The deuces were wild in Friday’s vote by the House Appropriations Committee to approve the $1.1 billion contract between the state and Blue Cross/Blue Shield (BCBS) which calls for BCBS to take over the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) Preferred Provider Organization (PPO), which provides health care coverage for about 62,000 state employees, retirees and their dependents.
The Senate Finance Committee, meeting jointly with the Appropriations Committee, was a foregone conclusion insofar as the Piyush Jindal administration is concerned; Senate Finance was overwhelming in favor of knuckling under to Piyush all along. It was the Appropriations Committee that displayed a streak of independence last week when it voted 16-9 in favor of an immediate vote on the contract.
That motion, by Rep. Katrina Jackson (D-Monroe) prompted Commissioner of Administration Kristy Nichols to pull the proposal until this week.
Within hours of that vote, two members of the Appropriations Committee, Vice Chairman Cameron Henry (R-Metairie) and Joe Harrison (R-Gray) were removed by House Speaker Chuck Kleckley (R-Lake Charles) as indisputable proof that he is Piyush pliant.
Henry and Harrison were replaced by Reps. Bryan Adams (R-Gretna) and Alan Seabaugh (R-Shreveport).
This time, the vote was 15-9 in favor of the contract with Adams and Seabaugh voting in favor.
Also voting in favor were two members who were absent from last week’s meeting—Reps. Patrick Connick (R-Marrero) and Jack Montoucet (D-Crowley), and two members who got the message after the demotion of Harrison and Henry and flipped last week’s “no” votes to emphatic “yes” votes this week: Reps. Henry Burns (R-Haughton) and John Schroder (R-Covington).
Two other members who voted with Jackson last week were absent Friday: Reps. Brett Geymann (R-Lake Charles) and James Morris (R-Oil City).
Now that the contract has gained the legally required approval of the two legislative committees, the next likely phase will be the courts if unsuccessful bidder United Healthcare files suit against the state as expected.
Litigation could ensue because of the selection process for the contract, which is not to exceed $1.1 billion. The BCBS bid is said to have been as much as $15 million more than that of United Healthcare.
Jackson, who had sought—and received—an attorney general’s opinion that the contract required legislative approval, said Friday’s action came despite testimony Friday that the contract, besides resulting in 111 OGB employees losing their jobs, would cost the state “millions in additional dollars.”
She said new budgetary request shows a “significant increase” in what the state will spend on claims.
Testimony from the Legislative Fiscal Office and an OGB CEO Charles Calvi did little to shed any light on questions raised by committee members but it was all but obvious from the outset how the vote would come down.
While the Appropriations Committee vote was virtually a 180 reversal of last week’s vote (16-10 in favor Friday as opposed to 16-9 opposed last week), the Senate Finance Committee’s vote was 10-3 in favor Friday compared to last week’s 11-3 vote to defer action until this week. Voting against both deferral last week and the contract this week were Sens. Sherri Smith Buffington (R-Keithville) and Ed Murray (D-New Orleans). Sen. Dan Claitor (R-Baton Rouge) voted against deferral last week but in favor of the contract this week. Sen. Fred Mills (R-New Iberia), who voted in favor of deferral last week, voted against the contract.
“This is what happens when Gov. Jindal removes members from the committee,” Jackson said of Friday’s vote.
“The vote last week was a vote based on the will of the legislature. The vote this week I a vote based on Jindal violating the separation of powers clause and removing members from the committee based on their vote(s).
“Testimony showed that this move would not result in state savings yet (and) because of Jindal’s overlapping interference in the legislative process, some members were backed into voting for it.”
Sen. Gerald Long (R-Natchitoches) told LouisianaVoice after the meeting that he voted in favor of the contract “because BCBS is already administering 75 percent of OGB’s claims and is doing a good job.”
He did not address the question of why he voted to put 111 OGB employees out of work who were doing an equally good job administering the remaining 25 percent of OGB claims.
One of the phrases most repeated by witnesses who spoke out against the contract as committee members talked among themselves, texted and walked around the room was “why fix something that is not broken?”
That question is yet to be addressed by anyone on either committee or from DOA.
Louisiana Voice 
Keeping track of these legislators for the Do Note Elect Again list.
Rep. Jackson cannot be thanked enough for standing up for state employees and retirees. But alas, the other legislators with no b***s ought to be proud that they have put state employees and retirees at risk of higher premiums and lower coverage for health insurance. Just wait until we will have to start paying more. As far as the little banana republic dictator who has aspirations for national office once the president has served his second term, I, for my part will do everything to expose his dirty shenanigans in every way that I can. Thank God that all he did to try to elect Romney backfired in his face.
In calculating the projected savings supposedly to result from the contracting of the OGB PPO plan TPA (administrative only) functions by OGB to BCBS, the Legislative Fiscal Office (LFO) showed itself to be incompetent.
First, the LFO accepted the Division of Administration (DOA) calculations as to the existing OGB PPO plan administrative costs even while acknowledging that OGB had calculated a far smaller amount. LFO even went so far as to explain why the difference existed. That being the inclusion by DOA in total OGB administrative costs fees paid to BCBS for its administration of the HMO plan. OGB properly classified these fees as health care delivery costs. Therefore, when allocating total OGB administrative costs between the HMO and PPO plans, PPO administrative costs were overstated (penalized) by HMO TPA fees totally unrelated to the PPO plan.
Secondly, DOA and LFO included in PPO administrative costs over $7 million that SUPPOSEDLY would be reduced as a result of contracting the plan administrative functions to BCBS, Those cost savings were already set to be realized by OGB regardless of who performed the administrative functions of the PPO plan. The BCBS contract did not have one whit to do with that projected savings. Yet LFO and DOA included it in their projected contract savings.
Thirdly, the LFO spokesperson at Friday’s joint committee hearing showed his incompetence when he was asked about OGB personnel cost allocation calculations. He responded saying that LFO did not undertake a personnel allocation analysis in calculating how many employees currently involved in the OGB overall operations would or would not be needed to administer on-going OGB PPO plan administrative functions such as accounting for participant premium payments and claims processing and payments and therefore assumed that they all would be terminated. And did any of the legislators know enough to question him as to why this dereliction of duty existed? No! Not one. I’d bet dollars to donuts that if staffing levels in their business were made without calculating workloads they’d know about it and those hiring unnecessary employees would be looking for work elsewhere.
Lastly, when one of Jindal’s legislative shills asked Kristy Nichols if the contract could be terminated after one year, knowing that the answer was yes, did he think to ask if there would be anything left of OGB to take back the administrative functions? Assuming that he has never been involved in the sale of a business enterprise, let me answer that question for him. Hell NO! Skilled personnel, systems, infrastructure , etc. will be long gone, never to be reconstructed again. When you privatized this important function, you privatized it FOREVER. It may go to a different TPA but it will NOT come back in-house. EVER!
In summary, there were enough bogus cost savings presented as being realized by entering into this contract that will not result that had they been excluded would have resulted in showing that this contract will significantly cost, not save, the PPO plan and taxpayers money.
Maybe United Healthcare’s lawyers will be interested in exploring these obvious accounting travesties. I’ll certainly make myself available to assist them.
Amen.
Wouldn’t it be fitting for every dollar that goes over what the State would have saved by using State employees be paid back by the little dictator and his cronies. As this looks like a form of stealing, Jindal and his cronies should have to pay, (out of their pockets), for the poor decisions that has been forced on the people and the State employees of Louisiana. Based on the decisions made by followers of Jindal to think for themselves due to their lack of courage to stand up for what’s right, hopefully, all this will come true and they will be forced to pay for their poor decision(s) and answer to the people of Louisiana.
Are we really certain that Jindal’s first name is Piyush? I’m thinking that Spellcheck did that. His real first name has got to be Putsch.
Do not bet on the Courts correcting this. Jindal and Teepell, through their super pac, are buying the Supreme Court seat for Jefferson Davis Hughes III. Notice that J. Hughes had a superpac do a openly attack President Obama and promote Hughes as against all things federal—especially civil rights. I thought this was prohibited under the Judicial rules for campaigning. Oh well, money talks and rest of us better get in lock step.
Well it’s only a baby step but I will definitely vote for Hughes opponent in the runoff.
I do not favor or disfavor the socalled privatization of OGB’s PPO portion. However, in light of recent activity and actions, I cannot help but wonder what would the repercussions be if something like this were to take place with the board of directors of a publicly traded major company? At the very best its corporate governance would be seriously questioned and it is quite possible that stronger enforcement for its missteps might take place. We the citizens of this state in a sense are the stockholders of a corporation, our state (after all we are the ones who pay for its operating costs). I am let down at best with these recent events.
All across Louisiana, public and private schools are conducting anti-bullying campaigns. The anti-bullying campaign seeks tolerance.
It’s ironic because the biggest bully in Louisiana is Governor Bobby Jindal.
Governor Jindal has no taste for tolerance.
Bully defined says aggressive person or person who intimidates or frightens.
That’s Governor Jindal.
He may not be like Butch and Worm from the Little Rascals, but his desires are the same.
He bullies his staff. If you speak out against his wishes, you are fired.
He bullies the legislature. If you speak out against his wishes, you get kicked off your committee assignment and your area is starved, even if it means human suffering.
He bullies teachers. In bullying his education reform package through the submissive legislature he pointed his finger at teachers and called them all bad, bad, bad, spending lots of campaign money he cajoled across the country.
Governor Jindal doesn’t raise a fist or throw a punch to bully. Governor Jindal uses his executive power to demean, defile and defeat anyone who does not obey and pay homage.
His national political aspirations are his top priority, not the economic and medical needs of Louisiana citizens.
If our schools are trying to stop playground bullies, Governor Jindal is setting a bad example.
Kids, don’t grow up to be like Governor Jindal.
If you behave at school like he does in his mansion, you will get suspended or detention.