applying for welfare.

Among the services that Solantic offers: drug testing.

"These changes to Medicaid are basically nothing but a business plan for Rick Scott's Solantic," says Florida Democratic Party spokesman Eric Jotkoff.
Scott's office dismiss ethics questions over the governor's Solantic ties without further elaboration. "The claims of a conflict of interest are incorrect and baseless," Brian Hughes, Scott's deputy communications director, responds in an email. When pressed by local reporters, Scott also glosses over the issue. "I believe in the principle that if you have more competition it will drive down the prices," Scott told the St. Petersburg Times last week when asked about his wife's shares in Solantic. "If you give more choices, it's better for the consumer also to help drive down price…and that's exactly what I'm going to do as governor."

Florida Democrats have blasted the governor over the controversy. "These changes to Medicaid are basically nothing but a business plan for Rick Scott's Solantic," says Eric Jotkoff, a spokesman for the Florida Democratic Party. "It's clear that he stands to greatly profit from these changes to Medicaid." The Democrats also point to Scott's past: Columbia/HCA was ultimately forced to pay the biggest Medicare fraud settlement in history, totaling $1.7 billion, though Scott denied knowledge of the fraud and escaped being personally penalized. More recently, Florida's Medicaid system has also been beset by fraud perpetrated by private health care officials. In January, five former executives of Wellcare, a managed care company, were indicted by a grand jury for running a scheme that stole Medicaid money designated for patients.

Scott's current proposal aims to save the state $1 billion by drastically overhauling Medicaid, allowing private managed care companies to bid for contracts rather than paying traditional fee-for-services. The majority of Medicaid patients receive care through private companies and HMOs, but under Florida's bill such firms would end up having vast new authority over the program, with great leeway to limit access to services or reduce benefits. The bill would also put a hard cap on the amount of money that these managed care companies could spend on Medicaid, which advocates say could particularly harm disabled and elderly patients who require costlier long-term care.

In the past, Florida's Medicaid pilot programs—which tested the waters for the proposals at the heart of the current bill—have been plagued by problems. According to a 2008 study by the Georgetown Center for Children and Families, participants experienced huge delays and restricted access to necessary treatments, says the center's co-executive director, Joan Alker. Patients found the new system bureaucratic and confusing—and HMOs were prone to dropping out without warning. Dr. Aaron Elkin, president of the Broward County Medical Association, recently declared the program to be a failure. And Medicaid patients don't have much better reviews. "It has taken four months to get a biopsy on a throat cancer due to the impediments placed by the HMOs for authorizations," one participant in the program told NPR.

Scott and Florida Republicans are nevertheless plowing ahead, arguing that slashing costs is necessary due to the state's $3.6 billion budget deficit. Yet even if the bill passes the Florida statehouse, it will likely face another roadblock with the Obama administration, which must approve the biggest changes in the measure. Though the Bush administration happily green-lighted the pilot program in 2005, Obama officials are less likely to be amenable to continuing the troubled program—much less expanding it. The Obama administration, however, is holding off from commenting on the Florida bill until it receives the final version, though officials are "aware of some of the concerns" raised about the pilot programs, says Mary Kahn, a spokesperson for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Casting himself as a free-market champion, Scott put his opposition to "Obamacare" at the heart of his campaign. But he could ultimately stand to gain from one of the federal government's biggest entitlements—a program that's also set to expand massively under the Affordable Care Act. Concludes Georgetown's Alker: "It's especially ironic when people who speak out against government involvement in health care turn around and profit from it."</span>

BTW,.... Wolf, Hondo, Stretch, Sack, Q., Sofla, Mac, Dick, Moblvs, basically, all of my friends, please don't respond to any from the right, within this thread....I'm tired of them hi-jacking every thread, with ridiculous juvenile RW personal attacks, and irrelevant Bubba BS...perhaps, we can create some space on this forum, where their tactics can't destroy all adult debate, even if it is ONLY within my threads.

Thanking you in advance....
G. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

pooltchr
03-25-2011, 08:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
BTW,.... Wolf, Hondo, Sack, Q., Sofla, Mac, Dick, Moblvs, basically, all of my friends, please don't respond to any from the right, within this thread....I'm tired of them hi-jacking every thread, with ridiculous juvenile RW personal attacks, and irrelevant Bubba BS...perhaps, we can create some space on this forum, where their tactics can't destroy all adult debate, even if it is ONLY within my threads.

Thanking you in advance....
G. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

Gayle...trying to restrict discussions on a discussion forum....one post at a time!

Steve

LWW
03-25-2011, 10:17 AM
The desperation is apparent as she tries to remain relevant.

Soflasnapper
03-25-2011, 07:07 PM
But we in Florida knew that going into the election!

Stunning that he'd prove it again so soon.

On the other hand, he showed a little integrity when he temporarily blocked the marina approval we thought we'd wired by hiring the biggest lobbyist in Tallahassee. (But he approved it a couple weeks later when the whole thing was better explained to him, and/or maybe he got his cut.)

eg8r
03-25-2011, 07:52 PM
I have a friend that is a judge's assistant and they are all upset with him. He is trying to pass a law (or may have already done so) that will force them to start paying for their own health insurance and she is flipping out. I welcomed her to the real world where we all pay for healthcare.

eg8r

ugotda7
03-25-2011, 10:31 PM
Let me translate - do not let anybody interrupt our liberal love fest circle jerk.

PO................?

TOTAL IGNORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/rick-scott-florida-medicaid-solantic



<span style='font-size: 11pt'>Rick Scott's Medicaid Overhaul to Benefit…Rick Scott?

Florida's governor is pushing a privatization plan that could be a major boon for health care companies. Like his.



Republican governor Rick Scott's push to privatize Medicaid in Florida is highly controversial—not least because the health care business Scott handed over to his wife when he took office could reap a major profit if the legislation becomes law.

Scott and Florida Republicans are currently trying to enact a sweeping Medicaid reform bill that would give HMOs and other private health care companies unprecedented control over the government health care program for the poor. Among the companies that stand to benefit from the bill is Solantic, a chain of urgent-care clinics aimed at providing emergency services to walk-in customers. The Florida governor founded Solantic in 2001, only a few years after he resigned as the CEO of hospital giant Columbia/HCA amid a massive Medicare fraud scandal. In January, he transferred his $62 million stake in Solantic to his wife, Ann Scott, a homemaker involved in various charitable organizations.

Florida Democrats and independent legal experts say this handover hardly absolves Scott of a major conflict of interest. As part of a federally approved pilot program that began in 2005, certain Medicaid patients in Florida were allowed to start using their Medicaid dollars at private clinics like Solantic. The Medicaid bill that Scott is now pushing would expand the pilot privatization program to the entire state of Florida, offering Solantic a huge new business opportunity.

"This is a conflict of interest that raises a serious ethical issue," says Marc Rodwin, a medical ethics professor at Suffolk University Law School in Boston. "The public should be thinking and worrying about this."

Advertise on MotherJones.com

With Scott's blessing, the Florida statehouse is currently hammering out the final details of the Medicaid bill, with a vote expected in the upcoming weeks. In the meantime, Scott has moved forward on another front that could also bring new business to Solantic. On Tuesday, he signed an executive order requiring random drug testing of many state employees and applicants for state jobs. He's also urged state legislators to pass a similar bill that would require drug testing of poor Floridians applying for welfare.

Among the services that Solantic offers: drug testing.

"These changes to Medicaid are basically nothing but a business plan for Rick Scott's Solantic," says Florida Democratic Party spokesman Eric Jotkoff.
Scott's office dismiss ethics questions over the governor's Solantic ties without further elaboration. "The claims of a conflict of interest are incorrect and baseless," Brian Hughes, Scott's deputy communications director, responds in an email. When pressed by local reporters, Scott also glosses over the issue. "I believe in the principle that if you have more competition it will drive down the prices," Scott told the St. Petersburg Times last week when asked about his wife's shares in Solantic. "If you give more choices, it's better for the consumer also to help drive down price…and that's exactly what I'm going to do as governor."

Florida Democrats have blasted the governor over the controversy. "These changes to Medicaid are basically nothing but a business plan for Rick Scott's Solantic," says Eric Jotkoff, a spokesman for the Florida Democratic Party. "It's clear that he stands to greatly profit from these changes to Medicaid." The Democrats also point to Scott's past: Columbia/HCA was ultimately forced to pay the biggest Medicare fraud settlement in history, totaling $1.7 billion, though Scott denied knowledge of the fraud and escaped being personally penalized. More recently, Florida's Medicaid system has also been beset by fraud perpetrated by private health care officials. In January, five former executives of Wellcare, a managed care company, were indicted by a grand jury for running a scheme that stole Medicaid money designated for patients.

Scott's current proposal aims to save the state $1 billion by drastically overhauling Medicaid, allowing private managed care companies to bid for contracts rather than paying traditional fee-for-services. The majority of Medicaid patients receive care through private companies and HMOs, but under Florida's bill such firms would end up having vast new authority over the program, with great leeway to limit access to services or reduce benefits. The bill would also put a hard cap on the amount of money that these managed care companies could spend on Medicaid, which advocates say could particularly harm disabled and elderly patients who require costlier long-term care.

In the past, Florida's Medicaid pilot programs—which tested the waters for the proposals at the heart of the current bill—have been plagued by problems. According to a 2008 study by the Georgetown Center for Children and Families, participants experienced huge delays and restricted access to necessary treatments, says the center's co-executive director, Joan Alker. Patients found the new system bureaucratic and confusing—and HMOs were prone to dropping out without warning. Dr. Aaron Elkin, president of the Broward County Medical Association, recently declared the program to be a failure. And Medicaid patients don't have much better reviews. "It has taken four months to get a biopsy on a throat cancer due to the impediments placed by the HMOs for authorizations," one participant in the program told NPR.

Scott and Florida Republicans are nevertheless plowing ahead, arguing that slashing costs is necessary due to the state's $3.6 billion budget deficit. Yet even if the bill passes the Florida statehouse, it will likely face another roadblock with the Obama administration, which must approve the biggest changes in the measure. Though the Bush administration happily green-lighted the pilot program in 2005, Obama officials are less likely to be amenable to continuing the troubled program—much less expanding it. The Obama administration, however, is holding off from commenting on the Florida bill until it receives the final version, though officials are "aware of some of the concerns" raised about the pilot programs, says Mary Kahn, a spokesperson for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Casting himself as a free-market champion, Scott put his opposition to "Obamacare" at the heart of his campaign. But he could ultimately stand to gain from one of the federal government's biggest entitlements—a program that's also set to expand massively under the Affordable Care Act. Concludes Georgetown's Alker: "It's especially ironic when people who speak out against government involvement in health care turn around and profit from it."</span>

BTW,.... Wolf, Hondo, Stretch, Sack, Q., Sofla, Mac, Dick, Moblvs, basically, all of my friends, please don't respond to any from the right, within this thread....I'm tired of them hi-jacking every thread, with ridiculous juvenile RW personal attacks, and irrelevant Bubba BS...perhaps, we can create some space on this forum, where their tactics can't destroy all adult debate, even if it is ONLY within my threads.

Thanking you in advance....
G. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

JohnnyD
03-26-2011, 12:58 AM
Friend i cannot sit back anymore and let you make a fool of yourself.Friend you have to settle down and look at what you type before you submit.Friend Jesus loves you so much.Friend let him into your life.
Sincerly your friend
JohnnyD

JohnnyD
03-26-2011, 12:59 AM
GOD damn the pusher man!

Gayle in MD
03-26-2011, 01:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But we in Florida knew that going into the election!

Stunning that he'd prove it again so soon.

On the other hand, he showed a little integrity when he temporarily blocked the marina approval we thought we'd wired by hiring the biggest lobbyist in Tallahassee. (But he approved it a couple weeks later when the whole thing was better explained to him, and/or maybe he got his cut.) </div></div>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gifThat must be it!

Qtec
03-26-2011, 03:01 AM
So she is taking a pay cut. Do you expect her to be jumping for joy?



Q

Qtec
03-26-2011, 03:08 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But we in Florida knew that going into the election!

Stunning that he'd prove it again so soon.

On the other hand, he showed a little integrity when he temporarily blocked the marina approval we thought we'd wired by hiring the biggest lobbyist in Tallahassee. (But he approved it a couple weeks later when the whole thing was better explained to him, and/or maybe he got his cut.) </div></div>

What always got me was, 'why would R Scott would want to be Gov in the first place.'
Why would he spend $73 million of his own money to get elected?
Now we know.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Florida's governor is pushing a privatization plan that could be a major boon for health care companies. </div></div>

OTOH, only in America could a crook with his history of ripping off the Govt/ TAX PAYER get a single vote.

Q

Gayle in MD
03-26-2011, 08:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But we in Florida knew that going into the election!

Stunning that he'd prove it again so soon.

On the other hand, he showed a little integrity when he temporarily blocked the marina approval we thought we'd wired by hiring the biggest lobbyist in Tallahassee. (But he approved it a couple weeks later when the whole thing was better explained to him, and/or maybe he got his cut.) </div></div>

What always got me was, 'why would R Scott would want to be Gov in the first place.'
Why would he spend $73 million of his own money to get elected?
Now we know.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Florida's governor is pushing a privatization plan that could be a major boon for health care companies. </div></div>

OTOH, only in America could a crook with his history of ripping off the Govt/ TAX PAYER get a single vote.

Q </div></div>

Yep, only in a country where one Party has an authoritarian loving, voting base, which is too stupid to understand they are being exploited, by their party politicians, for personal, political and financial gain... so ignorant, and easily distracted by their religious fundamentalism, and ignornace of economics, they continue to vote against their own best interests, and the interests of the country, at large.

They are so easily distracted from the critical isues, by the divisive, irrelevant tactics, of Republicans, who use social issues, Guns, Gays and God, to lead their sheep to the edge of the cliff.

Those Dog Whistle, Talking Points, are the only thing they hear.

G.

JohnnyD
03-26-2011, 08:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JohnnyD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Friend i cannot sit back anymore and let you make a fool of yourself.Friend you have to settle down and look at what you type before you submit.Friend Jesus loves you so much.Friend let him into your life.
Sincerly your friend
JohnnyD </div></div>
This was a continuation to wail.

OK,handoe & wolfi.

eg8r
03-28-2011, 08:58 AM
Nope, her pay is exactly the same. She will now have to pay for healthcare instead of me paying for her healthcare. I am jumping for joy though.

eg8r

LWW
03-28-2011, 11:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nope, her pay is exactly the same. She will now have to pay for healthcare instead of me paying for her healthcare. I am jumping for joy though.

eg8r </div></div>

I get it. Snoopy won't.

Qtec
03-28-2011, 02:16 PM
So she takes home less money, ie she is worse off.

Q

pooltchr
03-28-2011, 02:34 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So she takes home less money, ie she is worse off.

Q </div></div>

Let me see if I can explain this so that even you can understand.

I have a job. I pay taxes and I pay for my healthcare.
A judge's staff salarys (and benefits) are paid by taxpayers.
So I am paying her salary.
Out of my salary, I pay for my healthcare.
Out of my salary, I also pay for her healthcare.
Now, she is going to pay for her healthcare out of her salary, and I will pay for mine. See how much more "fair" that becomes?


Steve

Qtec
03-28-2011, 02:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Let me see if I can explain this so that even you can understand. </div></div>

The net result is that she takes home less money. True or false.

Q

pooltchr
03-28-2011, 03:30 PM
The net result is she is now paying for something that previously she was expecting others to pay for.

The fact is, she had been getting more than others, and now it is more equitable. You should love this! It's redistribution of wealth, back to the people who had previously been getting soaked.

Why would she expect to have something without paying for it, when others have to pay for the same thing?

Steve

Qtec
03-28-2011, 04:16 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The net result is she is now paying for something that previously she was expecting others to pay for.</div></div>

Ypu can't bring yourself to say it, can you?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The fact is, she had been getting more than others, and now it is more equitable. You should love this! It's redistribution of wealth, back to the people who had previously been getting soaked.</div></div>

Oh my! You are now a Socialist?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Why would she expect to have something without paying for it, when others have to pay for the same thing?

Steve </div></div>

I assume when she was employed <span style='font-size: 14pt'>she signed a contract</span>. In that contract wages and benefits were part of the agreement.

Are you now saying that all contracts are null and void?

Q.......

pooltchr
03-28-2011, 05:13 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[
Are you now saying that all contracts are null and void?

Q....... </div></div>

If you belong to a union, aren't all contracts null and void whenever they decide they want to renegotiate?

Steve

pooltchr
03-28-2011, 05:16 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[<span style='font-size: 14pt'>she signed a contract</span>. In that contract wages and benefits were part of the agreement.


Q....... </div></div>

If I offer Sev a job, and agree to pay him 6 figures, and pay for his healthcare, but I intend to use your money to pay him, how would you feel about that?

Steve

Gayle in MD
03-28-2011, 05:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The net result is she is now paying for something that previously she was expecting others to pay for.</div></div>

Ypu can't bring yourself to say it, can you?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The fact is, she had been getting more than others, and now it is more equitable. You should love this! It's redistribution of wealth, back to the people who had previously been getting soaked.</div></div>

Oh my! You are now a Socialist?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Why would she expect to have something without paying for it, when others have to pay for the same thing?

Steve </div></div>

I assume when she was employed <span style='font-size: 14pt'>she signed a contract</span>. In that contract wages and benefits were part of the agreement.

Are you now saying that all contracts are null and void?

Q....... </div></div>

Do you find it as hilarious as I do the way these righties want to count every penny that goes to a union worker, usually not high paying jobs,.... teachers, firemen, policemen, road workers, who look to their good pensions, and health care, to help them get by.... while they are teaching our kids, cleaning our streets, saving our homes from fire, etc.


BUT....the right, totally overlooks the billions upon billions given away to the oil companies, energy corporations, loopholes galore, guaranteed to American corporations, by Republicans, to corporations that hide their money offshore, two-thirds paying no taxes, at all, and health costs and insurance, big pharma, all taking record breaking profits, billions upon billions over the last decades, the corrupt bank CEO's, crooks on Wall Street, all the while they are bilking the consumer left and right.

Then, they have the colossal nerve, to present themselves, as intelligent, writing condescending posts, while their ignorance shines like a comet through every nit picking post they write.

Unbelievable!

These righties should go fill up the tank, and see what the Wall Street speculators have stolen from our paychecks, this month, compliments of Republican obstructionism, the failed deregulatory policies, which threaten our economoic futures and our safety.

Penny wise, and pound foolish.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

pooltchr
03-28-2011, 06:40 PM
I just love how you can look at the past 2 years of complete Democrat control of Washington, followed by 2 months of continued Democrat control of the White House and Senate, and somehow blame Republicans for rising gasoline prices.

Do you have any idea how ignorant you make yourself appear with your posts?

Steve

Sev
03-28-2011, 07:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Let me see if I can explain this so that even you can understand. </div></div>

The net result is that she takes home less money. True or false.

Q </div></div>

Actually no.
She can elect to not take out Health insurance and save the money.

eg8r
03-28-2011, 08:13 PM
Again, no. She will take home exactly the same amount. However now she will have a healthcare bill just like the rest of us.

eg8r

eg8r
03-28-2011, 08:14 PM
False. Her pay has not changed one bit.

eg8r

eg8r
03-28-2011, 08:14 PM
Exactly. It is not required by law just yet. qtip's hero though will be forcing this poor woman to start paying for healthcare though if she does not want to go to jail.

eg8r

eg8r
03-28-2011, 08:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Do you find it as hilarious as I do the way these righties want to count every penny that goes to a union worker, usually not high paying jobs,.... teachers, firemen, policemen, road workers, who look to their good pensions, and health care, to help them get by.... while they are teaching our kids, cleaning our streets, saving our homes from fire, etc.
</div></div>Don't you find it funny that this lefty has decided to completely change the subject and begin describing people that do not meet the description of the person in question? By the way, the two fire fighters I am related to both make well over $100k each. That does not sound like a low paying job this lefty would have us believe.

So, back to the subject, it is a great thing that our Governor is trying to level the playing field and make these government workers pay for their own healthcare.

eg8r