« Environment - Ex-EPA Chiefs Blame Bush in Global Warming | Main | Ind. Decisions - Judge Barker rules on whether communities have right to restrict new medical centers [Updated] »
Thursday, January 19, 2006
Ind. Law - A number of editorials today on the legislators' health perk; plus some observations
A number of Indiana newspapers this morning have editorials on the General Assembly's free health care benefits for life.
The Indianapolis Star writes today, in an editorial titled "Cut lawmakers' perk permanently" that even though Speaker Bosma has promised to modiy the health care perks for House members:
The public will continue to pay the current rate for 25 retired legislators and for anyone with six years and one day of service who retires before this November's election. The financial stakes could cost the legislature some members. And there are other catches.The Lafayette Journal & Courier opines:Senate President Robert Garton, R-Columbus, who backed the legislation creating the benefit, has not embraced Bosma's move, of course; though he says he is reviewing it. Furthermore, Bosma's edict could die at the whim of his successor should the Indianapolis Republican lose the speaker's post.
What's needed is passage of House Bill 1309, offered by Rep. Troy Woodruff, R-Vincennes, which would repeal the legislation behind the windfall altogether.
The bill is buried in the dreaded Rules and Legislative Procedures Committee, and Bosma killed it last year in the name of peacekeeping. But Woodruff insists it helped him oust an incumbent in 2004. Perhaps his colleagues should follow his regimen in 2006, for the sake of their political health.
On Tuesday, House Speaker Brian Bosma rescinded the lifetime benefit -- which allowed retired lawmakers with at least six years in office and their families to get perpetual coverage at today's prices -- saying it was, indeed, too generous. And it was, indeed, too much to ask Hoosier taxpayers to foot. * * *The Munster (NW Indiana) Times has an editorial today headed "Lawmakers' health care perk is unhealthy for taxpayers." Some quotes:A few years late, perhaps, Bosma's call was the right one.
What's hilarious -- sad, but hilarious -- were the overbaked warnings from the General Assembly floor once Bosma announced the cuts: What if the change spurs a massive wave of retirement by lawmakers who would rather get guaranteed health insurance for life than keep a seat at the Statehouse?
Bosma admitted, in a quote from The Indianapolis Star, that that "was one of the concerns as I struggled with the decision."
You know what? Good riddance, is what Hoosiers say, if that happens.
Our lawmakers make a tremendous commitment to do the part-time job, but not tremendous enough to qualify for such a lush perk.
Besides, Bosma's directive still leaves legislators with a sweet deal. After six years at the Statehouse, they could still buy into the state insurance plan at the going rate for annual premiums. It's the same benefit offered to other retired state employees. And it's fair, considering so many Hoosiers live without insurance or who each year face new reductions in company-provided health plans. Think a self-employed Hoosier wouldn't jump at that arrangement?
What about those lawmakers who decide it isn't fair -- who retire to preserve what shouldn't have been theirs in the first place? That's simple. When they announce they won't run, their constituents should tally up what really mattered to a lawmaker they sent to Indianapolis, thank them for their honesty and send them on their way.
Then voters should replace them with legislators who will think twice before pulling such blatantly self-serving moves in the future.
The Indiana House made amends. Now it's the Indiana Senate's turn.
The issue: Cheap health insurance for former Indiana lawmakersSome observations. The Evansville Courier&Press has a story today that includes these quotes - I have highlighted the parts with which I disagree:Our opinion: House Speaker Brian Bosma was right to end this costly perk for House veterans. Now Senate President Pro Tem Robert Garton
The lawmakers were elected to serve Indiana, not to serve themselves at the state's expense.
Political analyst Brian Howey, whose column appears Sundays in The Times, said estimates on how much the pricey perk could cost Hoosier taxpayers range from hundreds of millions of dollars to $1 billion.
The lawmakers eager to take advantage of this benefit should remember that it was given them without a public hearing on the proposal. And it came at a time when 14 percent of Hoosiers were without health insurance of their own.
And as an increasing number of employers drop health insurance benefits for their employees, the lawmakers' participation at the taxpayers' expense is even more shameful.
Senate President Pro Tem Robert Garton has said he doesn't expect to change the senators' benefit. He should follow Bosma's example.
Earlier this decade, Garton, R-Columbus, and John Gregg, then the Democratic House speaker, quietly offered the plum to lawmakers without the public noticing it.
Barton needs not only to reverse his decision on this perk but also to provide data showing how much this is costing the taxpayers.
In both the House and Senate, lawmakers can currently retire after six years and one day of service and lock in their state health-care plan for life. That means whatever percentage of premiums they pay now - which can range from nothing to almost a quarter of premiums depending on the plan would stay in place. The rest of the premiums are picked up by taxpayers.My understanding of health care benefits for regular state employees differs somewhat (if I am incorrect, please let me know):On Tuesday, House Speaker Brian Bosma announced that for representatives that don't retire this year, the benefit will be changing. Under the new plan, retired legislators can still opt into the state health-care coverage but must pay 100 percent of their premiums.
Retired representatives who qualify for Medicare must take Medicare and can opt into a state supplemental health-care plan but again must pay 100 percent of their premiums.
- A state employee who leaves state service is eligible for COBRA coverage for 18 months. The former employee can continue to receive health care under the Anthem "traditional plan" during those 18 months, but has to pay both their own share, plus the state's share. After 18 months, they are on their own, unless they are 65 and eligible for Medicare.
This is why the state "early retirement" plans offered a few years back were not very popular. State employees who were eligible for state retirement, but not yet eligible for Medicare, could not afford to leave state service and their health care benefits.
As I understand what is being talked about in the legislative "cutbacks", legislators would not be bound by the 18-month COBRA period.
- The State has NO health insurance coverage for retired state employees who are eligible for Medicare. There is no "a state supplemental health-care plan."
There IS a not-for-profit Retired Indiana Public Employees Association (RIPEA) that retired state employees are eligible to join. RIPEA, according to its website, "sponsors a group health insurance plan for retirees and/or spouses over age 65. This is an excellent insurance plan that has been negotiated by an experienced insurance consultant retained by RIPEA."
For earlier related ILB entries, select "Legislative Benefits" from the list of categories in the right column.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on January 19, 2006 07:07 AM
Posted to Indiana Government | Indiana Law | Legislative Benefits