1/10/18, Maine First Media Staff Report,
A Leftist group in Maine, with criminal ties, is trying to fool Mainers into signing a petition — and then voting for — a money funneling scheme.
The Marxist Pedophile Authority (or so-called Maine People’s Alliance) is pushing a petition for Universal Home Care.
If they collect 61,123 valid signatures 90-days before the end of the legislative session (a February deadline), Mainers will vote on MPA’s friendly-sounding Universal Home Care program proposal.
They tell Mainers Universal Home Care will provide in-home and community care to any Mainer in need of medical assistance. They play at the heartstrings by pointing their efforts toward the elderly and disabled.
However, the costs or the program are astronomical while providing little actual benefit. The real winner in MPA’s plot is forced unionization. Maine First Media will dive deeper into all three of these points throughout this report.
Rep. Deb Sanderson (R-Chelsea) is the ranking Republican on the Health and Human Services Committee. Rep. Sanderson was first elected in 2010. Ever since, healthcare issues, like these, have been her first priority — in particular fighting the expansion of Medicaid to the young and healthy and attempting to clear the waitlist of elderly and disabled Mainers in need of care.
Rep. Sanderson is arguably the foremost expert in the Maine House of Representatives on topics such as these.
She believes caring for Maine’s most vulnerable citizens is a top priority. And while she favors increased funding for in-home services, she says MPA’s approach is misguided.
She also questions MPA’s credibility in this ballot initiative push.
“I am absolutely dumbfounded that they use the waitlists to push their agenda,” Rep. Sanderson said. “These are the very same people who poo-pooed my battle against Medicaid expansion and other expensive policy programs for this very reason — so we could clear the wait list and adequately fund care for seniors in their own homes!”
Rep. Sanderson goes on to question the timing of MPA’s involvement.
“This is a battle I have been fighting for six years, but now they say it’s important,” Rep. Sanderson asked. “If this were true, they would have pushed, right alongside me for the last six years. But no, their agenda is backward. They (MPA) had to increase eligibility for Planned Parenthood services (sic) first…They had to pass Medicaid expansion first — free healthcare for non-disabled adults (sic) first. That is going to break our budget to fund that monster, and if they think we are going to be able to fund universal homecare for everyone over 65, after passing Medicaid expansion, they are completely bonkers.”
While MPA claims every Mainer that needs care will receive it under this plan, the proposal itself doesn’t actually fulfill that promise.
In fact, little of the money collected by the Universal Home Care program would actually go to the people the program is supposed to help.
The proposal demands 77% of all funds go to “direct worker costs.” In other words, it’s a slush fund to increase wages of nursing aids at a high cost to hardworking Mainers. Not that nursing aids aren’t hardworking. Most are. However, the rest of Maine shouldn’t be penalized just to jack up wages for one particular job title.
That leaves 23% of the funding remaining for actual care costs for elderly and disabled Mainers. But not really. You see, administrative costs will come out of this 23%. And administrative costs typically account for about a quarter of a hospital’s budget.
It is then fair to predict about 25% of the remaining 23% will be allotted for administrative costs.
Leaving only about 17% of the fund actually benefiting elderly and disabled Mainers.
Furthermore, the language of the proposal itself makes it clear universal care is NOT guaranteed.
The program would allow an overseeing board of directors to “curtail services” if demand outweighs funding (which it undoubtedly will).
According to the proposal:
“If demand for services for eligible persons exceeds available funds, the board shall curtail services. When curtailing services, the board may provide varying levels of service to eligible persons depending on an assessment of their needs. The board may allocate an amount of funding for each assessment level and restrict the total amount of services provided to eligible persons in that assessment level to the funding amount allocated to that level.”
This means Mainers will be paying heavily into a system they have been sold guarantees in-home and community care for their elderly and disabled neighbors — but in reality, board members overseeing the program can diminish services any time they see fit.
And just how heavily will Mainers be paying into this slush fund?
If this dangerous referendum is passed, using MPA’s own numbers, they would raise taxes on Mainers by at least $132-Million each year to fund the phony system.
However, MPA’s numbers don’t add up. They claim the tax hikes will fully fund the program. But they also claim 10,000 Mainers need this service now. And by 2030, that number balloons to 110,000.
They also estimate home care costs at around $54,000 for each individual. For 10,000 people that’s $540-Million!
By 2030, assuming the cost of care stayed that same (which it wouldn’t, it would increase at least along the lines of inflation) the number would skyrocket to nearly $6-Billion!
These numbers suggest their board will be doing a lot of curtailing of services.
Rep. Sanderson believes a better approach would be to gradually increase funding for those already on the waitlist for services and then slowly increase the number of Mainers eligible as the state catches up.
“We need to have a strong network of community and in-home services for seniors and our disabled,” Rep. Sanderson said. “It is the front line of defense ahead of more expensive, “in-facility” care. However, policies like this passed at the polls are dangerous because while yes, they are something we’d all like to see, there is a very real fiscal impact that can be incredibly damaging in other areas.”
Rep. Sanderson points out that when combining the huge costs of Universal Home Care with the $40-Million shortfall in fully funding the current waitlist, and of course, the more than $50-Million estimated for the recently expanded Medicaid program — raising taxes won’t be enough, needed services will have to be cut. This could include school budget cuts, infrastructure cuts, a reduction of revenue sharing with municipalities and more.
The real boondoggle in this proposal is the establishment of “constituency associations,” or in other words, unions recognized by the Universal Home Care board.
And since Maine is a forced-unionism state, home health workers will likely be forced to join the quasi-unions.
That’s what MPA’s effort is really about — raising taxes and forcing more workers into unions all under the guise of a nicely-named program supposedly about caring for Maine’s elderly and disabled.
The proof is in the language of the bill.
(NOTE: This is not the only referendum the Marxist Pedophile Authority is pushing for in 2018. Maine First Media reported earlier this week on MPA’s Ranked-Choice Voting scheme to steal elections with a failed voting system. The report includes a breakdown of millions in out-of-state money involved in the plot.)
This is not a Universal Home Care referendum. It is a Union Slush Fund referendum — raising taxes $132-Million to line the union hierarchy’s campaign war chest.
Our elderly and disabled Mainers deserve better!
Meanwhile, Rep. Sanderson has a question for MPA:
“It’s time the Maine People’s Alliance comes to the table with ideas of where we can get boatloads of money that will NOT hurt Maine’s growing economy, NOT tax the hell out of our businesses and NOT burden Maine citizens anymore,” Rep. Sanderson said. “Their grandiose ideas of ‘everything should be free’ is nothing more than a pipe dream. Nothing is free. Somebody has to pay for it. So, what say you Maine People’s Alliance? Which services are you willing to say ‘bye-bye’ to?”
One thing is for sure, MPA won’t say goodbye to any benefits to their friends in the union hierarchy they’re helping to fund.