General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up/Pre-Game Show: Thurs., Jan. 19, 2023
The air of excitement is palpable. The day that John Carney comes out of hibernation to discover he casts no shadow. Nor utters words of wisdom. His State Of The State Address. We’ve probably already heard his one initiative for the upcoming fiscal year–a boost in teachers’ salaries. Otherwise–another six weeks of winter while the Joint Finance Committee meets.
Here’s yesterday’s Session Activity Report. BTW, I need another word for ‘highlights’, as ‘highlights’ are often ‘lowlights’. As in, these two terrible bills were released from the Kop Kabal Committee–HB 39 (M. Smith), which gives local police forces $20 mill in no-strings-attached funding; and HB 50 (K. Williams), which creates a brand new crime that mirrors the existing crime of theft, nothing more than a stacking of charges. Gotta say, though, I rather admire the gentility of the committee report:
The committee found the bill to be agreeable, and it was released from the committee.
Tea. Crumpets. The stacking of charges.
The House Education Committee did not release HB 42, which was just another M. Smith attempt to starve public education. In light of Gov. Carney’s proposal to increase teacher salaries, this bill could have made it more difficult for local districts to provide the matching funds needed for the increases. This bill should, and will, remain buried.
Time to talk about SB 29 (Townsend), which tries to provide state retirees and public employee unions with input into health plans for retirees. I support the bill (I know that not all progressives do). While I fully understand the mistrust that exists between the retirees and the Carney Administration, I think that the General Assembly can be an honest broker here, and I think that’s what SB 29 is trying to do. I listened to the entire committee hearing on the bill, including the public comments. I think Sen. Pinkney put it best:
The sentiment was echoed by Senate Executive Committee member Sen. Marie Pinkney, D-Bear, who added that while she understands retirees’ fears regarding the legislature’s commitment, she and her colleagues remain focused on providing state retirees a solution.
“We are listening to you and we care about everything that you’ve said and that you have presented to us. This legislation is not where we stop this work,” Sen. Pinkney said.
“Every one of us is incredibly committed to making sure that whatever happens at the end of this is in the best interests of the people we represent.”
I feel compelled to echo Liberalgeek’s comment from yesterday concerning former Sen. Peterson’s plea to grandfather in existing retirees:
Sheesh. That’s some bullshit. If you can’t give it to everyone, can you at least give it to me?
Ditto. I think Karen Peterson is one of the best legislators in Delaware history. She accomplished so much. But that request to close the drawbridge once the Boomers are safely ensconced in the castle is, well, just wrong. And selfish. Fairness for everybody–or nobody.
SB 29 passed the Senate, and will likely be on the fast track to pass the House next week.
With the exception of this lonely Senate bill (which likely is time-sensitive), all productive activity will stop to hear Carney’s annual dronings. Couldn’t he at least get someone like, oh I don’t know, Aubrey Plaza, to read the speech for him? You know, to draw more attention to it, and to make the captive audience feel less captive? Hey, it’s a thought.
My final thought of this legislative week.
Ever notice in this sad assed state the politicians can never give the cops enough money? Feel free to tell me what we really get for this money? I realize the politicians fear the police, so do I and I’m white as a sheet.
I did not hear what Karen Peterson said, but if she was asking that current state retirees get the health care package that they were promised when they took their jobs, I don’t see that as unfair or selfish. State employees have always had differing benefits depending upon their date of hire, years of service etc. When benefits changed in the past, it always affected new-hires. Many state employees, like myself, came to work at the state from private industry, and could afford to take a pay cut to do so because of the state benefit package. My state salary was about 20% less than I was making when I voluntarily left private industry but I made the move because I liked the job and the promised benefits were much better than industry offered.
I do not believe that it would be unfair to offer new-hires a different benefits package going forward. This has always been the case before as long as I can remember.
I’m paraphrasing here, but what she basically said was, ‘If you’ve gotta screw somebody, grandfather us in BEFORE you screw those who are younger than we are.’
My wife works for the state and makes peanuts. She’s been there about 15 years and is 10-12 years from retirement. Should she be forced to take less than what we expected?
No. ABSOLUTELY no. That’s why I couldn’t believe Karen Peterson proposed that as a solution.
Retirees weren’t given any choice under the proposed change. Highmark said all retirees had to join. Whereas current state employees have a number of different plans and companies to choose from.
What I find especially troubling is the state has a huge budget surplus yet it has decided to go with an inferior health care plan for retirees.
I would expect this type of move from a Republican led government but from a Democratic controlled one it is hard to take.
The NY Times had an excellent article about the problems with Medicare Advantage plans.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/28/health/medicare-advantage-plans-report.html
Retirees have never had options. They are in a single group plan and have always been in a single group plan. Active employees have options, but they also pay more in premiums to offset some of that cost. In order to make “options” work for retirees you couldn’t guarantee the same low rates that retirees have enjoyed for years. Charging people on fixed incomes more for their healthcare just so that some current retirees, who can afford to pay more, can get “options” is the complete antithesis of fair or democratic. If the only thing we have to give up is “preauthorizations”, I don’t see the problem. Sounds like a good deal. Everyone in America has preauthorizations in their healthcare plans the fact that retirees do not in Delaware is wild. It’s a blank check for hospitals and doctors.
Fair & democratic would have the state with a huge budget surplus pay what they have promised to retirees. When this plan was first introduced I contacted Highmark for a list of physicians who were in network. They said they would send out the information in several weeks which I never received.
As a state employee I had a BCBS PPO and never had a preauthorization.
We have the worst health care outcomes of any western nation and yet pay the most for medical coverage.
Pre-authorizations are used by the health care companies to deny coverage so that so that they can make more money. Highmark’s CEO was paid $8.64 million in 2021.
This isn’t only an issue for retirees. It will affect every current state employee when they eventually retire. I’m amazed at the silence from organizations that represent state employees on this issue.
I agree. Where are AFSCME and DSEA? I’m guessing–trying to play the inside game.