ERS contract is sweet deal for Perry insiders
On Thursday, February 23, I wrote this brief post about the Employees Retirement System’s decision to award the health insurance contract for state employees and retirees to UnitedHealthcare:
The Perry gravy train is back on the track. UnitedHealthCare is a client of … Mike Toomey. What a remarkable coincidence.
I went on to quote from the release:
Chris Cronn, a former Perry staffer, will become Vice-President for state affairs for UnitedHealthCare, and other former Perry staffers are on the gravy train. Their names appear below, following the text of an email that went out on Wednesday: UnitedHealthcare was selected by the Employees Retirement System of Texas (ERS) to be the third party administrator of the HealthSelect of Texas health insurance plan. As the administrator, UnitedHealthcare will process claims, provide customer service and manage the HealthSelect network starting September 1, 2012. We will be working with ERS, and the current administrator, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas, to make the transition as easy as possible for all HealthSelect members.
The names that followed included Cronn (as the new vice president for state affairs for UHC); Toomey; Laura Keel; Louis Saenz, a former senior adviser for Perry; and Victoria Ford, a former Perry health care staffer.
* * * *
What follows is information that I have picked up from various sources, including interviews and web sites. Some of this information has come from sources who are familiar with the terms of the new contract and are critical of certain aspects of the contract.
—–First, UnitedHealthcare’s competitors are not going to go quietly into that good night. I am told that ERS will meet tomorrow, and that representatives of the speaker’s office and the lieutenant governor’s office will be present. The switch from Blue Cross to UHC is going to have huge implications, both financial and personal. (Full disclosure: I am covered by Blue Cross through TEXAS MONTHLY’s parent company.) The UHC plan will cause major disruptions in patient care, at least in the beginning, as well as considerable cost-shifting to state employees and retirees.
—–ERS estimates that 16,000 members will pay an aggregate amount of $10 million annually over four years in extra billings, known as “balance billings.” This amounts to $40 million — nearly the identical amount to the alleged $41 million in “savings” contemplated by the contract, or 0.5% of the value of the contract. In other words, there are NO savings. It all comes out of the wallets of ERS members in the form of balance billings. If they do not use a UHC network provider, they will be hit with a balance bill for going outside of the network. (This is generally true of all health plans.) For members who remain “in network,” their payments are contractually predetermined. (My co-pay is $25 per office visit.) The actual cost of services may be considerably higher, but, so long as I stay “in network,” I am not billed for the higher cost. If members go “out of network,” the billing entity is allowed to seek payment of the balance–that is, the full cost of the services. As long as I am “in network,” I cannot be subjected to balanced billing.
—–ERS members will be balanced billed, however, in or out of network, because they no longer have access to the Blue Cross Blue Shield safety net, known as the Par Plan, which limits the damage done by balanced billing. The Blue Cross Par (short for “participating”) Plan has contracts with out of network providers who agree to bear some of the burden of balanced billing. UnitedHealthcare does not have such a safety net plan.
—–ERS also estimates that an additional 10,000 members will be required to change their primary care physician and their network. Contemplate the misery that this will cause. Nobody who is satisfied with his or her doctor wants to be forced to find another one.
For more about balanced billing, here is information from an Aetna web site:
Balance billing occurs when physicians bill their patients more than what the insurer
pays for their services. Since contract and state law generally prohibit participating
(par) physicians from balance billing members, it often occurs in situations involving
non-participating (non-par) physicians who do not participate with a health plan, and therefore do not accept pre-negotiated health plan rates. Usually members understand they must use
par physicians to minimize out-of-pocket expenses. But even a savvy consumer can
end up being treated by a non-par physician and receive a large bill for the
difference between the physician’s charge and the amount paid by the health plan.
This typically occurs when a member faces an emergency and selects the nearest hospital without knowing whether the hospital participates with his or her plan.
* * * *
I don’t want to rush to judgment here. I haven’t read the contract. I don’t pretend to understand the nuances of health insurance. I haven’t seen a comparison of the two plans. But the combination of possible influence peddling by the governor and his former staffers turned lobbyists, and the potential impact of the plan on thousands of state employees, should motivate the state’s leadership (excluding Perry) to determine whether state employees are getting the best possible deal here. The integrity of TRS has already been compromised by Perry’s appointments–remember the Michael Green whistle-blowing letter–and now ERS is likely to come under scrutiny. Dewhurst and Straus should seek a thorough airing of the differences between the new UnitedHealthcare plan and the Blue Cross Blue Shield plan that is no longer in force and determine whether state employees are well served by the new contract.
And what about ERS’s lawyer — Greg Abbott? He is widely believed to be planning a race for governor. He would benefit significantly if Perry were to step aside. But would Abbott risk a fight with Perry by questioning the process that led to the awarding of a contract to Perry’s friends? Unlikely. This is really ugly, and it is going to get worse before it gets better.
vietvet3 says:
How do you spell CORRUPTION? R-I-C-K P-E-R-R-Y
How do you spell CRONYISM? D-I-T-T-O
Reply »
Robert says:
Where’s your responsible evidence that UnitedHealth was not the best most responsive bidder for the contract? Or does that not matter?
Reply »
Pam Reply:
February 26th, 2012 at 10:23 pm
The question, Robert, is “Where is the evidence that United Health was the best, most responsive bidder?”
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 8:31 am
UHC may have been the best, most responsive bidder. But it was also the bidder that had the advantage of having Rick Perry and Mike Toomey on its side. The way things work in this state, I’d rather have Toomey than the best, most responsive bid. The fix is always in.
Reply »
Billy Talks a lot Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 9:14 am
Paulie, you should look at the board presentation by ERS to fully understand that ERS’s 8 month bid process is one of the most intense, detailed and rigerous in the country.
Reply »
Bose Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 9:51 am
“The fix is always in.”
Another conspiracy theory–It is getting harder and harder to distinguish between Morrow and Burka.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 4:34 pm
My issues are not with whether ERS had a rigorous bid process, or whether Blue Cross or UnitedHealthcare had a better proposal. My issue is that this has the appearance of crony capitalism.
Reply »
Pam says:
Can you say “Sharpstown?”
Reply »
Reminder says:
Hmmm— BCBS has not serviced their contract well- everyone knows that. It is crappy service and has been under review by the lege for years. And cost increases every year!!! It was broken, and it was time to fix it. The most interesting piece of the Burka Blog seems to be ignoring the lobby presence of BCBS- who has both the HillCo Lobby Team- and Communications team- on retainer for the last gazzilion year$. Shows you can’t spin to win.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 8:34 am
I have heard about grumbling concerning BCBS. And to some extent, the contract is a lobby fight between the Perry team and the HiiiCo team. But the burden is on the team that had influence on its side to demonstrate that it has the better proposal.
Reply »
Anon100 says:
How do you know so much about a competitive procurement? Is that even legal?
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 4:37 pm
I don’t have any information about this procurement. I wrote about this because it involves Perry’s modus operandi as governor. Heaven forbid that he might be president and lavish federal goodies on his friends.
Reply »
Jerry Only Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 6:12 pm
you mean like no bid contracts with bush/cheney and halliburton?
Reply »
Billy Talks a lot says:
BCBC pays a retainer of 50k a month to Buddy Jones’s Hillco. In addition to marketing and press fees. Which the tab is running up on. HiLlco clears a million dollars a year on this client. Wait,, who does the Speaker’s gold tournament each year. BCBS and Hillco. Hmmmm…..No wonder BCBS and Hillco have held an ERS contract for 29 years.
Reply »
Reality Check says:
Paul is right a tremendous amount of insider influence peddling went on to get this contract; just like it did when BCBS was successful in getting this contract for all the years before.
Bill Miller, Buddy Jones, and the Hillco lobby team (BCBS outside lobby team) have lobbied like crazy to keep this contract for years.
For example:
BCBS is the “lead sponsor” to the tune of thousands of dollars for the charity golf tournaments held for both former Speaker Craddick and the current Speaker. Those golf tournaments have been held at Barton Creek Country Club each year and are ran by none other than HillCo Partners. BCBS gets all kinda of “kudos” during the events.
Both companies given thousands in campaign donations through their employees and lobbyists. BCBS lobbyists such as HillCo has given thousands to legislators and of course Governor Perry.
I bring this up to point out the lobbying on this contract has occurred for years. This just seems to be the case where the Mike Toomey lobby squad beat the Hillco crew.
The contract will be released for review once it finalized since it is a public record. Write the story then.
Reply »
Wake Up Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 7:01 pm
The Speaker’s Golf Tournament turns right around and gives that charitable contribution back to a BCBS program. Ask their competitors how they feel about getting the shake down to back a tournament that’s proceeds support their competitor’s “charity”.
Reply »
Blue Dogs says:
Burka, you are DREAMING to think Perry will resign because he will NOT and likely will serve out his 3rd full term until he rides off the sunset on January 20, 2015 once Abbott succeeds him as governor.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Paul, you’ve already rushed to judgement (see last week’s post). If your point is about influence peddling, then why aren’t you talking about both sides of it – lobbyists for United as well as BCBS? We only see Bill Miller’s point of view represented in your posts.
My family is covered by the state BCBS plan, and we’ve seen our out-of-pocket costs go up every year. When you get a chance to read the proposals, can you tell us if BCBS maintained their current pricing for the four years? I bet they passed increased costs on to the insured pool, too.
It’s interesting that you’re petitioning the involvement of the leadership. It’s not the Legislature’s responsibility to award contracts – it would be unprecedented to see those offices change the award. Oversight might be warranted, of course. If so, hopefully they will approach it with an objective viewpoint.
Please tell us WHAT was so ugly about the award process. You keep making the claim without backing it up.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 12:18 pm
It’s croney capitalism, pure and simple, that has gone on here for years.
Reply »
Ben Quick Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 5:36 pm
Glad to know our cost will no longer be going up – thanks to the Perry lobby group?
Reply »
Shocked! Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 7:05 pm
Paul, are you saying that HillCo is no longer a powerful lobby group when it comes to lobbying the Governor? I’m sure all their clients will be interested to read that they no longer hold favor with the most powerful statewide elected official.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 9:32 pm
This is a ridiculous question.
Hooah! says:
Paul…you REALLY need to clarify this paragraph…
“—–ERS members will be balanced billed, however, in or out of network, because they no longer have access to the Blue Cross Blue Shield safety net, known as the Par Plan, which limits the damage done by balanced billing. The Blue Cross Par (short for “participating”) Plan has contracts with out of network providers who agree to bear some of the burden of balanced billing. UnitedHealthcare does not have such a safety net plan.”
Does this mean that if an ERS member goes to an in-network provider and Untied does not pay the entire amount claimed, that the in-network provider will be able to go after the ERS member for the balance?
Or…as in the Aetna information…does this ONLY apply to non-network providers, such as ER physicians who may not be on the United HC list?
Reply »
Cereal Hippocrates Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 10:19 am
You want to state workers in emergent situations to check their network when they are bleeding out.
“Yes, Dr. I am sure your rates are pretty competitive, but let me just call my hotline number to see if there is someone in network. Pardon, my bleeding on your floor, think of them as ‘freedom of choice’ stains.”
It’s been said before, child molesters and state workers are the only categories of people that the Leadership of this state can mistreat with perpetual consistency.
Reply »
paulburka says:
I can’t clarify it further than I have written.
Reply »
Ed Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 12:33 pm
Rather than clarifying this passage, I believe you need to restate it; as written it is untrue. By TDI definition balance billing can only occur with out-of-network providers. See http://www.tdi.texas.gov/consumer/cpmbalancebilling.html
Reply »
govanalyst says:
Balanced billing for in-network services is against the law. Balanced billing for out-of-network services is fair game. The BCBSTX Par Plan did provide a safety net for participants who chose out-of-network Par providers. United did not bid with a Par Plan equivalent. The question is, was BCBSTX given the opportunity to go back and rebid without the Par Plan option, in order to make an apples-to-apples comparison of the two bids?
Reply »
Blue Dogs says:
Hey Burka, I haven’t even read about scandals like this in the morning paper this morning.
Perry is NOT running again in 2014 if he still has White House ambitions, and why would he run again ?
1. He’s done all he could do in Austin after 14 years in office.
2. Perry already has given Greg Abbott the green light in succeeding him as governor on January 20, 2015.
3. Perry’s approval ratings have tanked due to his horrible presidential campaign.
4. Down-ballot TX GOPers waiting for Perry to move on.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 11:41 am
He’s done almost nothing after 14 years in office except keep running for office.
Reply »
State Employee says:
For those focused on lobbying, cronyism and increased out of pocket costs, some other points to consider. The most recent increase in BCBS out of pocket costs was dictated by the failure of the state legislature to fully cover employee health costs in the previous biennium. A mid year increase was needed to cover a $200-300 million shortfall in Fall 2010.
Of greater importance UHC has a reputation for cutting costs by denying care, that is refusing authorization for treatment. As a parent with a medically fragile child I foresee the end of medical and other services critical to her care.
While BCBC had its problems, it did have a reasonably big network and would authorize care. I think denial of care as opposed to cost is often overlooked by those who don’t use their insurance often. As a friend of mine says, everyone likes their health insurance till they use it.
Reply »
older and wiser Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 2:50 pm
Why do the citizens of Texas continue to elect this snake in the grass buffoon? He got his comeuppance as soon as he strutted on the national scene. Makes me wonder if a bunch of Texans are just stupid. Just saying……..
Reply »
BLue Dogs Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 3:42 pm
What about Obama’s scandals in office over the last 4 years ?
SOLYNDRA, Rezko, etc.,
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 12:07 am
@ Blue Dogs,
That has nothing to do with the situation at hand. If I was beaten and robbed by someone while walking down the sidewalk, would you defend the mugger by saying that there was another mugger who did the same thing in another part of town?
Anon says:
Paul, why do you think that BCBS is better than United?
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 4:42 pm
I didn’t say BCBS is better than United. I said I think the award of the contract involved crony capitalism.
Reply »
jph says:
But isn’t this capitalism at its best and cleanest? If I’m the guy in charge of government contracts for my firm and I say, “if I hire Toomey I get the contract. If I don’t hire Toomey I won’t get the contract. I think I won’t hire Toomey.” How long do I keep the job?
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 4:43 pm
Thanks for making my point.
Reply »
John Johnson says:
I find it funny that most of you appear to be taking sides here. Some of you posting have, or will be getting some form of compensation that originates from UHC or BCBS, so you are part of the stink. It is a case of prostitutes on different sides of the equation calling each other whores.
Reply »
Ben Quick Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 5:39 pm
I only can wish I was as pure as you
Reply »
Cow Droppings says:
Paul has stated the following things: United may have had the best bid. He doesn’t care whether ERS has a rigorous process. He has heard there were problems with BCBS. He has no information on the procurement.
So, to summarize: United may have had the best bid, in what may have been a very intensive process, against an incumbent bidder for which he has heard there were problems and which had its own lobby army, and finally that he knows really nothing about the procurement. BUT NONETHELESS IT STINKS!
He defines crony capitalism as special deals to cronies regardless of merit and regardless of whether the process has safeguards to ensure the best bid is chosen. Merit doesn’t matter…the process doesn’t matter (though Paul is a process guy)…all that matters is the winning bidder had lobbyists with Perry connections, without caring about the substance of the bid or the bidding process.
In other words, any bid won by a Toomey client, regardless of the quality of the client…and no matter how powerful the lobbyists on the competing team…is bad.
That clears it up…makes a lot of sense.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 7:25 pm
CD…you know I respect ur opinions. I think that in UHS and BCBS we have two skunks who know how to play the game. What jumps out here, in my mind, is Toomey’s name popping up in all major state deals and all your friends and the Gov’s former staffers pulling up chairs to high paying jobs with the victor. It is just not right. Surely you can see how we commonbreds don’t like it. Those of us paying attention grow weary of land deals and quid pro quo arrangements that are not against the law, but should be.
Reply »
Not So Patient Reply:
March 19th, 2012 at 10:18 am
It seems to me that anyone who calls themselves “Public Servants” should essentially recuse themselves from involvement in awarding contracts or conversely those who award contracts should be ineligible from working for an associated company for a period of time (say 10 years). This might clean-up the process.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 9:37 pm
Molly Ivins said it best — the shame is not what’s illegal, it’s what’s legal.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 10:21 am
“Safeguards to insure best bid”???? Name them.
I’d also like to know a winning bid on any major state contract that did not have a Perry crony involved in the process that ends up making a killing or some company that is not loading up the Gov’s coffers in some shape, form or fashion.
Reply »
half full says:
You put it pretty well yourself Paulie…
“I don’t want to rush to judgment here. I haven’t read the contract. I don’t pretend to understand the nuances of health insurance. I haven’t seen a comparison of the two plans.”
But you are. You probably still haven’t. You obviously do pretend. And, again, you probably still have not.
Please, PLEASE, stop watching re-runs of All the President’s Men.
Reply »
S. Wolf says:
Where are your sources? It’s all well and good to claim that ‘What follows is information that I have picked up from various sources, including interviews and web sites’ but it is customary to cite sources with links to internet sites for this sort of information, else it is merely unsubstantiated opinion. Sorry but I have no reason to question Governor Perry’s honesty.
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
February 27th, 2012 at 11:48 pm
I’m sorry S. Wolf, but if you can’t smell the stink emanating from these type state contracts you are either involved and have gotten used to it, or are just plain ignorant. When your kids used the argument “everyone else is doing it” did you give into them? Maybe as an adult you are still using it yourself.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 11:48 am
Re S. Wolf: I have sources from the Blue Cross side of the deal. I would welcome explanations that I could post from ERS or UHC. But I bet I won’t get it.
Reply »
Jerry Only Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 4:41 pm
“Sorry but I have no reason to question Governor Perry’s honesty.”
you havent been watching texas politics much for the past 12 years.
Reply »
Bet Guv Remembers says:
I bet Guv Perry remembers some of Bill Miller’s greatest hits (“quotes”) from the Presidential Campaign (if he didn’t I bet Toomey reminded him):
“Absolutely Mike [Toomey] convinced [Perry] on that (vaccine mandate),” Bill Miller, a founding partner of the Austin lobbying powerhouse HillCo Partners told HuffPost. The firm has done work on behalf of top-tier conservative donors, such as Houston construction mogul and swift-boat funder Bob Perry (no relation) and Koch Industries. “Maybe he personally believes in that … Mike played an influential role. It’s just the way I read it, the nature of the deal.”
Vanity Fair:
“It was agonizing to watch, whether you liked him or not,” says Bill Miller, a top lobbyist in Austin and a longtime Perry observer. “Is he dead? Never say never, but it would have to be one of the greatest comebacks in history.”
During his first statewide campaign, for agriculture commissioner, in 1990, “there was a poster of Perry they put out, wearing chaps, feet up on a bale of hay, his crotch front and center,” remembers the lobbyist Bill Miller. “I saw that poster everywhere, in every office I went into, and I thought, This guy is hot. In every sense of the word.” Miller laughs. “I remember having lunch with a liberal lady friend of mine, and she leans over to me and says, ‘Bill, do you think Rick Perry puts socks down the front of his pants?’ That’s when I realized he was really getting under some people’s skins.”
“Weather, football, hunting, fishing, all that—he’s expert at Texas bullshit,” Miller says. “He works hard at being liked, and that’s a big part of his appeal.”
Reply »
eyeswideopen Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 7:33 am
Weeelllll….this would appear to be the smoking gun, as they say. We know that Perry punches, pummels and destroys anyone that even thinks about disagreeing with him or issuing a derrogatory statement.
What say you…you Perry apologists? Cow Droppings? JBB?
Reply »
Julie says:
Paul,
Will you be writing more on this topic? You raise some interesting points that warrant further information.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 11:49 am
Yes. I will be writing more on this topic.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
I always like to see what the Political Mother-in-laws are nattering about down at the local hair salon.
Reply »
Helen Wheels says:
Interesting that ERS is completely dumping BCBS after so many years. Several months ago, they changed coverage for retirees on Medicare from BCBS to Humana Medicare Advantage. BCBS must have seriously ticked off the Perry team. It is also interesting that there has been a comapaign against BCBS for years by an organization of far-right physicians called the AAPS. AAPS membership includes several quack physicians who are active in Texas politics.
Reply »
JUICE says:
“It’s been said before, child molesters and state workers are the only categories of people that the Leadership of this state can mistreat with perpetual consistency.”
And teenagers.
Reply »
anita Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 11:11 am
And children and the poor.
Reply »
Gorilla33 Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 2:40 pm
And women.
Reply »
sammy says:
This is poorly researched. While I respect the fact that you’ve tried to source information from interviews and individuals who have knowledge of the contract, your lack of even the key fundamentals of the contract and alternate bids puts you in no position to make these assertions. I’m all for investigative journalism that uncovers corporate abuse and cronyism, but you’ve done nothing with this piece other than call into question your own credibility by throwing out some very strong accusations without any supporting evidence. Perform an analysis of the bids side-by-side and you might have a cohesive argument.
Additionally, it’s highly unfair of you to name people that work at UHS who are involved with the contract. Do you know these people and their work product personally, because if you don’t, all you’ve done is dragged their name through the mud. If it was my name in the article and I had worked hard to get where I was in my career, you’d be getting a call from my attorney.
In the future, blogs like this would have a lot more credibility if you actually did some real investigative research rather than throwing out accusations based on “interviews” and light research. But until then, all you’ve done is call into question your own work product and you’ve ensured that readers like myself will make sure paul burka is not author of a post before I spend any time reading it.
Reply »
Wayne Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Is Paul supposed to have specific knowledge of every person involved in all the winning and losing contracts and have a full working knowledge of all the contract details before he meets your criteria for calling it out on a blog post?
That’s an awfully high threshold to meet; so high, in fact, that it would be impossible to ever level any negative claim without it getting lost in a galaxy of extraneous details. But I’ve no doubt that’s exactly what the defenders of the indefensible would want.
But even if Paul did all that, it wouldn’t change the facts he listed in his original post. And those facts are what’s at the heart of this matter.
Reply »
Billy Talks a lot Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
facts? Those aren’t all the facts. The point is to talk with or interview some other than pro BCBS folks. This is all inside politics. I have no problem with BCBS or United. United does have broader capabilities in their technology. State Emplyoyees will see little disruption.
Reply »
Wayne Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 4:44 pm
I was referring to his quotes from the press release that lists names. Those names should be considered facts.
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 6:35 pm
Sammy,
You sound real green to politics. In politics, its connecting dots – not long winded research. You don’t threaten to sue in politics because if you don’t like the heat you can get right out of the kitchen.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 11:57 am
I don’t care who ends up with the contract. I do care that the correct process is followed in state contracts, and I care about the damage that is done to politics generally when sweetheart deals occur. In terms of naming names, I know three of the five people personally who were listed on the original release. THEY put their names on the release, not I.
Reply »
Royale says:
That’s the beauty of it for Burka. He can hide behind his blog. He wants it both ways: He wants to be respected as a journalist, but he also wants the freedom to throw around wild, conspiratorial accusations without any proof whatsoever–just whispers and innuendo.
Then when people call him on it he can just say “but it’s just a blog.”
Reply »
Texian Politico says:
Burka,
Wake up!
The new interim maps are here -
http://txredistricting.org/post/18450944153/breaking-new-interim-maps
Reply »
Blue Digs says:
Burka, do you have the full exit polls from the 2002 Texas Governor’s race between Perry and Sanchez because I can’t find it ?
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 11:57 am
I have no clue.
Reply »
Cop on the beat says:
Anyone care to ask providers what they think of UHC vs BCBSTX? I hear some think UHS service stinks. Bodes really well for members of ERS, huh?
Reply »
govanalyst Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 10:42 am
I have heard the same thing from my providers. That United is one of the slowest companies to process specialist referrals, approve prior authorizations, and pay claims.
Reply »
John Johnson says:
Sammy, Royale, S. Wolf, et al…THIS IS A BLOG. Burka is not “hiding” behind anything… if he were, he would use some pseudonym like most do here. He can stress an opinion on this site just like everyone else. He can show a bias if he wants to, just like the rest of us do…so please take a different tack and quit pounding on him like he wrote a piece between the covers of Texas Monthly that had no “who, what, when, where or why”. He doesn’t have to here.
He is insinuating that the process is rotten; that it looks bad; that it smells bad; that it is immoral; that any burden for monies “saved” will eventually be carried by the policy holders; and that the people at the top are so used to playing this way, they see it as the normal means of conducting business.
This goes for BCBS, UHC, AT&T, Xerox, ONCOR, XYZ Roadbuilders, and hundreds of others who vie for state contracts. They don’t hire lobbyists to “educate”; they hire them to wine & dine, and promise, and pay. If this wasn’t the case, UHC would not have hired Toomey; they would have hired an insurance healthcare specialist… and an AT&T would not be hiring some legislative staff member over a communications engineer.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 5:33 pm
oh so very true…its rotten now and has always been rotten. In the past – the rotten turns over more – which keeps things from smelling too terribly had. When you have the same rotten apples in place for over a decade – it just stinks because it is way too easy to connect all the dots. Cathy Bonner was powerful as anyone discussed here at one time and I see her on tv selling auto repair – and that is a good thing by the way…good for Cathy and good for our system.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
Its rotten because the dems controlled the process far too long. In 1990 King Bob Bullock passed a decree that made double dipping a way of life. Dems thought it was great then…..
Its time for dems to wake up and smell the coffee, no one cares what they think and its gonna be a loooooooong time before another dem wins a statewide race in Texas.
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
February 28th, 2012 at 7:32 pm
The Repubs have shown themselves to be quick learners, JBB. Looks like they studied hard to learn the Bullock system and they’ve mastered it, I would say. Perry has world class credentials in the art of deceit, double dipping and cronyism. I know that you are proud to be an ardent cheerleader for such a skillful leader and his band of merry shysters.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 6:11 am
You missed my point. I’m not saying either is right. When dems are in power then anything goes. Then when they’re kicked out, they cry and whine and point fingers “look they’re doing what we did.” I think its hilarious.
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 7:36 am
Gotcha. Couldn’t agree more.
paulburka Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 12:00 pm
Oh, John, this has nothing to do with Democrats. You’re obsessed with a party that can barely muster a quorum.
Reply »
Blue Dogs Reply:
March 1st, 2012 at 10:22 am
Bernard, the TX Dems will likely wait until 2018 or 2022 to win statewide offices again.
The Legislature will likely stay Republican until 2030 IF minority growth continues to grow fast enough (see California).
Reply »
Anonymous says:
JBB,
The lobby infighting has more to do with people than it has to do with R’s and D’s. I am an outsider looking in and from reading these comments it sounds like there is one group of lobbyists fighting another group. My guess is the one group will keep power for a little while longer and the other group will move in and make sure that group in power now can’t lobby for a cup of coffee in Austin any more. Then that group has to move on, like to DC – or get out of politics altogether.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
You mean there’s no honor amoung thieves?
Our political offices are defined as “lucrative offices” because they are. Dems have set up a system where its possible to retire at 50 years old with a nice taxpayer funded system, a double dipping system, and a system supplemented by per deim. The dems have been voted out and they want back in. The voters of Texas recognize thieves when we see them, thats why we used to hang horse thieves.
It will be a long time till dems get back into power, they’re vanquished to legislating from the bench, and voter fraud.
Reply »
Stuart Greenfield says:
The $40 million is chump change. By moving 46,000 employees to Humana Advantage, the State lost out on over $500 million it would have received by creating an Advantage plan in partnership w/ BC/BS and offered that to retirees/employees on Medicare. I used to say that I maybe a state employee, but I’m not stupid, that is now under question.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
All you ever wanted to know about dems and more,
posted on a State of Texas website paid for by taxdollars:
“WIC clients usually receive services in the county where they live. U.S. citizenship is not a requirement for eligibility.”
democrats trolling for votes with citizen’s taxdollars.
Tired of it? Vote ‘em out.
Reply »
Texian Politico says:
How about a post on the new maps?
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
OK all you need to know on the new maps:
Atty Gen Abbott won.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
For once JBB is right. That’s my next post.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 12:04 pm
for once….hahaha right on
Reply »
Texian Politico Reply:
February 29th, 2012 at 12:51 pm
Burka’s next post is about JBB?
JohnBernardBooks says:
“Burka’s next post is about JBB?”
I’m already in your heads enough, I don’t think Burka would do that to you losers.
Reply »
J L MCKINNEY says:
WHAT’S NEW…..SAME OLE “BS” AS USUAL….IS ANYONE EVER GOING TO TRY AND GET PERRY TO PAY THE STATE BACK FOR HIS SECURITY TEAM WHILE ON HIS BIG BID OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS?????????????????? I GUESS NOT, WE CAN JUST CHALK THAT UP TO MORE STATE MONEY USED THAT SHOULD HAVE GONE INTO EDUCATION IN THE STATE!
YEP, “PERRY” STILL SPELLS “CORRUPT GOVERNMENT!”
Reply »
stra8talk says:
wake up people who think the bid process is fair, look at ACS getting DIR contracts when the PCRA contract is in the RED. No one checks references 8 months means nothing. Let the public see the facts on costs and how the evaluation scoring was calculated
Reply »
internet marketing greensboro says:
I relish, cause I discovered exactly what I used to be having a look for.
You have ended my 4 day long hunt! God Bless
you man. Have a great day. Bye
Reply »