RE: SAIF & Liberty

[Guest guest]

OR DCs,

I went to a forum last week put on by the

Oregon Health Forum with presentations from pro- and opponents of M-38.

The proponents were from Oregonians for

Accountability (read Liberty NW) and were represented by Liberty’s lobbiest and a political consultant.

The opponents were represented by the lobbiest from NFIB and an insurance

broker. These four have held forums all over the place and maybe they

have graced your town, C of C, local forum, etc. They put on a good show.

Liberty has had a hard-on (sorry) for SAIF for years, finds it hard to

compete and grouses (legitimately) about SAIF’s power in the market to

strike sweetheart deals with certain industries, redline others and play pretty

rough with brokers and others that don’t toe the line.

The pro- pitch is that it’s

anti-competitive, big govermint, squashing free enterprise, etc, etc.

The con- pitch is that it saves Oregon business a ton of

money and keeps a competitive edge for the state.

Hard to argue with either position.

Chiros’ general bad taste with SAIF

aside, it seems to be pretty good public policy to have a SAIF, private

competitors like Liberty

and self-insured employers in a so-called blended system. Evidence from

other states that have gone from state-controlled work comp to private insurance

(MI and NV recently) is mixed. Cost generally goes up.

The down-side is that it takes a vigilant

legislature to keep a basically government-owned dominant player (if not an

outright monopoly) under control. Liberty’s

point is that the Oregon Leg has basically caved in. Maybe more savy

political heads can weigh in here. Rep Barnhart may have it right.

This voter is a bit PO’d

that what looks like a corporate battle has been tossed to the voters in a

co-opted initiative process.

I listened to both sides and will vote “no”

on M-38. Most of the folks in the room (health care types mostly) weren’t

too sympathetic with the pros either.

Check the link http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov22004/g04_meas.html.

Attached is the text of the measure.

C Simpson

From: s,

D.C. [mailto:drbobdc@...]

Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004

3:48 PM

Oregondcs

Subject: SAIF &

Liberty

On the subject of SAIF....

If SAIF is absolved (due to it's " out of control " behavior)

(but, remember, it was Kulongoski who helped set-up SAIF in it's

current incarnation) does anyone know where the $$$ goes?

Has anyone read the measure? (I haven't) Does it even

discuss where the BILLIONS (i.e., 14 years of reserves) goes? Who gets to

spend that money....?

Yes, that's right, dear ol' Kulongoski. Are we gonna vote to give

him umpteen billions of dollars to throw into the general fund, and pay all of

his cronies " consulting fees " for the rest of their lives? I'm

not voting for that!

Let's let SAIF and Liberty

continue to battle it out! Then we can use Kulongoski's own

rhetoric against SAIF, and battle to get our attending physician status

restored within worker's compensation!!

That's my political thought for the day (I need a break!!

M. s, D.C.

OregonDCs

rules:

1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose

of the listserve is to foster communication and collegiality. No personal

attacks on listserve members will be tolerated.

2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and

last name.

3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could

end up anywhere. However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy,

print, forward, or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another

member without his or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been

removed.

[Guest guest]

Did I write "absolved"??? LOL, I guess that's what I get for using the "next best choice" under spell check (how about inserting "dissolved"?

SAIF & Liberty

On the subject of SAIF....

If SAIF is absolved (due to it's "out of control" behavior) (but, remember, it was Kulongoski who helped set-up SAIF in it's current incarnation) does anyone know where the $$$ goes?

Has anyone read the measure? (I haven't) Does it even discuss where the BILLIONS (i.e., 14 years of reserves) goes? Who gets to spend that money....?

Yes, that's right, dear ol' Kulongoski. Are we gonna vote to give him umpteen billions of dollars to throw into the general fund, and pay all of his cronies "consulting fees" for the rest of their lives? I'm not voting for that!

Let's let SAIF and Liberty continue to battle it out! Then we can use Kulongoski's own rhetoric against SAIF, and battle to get our attending physician status restored within worker's compensation!!

That's my political thought for the day (I need a break!!

M. s, D.C. OregonDCs rules:1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve members will be tolerated.2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere. However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward, or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

[Guest guest]

Listserv,

I've been torn about this issue also. Here's what I know from personal experience. Maybe it'll help you to make up your mind on this measure:

1. My billing secretary and office manager consistantly tell me that Liberty NW claim reps are difficult, rude and downright non-responsive more often than not.

2. Liberty NW has never extended a request to cont. treatment. They usually ignore requests.

3. Liberty NW has used silent PPOs and caused me to lose hundreds of dollars by forcing me to either accept the reduced fee schedule or take them to court over the PPO they claim I'm a member of. SInce they have more money to drag it out in court then me, my attorney advised me to just "cut my losses" and accept the lower fees. Liberty actually made me keep accepting the lower fee for 8 months because they claimed it took that long to accept my 'resignation' from their siletn PPO. This even tho I could eventually prove that I didn't sign the contract they claim I did. (because it didn't exsist.)

4. SAIF claim reps are willing to work with our treatment plans even when they go over the 30 day 12 OV limit. They've actually extended them when we write a report to show rationale for cont care.

5. SAIF claim reps return calls to my staff in a timely fashion more often than not.

6. SAIF premiums are lower than liberty NW. (ALtho I am not with either for my office. I am with the Hartford).

Minga Guerrero DC

In a message dated 10/6/2004 4:55:56 PM Pacific Standard Time, csimpson@... writes:

OR DCs,

I went to a forum last week put on by the Oregon Health Forum with presentations from pro- and opponents of M-38.

The proponents were from Oregonians for Accountability (read Liberty NW) and were represented by Liberty’s lobbiest and a political consultant. The opponents were represented by the lobbiest from NFIB and an insurance broker. These four have held forums all over the place and maybe they have graced your town, C of C, local forum, etc. They put on a good show.

Liberty has had a hard-on (sorry) for SAIF for years, finds it hard to compete and grouses (legitimately) about SAIF’s power in the market to strike sweetheart deals with certain industries, redline others and play pretty rough with brokers and others that don’t toe the line.

The pro- pitch is that it’s anti-competitive, big govermint, squashing free enterprise, etc, etc.

The con- pitch is that it saves Oregon business a ton of money and keeps a competitive edge for the state.

Hard to argue with either position.

Chiros’ general bad taste with SAIF aside, it seems to be pretty good public policy to have a SAIF, private competitors like Liberty and self-insured employers in a so-called blended system. Evidence from other states that have gone from state-controlled work comp to private insurance (MI and NV recently) is mixed. Cost generally goes up.

The down-side is that it takes a vigilant legislature to keep a basically government-owned dominant player (if not an outright monopoly) under control. Liberty’s point is that the Oregon Leg has basically caved in. Maybe more savy political heads can weigh in here. Rep Barnhart may have it right.

This voter is a bit PO’d that what looks like a corporate battle has been tossed to the voters in a co-opted initiative process.

I listened to both sides and will vote “no†on M-38. Most of the folks in the room (health care types mostly) weren’t too sympathetic with the pros either.

Check the link http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov22004/g04_meas.html. Attached is the text of the measure.

C Simpson

From: s, D.C. [mailto:drbobdc@...] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 3:48 PMOregondcsSubject: SAIF & Liberty

On the subject of SAIF....

If SAIF is absolved (due to it's "out of control" behavior) (but, remember, it was Kulongoski who helped set-up SAIF in it's current incarnation) does anyone know where the $$$ goes?

Has anyone read the measure? (I haven't) Does it even discuss where the BILLIONS (i.e., 14 years of reserves) goes? Who gets to spend that money....?

Yes, that's right, dear ol' Kulongoski. Are we gonna vote to give him umpteen billions of dollars to throw into the general fund, and pay all of his cronies "consulting fees" for the rest of their lives? I'm not voting for that!

Let's let SAIF and Liberty continue to battle it out! Then we can use Kulongoski's own rhetoric against SAIF, and battle to get our attending physician status restored within worker's compensation!!

That's my political thought for the day (I need a break!!

M. s, D.C.

OregonDCs rules:1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve members will be tolerated.2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere. However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward, or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed. OregonDCs rules:1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve members will be tolerated.2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere. However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward, or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.

[Guest guest]



I would add that it has taken four years to get our proposed Worker's Compensation Cost Comparison study to this point....comparing all of the direct and indirect costs of medical care for common musculoskeletal injuries vs. chiropractic costs. Our study will need the volunteer corroperation of SAIF Corp. to be run and they are under great pressure right now I say support these folks!

BTW we have gotten the same BS response from Liberty's claims reps as well.

Vern Saboe, DC

SAIF & Liberty

On the subject of SAIF....

If SAIF is absolved (due to it's "out of control" behavior) (but, remember, it was Kulongoski who helped set-up SAIF in it's current incarnation) does anyone know where the $$$ goes?

Has anyone read the measure? (I haven't) Does it even discuss where the BILLIONS (i.e., 14 years of reserves) goes? Who gets to spend that money....?

Yes, that's right, dear ol' Kulongoski. Are we gonna vote to give him umpteen billions of dollars to throw into the general fund, and pay all of his cronies "consulting fees" for the rest of their lives? I'm not voting for that!

Let's let SAIF and Liberty continue to battle it out! Then we can use Kulongoski's own rhetoric against SAIF, and battle to get our attending physician status restored within worker's compensation!!

That's my political thought for the day (I need a break!!

M. s, D.C.

OregonDCs rules:1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve members will be tolerated.2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere. However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward, or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed. OregonDCs rules:1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve members will be tolerated.2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name.3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere. However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward, or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed.