Questions for the Insurance Commissioner
Next week, a joint committee will be holding a hearing with the Insurance Commissioner, Karen Weldin Stewart to discuss a BCBS issue and allegations raised by the partisan, Caesar Rodney Institute. DelawareLiberal may be in attendance at the hearing, but all of the questions will be issued by the members of the committee.
However, I thought it might be informative if we come up with questions that we would like answered. Hopefully someone will filter these to members of the committee. I’ll start.
- You have stated that there were no law firms capable of representing the office of the Insurance Commissioner in a lawsuit that you inherited from your predecessor. However, the name of the law firm in question, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, LLP is not named as counsel on the Chancery court decision. The law firm named is a local firm; Richards, Layton and Finger. What role did Stroock & Stroock & Lavan serve on the case?
- Your department has made the statement in the past that the OIC is not funded by taxpayer dollars. While this is technically correct, any monies remaining at the end of the budget year are redirected into the General Fund, reducing taxpayer liabilities. Do you feel that the OIC should be bound to austerity measures that have been implemented in other parts of state government?
So here’s the ground rules… They have to be real questions. We can’t ask questions like “is it true that you can’t read or write?” (I am sad that I have to even stipulate that). They should be pointed and not subject to pontification. If there are follow-ups, ask them too. You can even follow up on the questions someone else asked.
Tear it up.
Tags: Delaware legislature, Insurance Commissioner, Karen Weldin Stewart
Welcome to the target zone!
Did anyone see this bit of incompetent bullshit?
Talk about cherry-picking your facts. But may have some utility in helping to form up questions.
“Do you feel that the OIC should be bound to austerity measures that have been implemented in other parts of state government?”
That’s a good question LG, but you could shake that question at a lot of State Agencies whose funding is different (federal dollars, Slots dollars etc). Not saying that it shouldn’t be asked, but just saying that not all state agencies are practicing austerity measures 🙂
A question I would ask is: In the latest changes to the State Employee’s medical plan, both Aetna and Blue Cross are going to require pre-authorization for all imaging tests (including stress tests). Is there going to be an adequate appeal mechanism in place for denials? Did you know of this change (and technically she should have as I believe she is on the insurance benefits committee) and what can be done about it?
Leave Perky aloooooone….
Yeah, I read her column. This really stuck out at me, the part at the beginning:
She’s saying her job is to make sure the insurance companies make profit – where is the responsibilty to the consumer? No wonder she didn’t investigate the denials of stress tests – her job is to protect insurer’s profits.
– Why did you wait more than a year after you took office to bring the issue of allegedly missing files from your predecessor’s tenure to the public’s attention? What files do you believe are missing? Did you contact law enforcement authorities to investigate, and why not?
– More than a year after you took office, why are key posts on your staff unfilled? Your deputy insurance commissioner is only “acting” (Gene Reed, in addition to his other job), your consumer services director is only “acting” (Mitch Crane, in addition to his other job), your company regulation division director is vacant, and your deputy attorney general is vacant, according to the official staff list on your website as of April 8. Follow-up: Do you plan to fill any of those positions with out-of-state employees?
– Why did you wait more than a year after you took office to bring the issue of allegedly missing files from your predecessor’s tenure to the public’s attention?
*
She didn’t wait. CRI got them in FOIA and published them. Ron Williams read the FOIA and then started asking questions. She never intended to make any of that public.
– Did anyone see this bit of incompetent bullshit?
*
yes, and I crawled under the table to hide. She is coming across like a cat who has just had scalding water poured over its head. Not So Good.
– primary responsibility is to regulate the insurance industry to make certain that it is healthy and solvent
..She’s saying her job is to make sure the insurance companies make profit
*
Not really. It is making sure that they can pay you, should the need arise, for the amount on your life or home policy etc.
To prevent a situation as with what AIG did with their credit swaps – they had no funds to back up their derivative insurance ‘deals’ and when it came time to pay up, they didn’t have the money in reserve.
My question would be about the Captive Insurance hires: at this expense, is there anything in these contracts to measure accountability and proficiency?
NO, the job of IC isnt to amke sure they can pay your claims. the job of the IC is to make sure those who voted her in have a voice against a behomoth insurance industry who’s main goal is profit, whether it is through premium increases or drawn out legal battles. Her office doesnt only over see health insurance, but life, annuities, etc. You may say it is demeaning but ask her to explain the difference between whole life and universal life. Ask her to explain why delaware has individual life issuance and group life issuance where only one person constitutes a group. Ask her why delaware, being one of the smallest states, is the last in issuing policy riders?
Stewart’s office issued a press release this afternoon announcing a meeting at 10 a.m. Tuesday in the IC’s office in Dover. Since this is a not secret meeting (any longer), perhaps DL and other blogs and media would be welcome to attend. There is no reason for any legislator to attend other than to observe what is going on. You should call her office and ask if you should bring coffee and doughnuts.
My question for Nancy Willing:
REDACTED
Editors note: This line of questioning will not be tolerated. Desist.
I wish you’d stop using that ridiculous 20-year-old picture. You don’t have to have photos next to items about people, so why bother? It’s just another KWS lie that people who haven’t seen her will think is true.
The problem is, there aren’t other pictures of her available.
Then don’t use a picture at all.
Please, anon2, a 20 year old picture of KWS is the LEAST of your concerns about KWS. Perspective, please.
Provider/patient question:
How come insurances are allowed to deny payment for patients when a patient comes in for a toothache–exam and xray taken–decision made to treat the tooth via extraction, root canal, or filling. Patient treated then, because they are in pain, and there is time to do so. Most insurances — no problem. Some insurances–and we never know UNTIL AFTER–exam and xray covered–but procedure NOT COVERED because it was done the same day!!!! HELLO!!!! Most patients are thrilled to be treated the same day, out of pain, no more time off work, and decreased need for antibiotics and pain meds. Every time this happens–and it just did this week—I think I gotta call someone about this crazy thing–but I forget. So this is great DL. Maybe I’ll get an answer here. Such community servants you are…..
If you google for pictures of Perky, there are a couple of others, like of her snuggling up to Joe Biden.
I always use the three-card monte picture when I write about the ICs office.
1. Would you be willing to allow the State Auditor or an auditing firm chosen independently to do a detailed audit of your office?
If not, why not?
2. Please describe what you view as the primary responsibilities of your office. (If she gives the bureaucratic/faux legalistic response previously referenced): What responsibility does your office have to protect Delaware health care consumers from repeated denials for routine procedures by health care insurers? What procedures are in place to proactively respond on behalf of the consumers in these instances?
You know, with you guys posting all these questions here, her bootlicker and partner in corruption Elliott Jacobson is going to take every one of them and make up canned answers for KWS to memorize and regurgitate the way she usually does. Rote memorizing is about her only talent. So you won’t get the results you want, just more of Jacobson’s bulls..t rhetoric. It would be better if you kept the questions to yourselves and spring them on her at the hearing so she’ll have to extemporize. As we know, that’s not something she knows how to do at all. Just sayin’ ….
These questions should yield followup questions since legislators should not be willing to accept canned responses. That’s why I added followup questions to my initial questions.
The other alternative is to repeat the question, with the added caveat, ‘With all due respect, you didn’t answer my question. Allow me to repeat it.”
My biggest concern with the hearing is that it hasn’t been clarified, at least to my satisfaction, as to what is to be covered. If it is solely limited to the BCBS denials, then the Rogue’s Gallery might just be able to squirm through using bureaucratese. If it is to be a more comprehensive overview of the performance of the office per se, then (a) the committee should specify in advance what the IC’s office must be prepared to discuss in order to forestall the classic answer, “I’d be happy to get back to you with that information” and (b) committee staff should be preparing both background material and lines of inquiry for the hearing.
I wouldn’t be shocked if the ultimate result of this hearing would be to place the Insurance Commissioner’s office under Sunset Review by the Joint Sunset Committee. The powers and duties of the IC’s office are derived through the Delaware Code, which means that the General Assembly and the Governor have the power to change the power and scope of the office through the legislative process.
I actually think that this would be a really good outcome, and would open up the dealings of this office to the general public.
El Som….when does a Sunset Review take place? At the end of her term? If so, it would be too little too late.
No. Generally the Joint Sunset Committee schedules the agencies it will review in May or June. The information-gathering process begins almost immediately. Hearings are generally scheduled around the same time as the Joint Finance Committee hearings. Preliminary report, legislative recommendations and final report are concluded by June of, in this case, 2011.
The process is formalized, including a very detailed questionnaire, and it offers the most objective means to evaluate the effectiveness of a state agency. I’m not sure what a more ad-hoc process could yield. That’s why I wouldn’t be surprised if the upshot of next week’s hearing is to request the Sunset Committee to put the IC’s office on its review schedule.
FYI, here’s the Sunset Committee schedule:
http://legis.delaware.gov/legislature.nsf/Lookup/JSC_Home?open&nav=JC
Perhaps a dumb question… but has a state agency ever been sunsetted?
Yes. Although generally these are smaller boards, for example, that were not in fact functioning prior to being sunsetted. However, significant legislative changes have often been imposed on agencies that are not carrying out their public responsibilities. It happened last year with the Victims Compensation Board.
Sometimes, an agency gets a ‘death penalty’, i.e. losing its independence, when transgressions are discovered. My favorite (in a previous life, I was the Research Analyst for the Joint Sunset Committee) was what happened to the Board of Chiropractic back around 1984. The Board of Chiropractic administered a standard national licensing exam. State boards have the authority to set in advance the required passing score. What happened in 1984 was that, AFTER the exam had been administered, the Board of Chiropractic went back and lowered the passing score, enabling 3 applicants who had previously failed to in fact pass. I’m sure it was sheer coincidence that 2 of the 3 who passed as a result of the change were related to…members of the Board of Chiropractic. An outside authority was brought in to oversee the Board.
I’ll betcha that the Board of Medical Practice could see drastic Sunset changes as a result of their clear failure to do their job on the Bradley case.
I think you all are way too optimistic about what will happen to this IC. There’s ovbiously much more to this scandal than meets the eye because they’re falling all over themselves doing damage control. They wouldn’t be nearly as frantic if there were really legitimate explanations for what’s been going on in all respects. That it will be allowed to continue until the Sunset Committee can take a look at it is more than doubtful.