Dark Waters is a must see

On Friday, I went to see the movie “Dark Waters” about a long uphill battle some West Virginia families had against Dupont. Mark Ruffalo stars and co-produces the film, playing the attorney, Rob Bilott, who fought so long and hard as a favor to his grandmother. The movie also stars Anne Hathaway as his wife, Tim Robbins as his managing partner and Bill Pullman and is directed by Todd Haynes. Some of the families impacted by Dupont and involved in the court cases show up in cameos throughout the movie.

The movie is a must see. Your emotions will flow with Bilott’s throughout the movie. You will be inspired by his courage and tenacity and that of the first client a farmer named Wilbur Tennant, ably played by Bill Camp. You will also be saddened by how a company could cover-up for decades they were harming their employees, community and the buying public. Yes, we too, are also impacted by this story. Not to spoil the plot any further, but the word “Teflon” plays a key role.

Like “Erin Brockovich” before it, these movies should not have to be made. Companies need to do the right thing. Yet, when government agencies ask the companies and industry to police themselves, short cuts are made and information is hidden. Think Boeing for a recent example. Dupont is not very happy this movie was made. They should not be as it paints them many times over in a very poor light. They had many opportunities to do the right thing, but did not until their hand was forced. Even then, it had to be reinforced.

I will stop short here. Please go see it. Make sure the kids see it, as well. This is why our voices matter.

The torch passes to us

Our friend Jill wrote an excellent post (see link below) called “Why do we need bigotry?” In the comments, she and I discussed the passing of Holocaust survivors, at a time when white nationalism is on the rise along with hate crimes.

The torch passes to new generations to speak the hard truths about history:

– the Nazi movement purposefully captured Jews, intellectuals, gypsies, homosexuals and expunged multiple millions of human beings calling them less than human. This is genocide.

– the American settlers committed genocide, as well, on Native Americans first claiming rights to land and killing the Native Americans when they rose up in protest.

– Slavery has never been right dating back to the bible. It matters not who is being enslaved. It is wrong. Watching the movie “Harriet” about Harriet Tubman, the cumulative asset value of the slaves could exceed the value of the land, which is why people wanted to maintain this sinful way of life.

– Then, there are the enslavements and genocides around the world and over history. Sometimes the enslavement is tying low wage jobs to people at risk. This is economic slavery. This occurs today in the US and other countries and is not restricted to the Jim Crow period. Whether it is sex trafficking or suppressed migrant workers, it is wrong.

– Finally, we had the Lavendar Scare in the US, where homosexuals were fired from government jobs, even if they were highly proficient and experienced. This is after Brit Alan Turing helped shorten WWII, but had to hide that he was gay. He was arrested and humiliated before he died after being outed after the war.

Bigotry is not right. It is also unwise. If people are treated as possessions or suppressed then their intellectual capital cannot be allowed to flourish. Countries that suppress women and girls are competing in a world with half of their talent.

Let me leave you with the key line from Oscar Hammerstein in “South Pacific.” “You have to be carefully taught, by the time you are seven or eight. You have to be carefully taught to hate the people your parents hate.” Bigotry is not DNA driven. It is taught.

Why Do We Need Bigotry?

Three simple questions

With the building impeachment story of abuse of power based on the testimony of honorable and decent public servants, there are three questions to ask Republican lawmakers.

– why is the president operating shadow diplomacy led by an unvetted (by the Senate) person?

– is the person in the White House someone you want to spend your dear reputation on?

– what will you have to defend or rationalizs next week, next month and next year and do you even know whether he has already committed the act needing your defense?

Respected commenters Mark Shields and David Brooks noted in their weekly recap on PBS Newshour last night, the corruption we should be worried about is not in Ukraine – it is in the White House. Using Mike Pompeo as an example of spending a dear reputation, they vilifed Pompeo for his disgracing his Marine training of letting the troops eat first, by not defending his people.

I agree. A real leader defends his or her people, not throw them under the bus. Sadly, Pompeo is following his boss’ example. Trump will throw anyone under the bus for any reason, perceived or real.

Greta Thunberg joins a ninth grader in Charlotte for climate change strike

Her words were clear. We must “unite behind the science.” Sixteen year-old climate change activist Greta Thunberg joined ninth-grader Mary Ellis Stevens in Charlotte along with 1,200 other people for a climate change strike. I was one of the 1,200. Several young people spoke, with only a few adult voices making it to the dais. The crowd was multi-generational, multi-ethnic and multi-racial. It was wonderful to witness.

Below is a brief article from The Charlotte Observer on the strike. I was struck by several things she and others said.

– Thunberg made a point of referencing many of the indigenous tribes from our area. To me, this is representative of the saying “we are not inheriting our land from our forebears, we are borrowing it from our children.”
– a young UNCC student activist who is African-American noted that people of color are more impacted by climate change than other groups, yet they get under-represented at these events. The reason is the events are held during the working day, and not everyone has the luxury of getting away from work or school.
– Thunberg handled a heckler with the aplomb of a seasoned politician. After listening for a few seconds, she said why don’t you come back stage afterwards and we can talk about your comments?

I was incredibly proud of the young folks in attendance. I think Thunberg is a hero for her courage and candor. My favorite sign was from a young adult woman standing near me that said “You cannot renew lost time.” I told her that her sign was excellent. In my view, we have lost eleven years due to the Bush/ Cheney White House and the Trump White House. Good things have happened in spite of their lack of leadership on this topic, but these efforts could have been leveraged even more by concerted federal action.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article237108539.html

Climate change shout out

Earlier this week, the US president began the official process to abandon the rest of the world by leaving the Paris Climate Change Accord. As a response, I posted the following on the websites of many Democrat presidential candidates. Please feel free to modify and use accordingly.

“Please shout from the roof tops that if you win the presidency you will have the US rejoin the Paris Climate Change Accord the day of your inauguration. Leaving this agreement is poor stewardship of our planet and detrimental to our global leadership.

In less than three short years, we have recurringly ceded our global leadership role forsaking our allies and trading partners. We have also become less trustworthy because our president cannot be trusted. Rejoining Paris would be a huge step back to being a good neighbor.”

Half a dozen heroes to think about

My wife and I watched the movie “Harriet” on Friday about the American hero Harriet Tubman. She helped over 300 slaves find their way to freedom. Her courage, tenacity, faith and smarts are highly commendable. The movie is excellent and quite moving.

It got me thiking about a few other heroes. Let me mention three more historical heroes who need more notoriety, before I close with two current ones who deserve the shout out.

I have written before about Alan Turing, the father of modern day computing. He led a team that cracked the Nazi Enigma code used in secret transmissions. Allied Commander General Dwight Eisenhower said Turing and his team helped shorten the war by two years and save 750,000 lives. Sadly, Turing had to hide the fact he was gay and was later imprisoned after his sexual preferences were discovered. What if they had discovered he was gay in 1940 rather than 1950? Would those 750,000 people have died?

Two men who should get more acclaim are Elliott Richardson and William Ruckelshaus. What did they do? In October, 1973, they refused in succession to fire Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox at the direction of President Richard Nixon and were themselves fired. This was the beginning of the end of the Nixon presidency. Nixon called the Watergate investigation a “witch hunt” and said repeatedly “I am not a crook.” He was wrong on both counts. It wasn’t and he was.

A current hero is only sixteen years old, Greta Thunberg, the climate change activist from Sweden. She has inspired tens of millions kids, teens and adults in urging the need for more climate change action. I find her candor and can-do attitude refreshing. She has gotten the attention of legislators, but they need to act. We are behind where we need to be.

The other current hero is former US ambassador to Ukraine, Maria Yovanovitch. She was the first to testify to the House impeachment committees. Her political courage and respect for the US constitution is enviable. Her testimony led others to also brave testimony, especially in light of a vindictive president who they reiterated abused his powers. I cannot emphasize their courage enough, as more than a few Republican legislators feel the same but are not as courageous and fear the wrath of the president and his base.

Going against the grain in the face of adversity should be valued. Tubman freed herself and traversed over one hundred miles alone. Then she went back at great personal risk and freed more people. I applaud her and these other five people. We all should.

The most realistic path to ‘Medicare for All’ says a former Insurance CEO

I said back in 2010 to a healthcare consulting colleague, we will eventually need to consider national health insurance, but it won’t happen. When he asked why, I responded the “Healthcare industrial complex is too powerful.” People forget the reason we have the Affordable Care Act is CFOs were tired of rising healthcare costs to their bottom line.

Healthcare is a complex topic and the ACA added to that complexity. It has since gotten better, but we need to shore it up to stabilize it more, rather continue to allow it to be diminished as its opponents have down for several years.

But, national health care under the banner of “Medicare for All” is worthy of consideration with data and analysis. This retired actuary, benefits consultant and benefits manager supports data driven analysis to improve what we have and consider more substantive changes. JB Silvers, a former health insurance CEO and professor of health care finance at Case Western University, penned an article called “The most realistic path to ‘Medicare for All'” in The New York Times earlier this month. Here are excerpts from the article:

“Much to the dismay of single-payer advocates, our current health insurance system is likely to end with a whimper, not a bang. The average person simply prefers what we know versus the bureaucracy we fear.

But for entirely practical reasons, we might yet end up with a form of Medicare for All. Private health insurance is failing in slow motion, and all signs are that it will continue. It was for similar reasons that we got Medicare in 1965. Private insurance, under the crushing weight of chronic conditions and technologic breakthroughs (especially genetics), will increasingly be a losing proposition.

As a former health insurance company C.E.O., I know how insurance is supposed to work: It has to be reasonably priced, spread risks across a pool of policyholders and pay claims when needed. When companies can’t do those fundamental tasks and make a decent profit is when we will get single payer.

It’s already a tough business to be in. Right now the payment system for health care is just a mess. For every dollar of premium, administrative costs absorb up to 20 percent. That’s just too high, and it’s not the only reason for dissatisfaction.

Patients hate paying for cost-sharing in the form of deductibles and copays. Furthermore, narrow networks with a limited number of doctors and hospitals are good for insurers, because it gives them bargaining power, but patients are often left frustrated and hit with surprise bills.

As bad as these problems are, most people are afraid of losing coverage through their employers in favor of a government-run plan. Thus inertia wins — for now.

But there’s a reason Medicare for All is even a possibility: Most people like Medicare. It works reasonably well. And what could drive changes to our current arrangement is a disruption — like the collapse of private insurance.

There are two things insurers hate to do — take risks and pay claims. Before Affordable Care Act regulations, insurance companies cherry-picked for lower-risk customers and charged excessive rates for some enrollees…”

There is only one solution: pooling and financing many of the risks related to chronic and acute health care issues. A study by my former company noted generally 15% of participants drive 80% of the claims costs in any given year. It may not be the same 15%, but with major chronic issues, some could continue to be in the mix. The principle of insurance is to pool those risks, so that good risks can moderate the higher risks.

The ACA uses the private insurance system, exchanges and expanded Medicaid. Unfortunately, there are about 15 states who still have not expanded Medicaid. Medicare for All would consolidate the risk into one place, eliminating the profit load and reducing the relative administration cost of insurance companies. I have suggested for several years to do a pilot and expanded Medicare eligibility from age 65 to age 62, or even lower. This would let us measure the impact of such a change.

Yet, what we don’t need is this to become political. What people do not realize is the ACA has been sabotaged on several occasions by my former party which drove some insurers out of the market and increased premiums for everyone else more so than they otherwise would have been.

So, let’s cut to the chase and study options. And, politicians should let people who know what they are doing do the analysis. The ACA was made too complex and the exchange roll out was botched. On the flip side, what the GOP did in 2017 was sloppy and poorly staffed, so what was voted on woulf have been harmful to many.