WHY I AM VOTING FOR DINA PADILLA
Injured Pfizer Biotech Worker And Molecular Biologist Becky McClain Endorses Dina Padilla For California Insurance Commissioner
I am happy to endorse Dina Padilla for California Insurance Commissioner. Dina has decades of leadership and experience in fighting for worker’s rights related to workers compensation insurance. She is honest and takes a stand for integrity, defending injured workers who deserve healthcare.
Dina will fight for the public’s good as well. She will insure that companies who run from their responsibilities toward injured workers and thereby place unjust monetary burdens onto the public are stopped.
In the same way, Dina’s fight is connected to my struggle for justice for healthcare rights here in Connecticut. After incurring an exposure to a genetically engineered human infectious virus at work and becoming very ill, I was told that trade secrets superceded my right to information necessary for directed healthcare. Even with a doctor’s request, worker’s compensation denied me the right to this information and, thereby, denied directed medical care to me. This injustice is only one of the many blatant disregards for human rights issues that workers face in this country.
The deception, lies and cover-up by employers to avoid responsibility for injured workers is a systemic problem throughout this country. It leaves many injured and ill workers kicked to the curb, losing their jobs, health and homes. It makes the public pay when the companies should. Dina wants to change that.
You will have to go a long way to find someone like Dina who will fight for what is right. Dina is the only candidate who can do the job that is desperately needed today. She is the resounding voice that will stand against corruption within the insurance industry and fight for worker’s rights, human rights and the public’s welfare. I only wish that we had a Dina Padilla running for Insurance Commissioner here in Connecticut.
I wholeheartedly endorse Dina Padilla for California Insurance Commissioner
Becky McClain
Injured biotech worker
8/17/2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AN OPEN LETTER TO HARVEY ROSENFIELD
By Ralph Shaffer
Greetings, Harvey:
Harv, I know this is long, but the next four years at the Insurance Commissioner's office will depend on how you respond to this plea. You'll probably never see this, but the issue is so important that I have to press you for a decision...NOW!
DINA PADILLA needs your endorsement - NOW. Not a week before the general election, but NOW, when it can have a dramatic effect.
Four years ago, in what must have been a momentary lapse of sanity - I have those, too - you told all of us who followed your consumer organization to vote for the Minute Man [Steve Poizner] for Insurance Commissioner. I suppose you weighed Poizner against his Democratic opponent - that's a poor choice of verbs since Cruz so outweighed his rival on the scales that he made obesity his only campaign issue - and you decided Poizner was the lesser of two evils. Actually, he was the worst choice, but there were candidates who were not only not evil but were 100% pro-consumer. They were the candidates of Green and of Peace and Freedom. It really didn't matter whether Bustamante or Poizner won. They were both looking for a cushy job - Cruz was termed out and a once-defeated candidate for gov, and Poizner was already looking ahead to 2010. So you would have done consumer advocacy a great service had you endorsed either of those two third party candidates.
But you didn't. In an unbelievable press release, later disavowed by your own colleagues, you endorsed the candidate of Silicon Valley businessmen - and business women, if Meg Whitman bothered to vote. During the campaign he refused to discuss real insurance issues. He never answered my inquiry about where he stood on long term care insurance regulation. As it turned out, we didn't need him. My attorneys won a whopping big settlement for 100,000 policyholders without any help - or interference - from Poizner. For that matter, not a single one of the consumer advocacy organizations in California offered us any support either.
So Poizner's campaign was hardly anything that you could have supported. Nor was his inauguration, an invitation only Silicon Valley ceremony that was attended by the press and business execs. I doubt that even you were invited, despite your endorsement. Had you gone, you would have been sickened, not by the food but by the new commissioner's pledge to business that his term would be in their interest. It surely wasn't designed to be in the interest of people like you, me and the rest of the state's policyholders.
For the next four years where was this guy? He took credit for insurance victories that were won by consumer action, not by the commish or his office. And long ago he gave up being commish in order to run for governor. At least you didn't endorse him in the Republican primary.
Poizner is history - at least he will be in six months. So where do you stand on insurance commissioner in November? While you may play mental gymnastics and come up with a reason to endorse Dave Jones, let's rem,ember that he's running because, like Cruz, he's a termed out politician. He will probably prove to be another Garamendi, or Poizner, using the office for a step up the ladder to a statewide office that has a bit more prestige than insurance commissioner. Please.... don't toy with the idea of endorsing another Republican. You did that last time and we know how that turned out.
There is one candidate you ought to endorse: DINA PADILLA of the Peace and Freedom Party. I don't have to go through her platform here because it's one that any red-blooded consumer activist would have written.
Harvey, do it right this time. Don't give us another Garamendi. Put all your force behind the election of a dedicated consumer advocate. Dina deserves your support. If nothing else, your endorsement will atone for your mental lapse four years ago. We could have had a real insurance commissioner if you and the other consumer orgs had rallied behind one of the genuine regulators in 2006. But you didn't.
This time don't make the same mistake. DINA PADILLA should be publicly endorsed by you. Issue another press release. Apologize for your past error. Consumers are good people. We are forgiving. Do it right this time, Harvey. Do it right!
Ralph
Ralph E. Shaffer
Professor Emeritus, History
Cal Poly Pomona
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Professor Ralph Shaffer, CSU Pomona Emeritus
I'm endorsing Dina Padilla for Insurance Commissioner. We have had a string of phonies in that office, posing as representatives of consumers. The current incumbent was even endorsed in 2006 by a highly recognized and well publicized consumer advocate.... much to the dismay of those of us who, that year, voted for either of the two genuine representatives of the great majority of Californians. This time I hope that those who pose as spokespersons for consumers either endorse Padilla or remain silent. We don't need another professional politician or termed-out legislator as commissioner.
I endorse Padilla because had she been commissioner six years ago when CNA attempted to raise its long-term care insurance rates by 50% she would have voided that increase. But then-Commissioner Garamendi met secretly with CNA representatives and agreed that if they accepted a 25% increase in 2004 they could also raise rates by another 25% in 2005. All of this was done without the knowledge of policyholders who, in many, many cases were, like me, at an age where it was financially impossible to drop the policy and buy one from another company.
I complained to CNA and to Garamendi. Both defended the 2004 increase. In fact, Garamendi's aides were more vigorous in defending the increase than was CNA. But CNA sent a letter saying that while the rate was going up 25% in 2004 there were no plans for future increases. When that letter arrived, reassuring those who received it, including me, CNA and Garamendi had already made their devilish deal for another increase.
When the second increase came, in2005, I didn't stop with a complaint. I filed a class action law suit on behalf of about 100,000 policyholders who were caught in this scheme. It took nearly five years but this spring the Federal court approved the settlement that CNA agreed to. During all those years I paid the inflated rate and kept my policy in force. Good thing, for in the interim I lost most of my eyesight and I now am collecting benefits from CNA.
This long drawn out battle with the insurance company should not have been necessary. With a Dina Padilla in office there would have been no increase in premiums. A few commissioners in other states had the backbone to reject CNA's request for a rate increase. But not the California commissioner, who used the office as a stepping stone to what he thought would be a race for governor. Thank goodness he never got that office.
His successor, who also had the governorship in mind from the very beginning, was another dud insofar as protecting consumers. At Steve Poizner's inauguration ceremony the only guests invited were Silicon Valley execs and the commissioner talked only of saving money for businessmen. His four years in office have produced nothing in the way of benefits and protection for consumers. Yet this is the guy the most prominent consumer advocate in California chose to endorse in 2006.
Here's what I asked Garamendi and Poizner to do, none of which they did, but what Padilla will do her best to do if elected:
1-Roll back the unacceptable rate increases
2-Require insurance companies to inform all policyholders of intended rate increases
3-As commissioner, hold open hearings on those proposed increases, with notification to all policyholders so that they can attend and testify.
4-Provide consumer organizations with all the details of any proposed rate increase so that they can prepare rebuttal
5-Create a division within the Insurance Commissioner's office that will aggressively investigate any denial of claims by insurance companies.
If you want a commissioner who will truly represent all of us, vote for Dina Padilla. And I publicly call on Harvey Rosenfield to atone for his mistaken endorsement of Poizner in 2006 by endorsing Padilla in 2010.
Ralph Shaffer
Covina CA
reshaffer@csupomona.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 27, 2010
Dina Padilla and I have worked together a number of years dealing with unethical behavior of insurers and HMO’s. She has been a great help to me and, in turn, has been of immense value to people who have approached me for assistance.
Her first-hand and in-depth knowledge of insurers and medical plans make her an ideal candidate for the Insurance Commissioner for the State of California.
It’s time for a positive change that will benefit the people of this state. Dina Padilla is a
person of integrity who can make this happen.
Miguel A. Perez-Lizano
Retired Investment Analyst
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Dr. Charles Phillips
Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Endorsement of Candidate Padilla to Get Rid of Health Insurance Corruption
Dear Voter,
As a licensed physician in California, I am hereby endorsing Dina Padilla for the position of Insurance Commissioner. I believe that she is the only candidate who can clean up the mess left by Mr. Steve Poizner. He and Anthem Blue Cross of California have worked together to keep the benefits down for the many middle wage earners, like the teachers.
A careful analysis will show that top health executives in California get the best health care and wonderful perks as they spend their days planning how to cut benefits and increase profit. Mr. Poizner has part of all this. At the same time, he has allowed Anthem to have health insurance products outside of the Department of Managed Health Care to keep physicians and patients as confused as possible.
Since Mr. Poizner made over one billion on designing and patenting GPS cell phone chips, he has never worried about his own health care. He could buy his own hospital and be the single patient if he wanted - pampered by specialists. He has not been fighting for the common patient while at the helm of the Department of Insurance. Someday we will learn how he lobbied Washington, DC to get his phone chip into favored position to get rich.
Perhaps Mr. Poizner's worst abuse of office came about as he - and his Fresno field office - helped Anthem Blue Cross to arrest Hispanic grandmother Shawn Dodd of Bakersfield on May 15, 2009 - for alleged insurance fraud (People v. Shawn Dodd, Kern County, BF127872A. She has been in jail for over one year with no trial; speedy justice means nothing to Mr. Poisner and his agents.
As one looks closely at that case, the wrong people are in jail. There is, rather, and Anthem Blue Cross gang whose goal is to make more money for WellPoint, Inc. in Indiana. The latter organization lost half its value - stock dropping form 80 to 40 - in November of 2008. They chose to damage Mrs. Dodd - helping to manage a physical medicine clinic - so as to save money. She become a "stimulus" to Anthem/WellPoint profit. It is about the same as the Kaiser model explained to Nixon - the less care we give the more money we make).
Ehrlichman: "Edgar Kaiser is running his Permanente deal for profit. And the reason that he can—the reason he can do it—I had Edgar Kaiser come in—talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because—" President Nixon: [Unclear.] Ehrlichman: —the less care they give them, the more money they make.
I would challenge Mr. Poizner to show how much Anthem Blue Cross is sending out of California each year to WellPoint as profit. Perhaps $25 million a year or more. He can get the answer quickly if he does not already have it.
Though many of our county jails are letting the white collar crime accused go home with ankle monitors, Mr. Poizner and the Kern County DA (Mr. Jagels) prefer to have Mrs. Dodd in jail where they can monitor all over her phone calls - every one typed up - and withhold medical care from her as well. She also has Blue Cross insurance and has to pay premiums while getting no care. The county jail treatment for chest pain is delayed tylenol - no stress test.
Particularly interesting to me - a physician with six months of studying criminal law on the side - is that the conversations with the Department of Insurance agents and a Republican CPA (the DA Jagel's campaign treasurer) have been obviously erased. After five interviews - perhaps ten hours of time - the only tape recording shared with Mrs. Dodd's defense attorney is completely blank! This may be standard operating procedure for Mr. Poizner's agents, since his run for governor is centered on having lots of raids and putting lots of people in jail.
Mr. Poizner has put his own opinions of Mrs. Dodd - no trial yet - on the state DOI web site - claiming that she is guilty. Perhaps he needs to go to jail for the false arrest and evidence tampering of his agents. It would not surprise me if he has spent $1 million against Mrs. Dodd, though the "evidence" room is such a mess that the investigators walk on the paper. Do we need to waste all this money? If it is all proven a sham accusation, he should personally reimburse California, Kern County, and Mrs. Dodd. Kern County has already paid almost $10,000,000 to prisoners for false imprisonment under DA Jagels.
I have become so incensed with this insurance scheme to wreck a clinic, I have named it the Anthem Blue Cross gang - Mr. Poizner included. I have wondered at times if I am in Burma rather than Bakersfield - and mutter Burma-field at times. I wish that a candidate for Insurance Commissioner like Dina Padilla was given the right to investigate a department during a campaign. State departments seem well protected from any sunshine.
My own hopes for the Department of Insurance go way beyond cleaning up Mr. Poisner's mess. I would like to see the next Insurance Commissioner make sure that good medical care is given, that physicians are paid honestly, that medical records cannot be changed after the care, that the false advertising (like Kaiser's Thrive) stops, and that patients have a lot more say about insurance rates jumping up so fast.
One particular company that needs future investigating is "American Specialty Health" or ASH in San Diego in which a VA physician can secretly deny SISC/Anthem care to patients (many teachers) - like physical medicine - and feel federally protected in the VA clinic. In that case the public simply needs to have an advocate in Sacramento who will make all such decisions as transparent as possible. Meanwhile, if anyone goes to the ASH recruiting web site, it is clear that the executives all get physical medicine care right in the building as perks.
Having practiced medicine in the United States (40 years), Canada (two years), New Zealand (three months), Thailand (three months), and Saudi Arabia (two years - including coverage of the Jeddah Palace), I think I have figured out how to make the medical care make sense. The answer is to make sure that all the middle meddlers in health care - including insurance benefit blockers - have to endure the same care themselves!
And I think Dina Padilla is the best candidate for the job of Insurance Commissioner. She will stop insurance fraud by all parties including Anthem Blue Cross. Where she cannot solve things, she will be in a position to at least turn on the lights. And that is all the middle class in California really needs - truth in health care.
Charles Phillips, MD - Fresno (in the phone book all my career) -
[Party Affiliation - Independent - looking for the best candidate]
|
