To Run Nov. 28, 1992: 
Viola Stadts 
Nov. 23, 1992 
Miss Viola A. Stadts, Of Harris Road, Camillas, N.y., Died At Community 
Hospital, Syracuse.

Avoca 
Airport Reported In Black 
Assistant Airport Director Wy Mcgowell Said The Wilkes-barre/scranton 
International Airport Is In The Black With Revenues Of $93,563.77.

Sunday, November 29, 1992 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Page: 3B QUICK WORDS: HEALTH CARE 





U.S. needs total health-care plan for everyone &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 (COMMENTARY) &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; by Tom Bigler &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Times Leader Columnist &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 There are shocking consequences to the refusal of the U.S. Supreme Court to
disturb the decision of the lower courts upholding the right of private
employers to dump critically ill employees. However, we don't blame the
courts. We blame the Congress for the weak law it wrote, and we blame
employers who make a mockery of their promises to their employees. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 The law in question is the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Adopted
in 1974, it was hailed as providing federal assurance that the pension, health
and welfare benefits provided by most employers would be enforced, and for
those who complied with federal regulations, would be guaranteed by the
federal government. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Typically, the law contains a number of exceptions, including what amounts
to an almost total exemption for employers who opt to become self-insured.
That is, employers who assume the guarantees themselves rather than comply
with the federal program or pay for private insurance, have more escape
hatches than Houdini. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 In defense of the employers it needs to be understood that soaring health
care costs in the succeeding 18 years have forced more and more of them --
including many state and local governments -- to drop private insurers and to
assume the burden of self-insurance. Private insurers have had to reflect in
their premiums the extraordinary increases in charges and fees levied by the
whole range of health care providers. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 A consequence is that health care costs currently account for between 35
and 45 percent of the cost of labor to many employers, public as well as
private. Nothing in their long range planning or the commitments made to their
employees, envisioned such costs. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Among the results of self-insurance, however, have been some defaults with
awful consequences for the beneficiaries. Pension funds that were invested
back into the employer operations, for example, were too often being used to
delay the collapse of a failing operation or to launch a hopelessly risky
venture. One result has been a rash of lost pension benefits and the sudden
pauperization of retired employees. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Similarly, unregulated or inadequately regulated self-insurance plans have
resulted in an increasing number of cases in which the health benefits for
some retirees have been eliminated and the benefits for some current employees
curtailed, with severe consequences for the affected beneficiaries. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 The decision that was sustained by the Supreme Court earlier this month
involved an employee of a music store in Houston, Texas, who, when he filed a
claim for health care for an AIDS-related illness, was advised the $1 million
health benefits protection promised by his employer had been cut, as a result,
to $5,000. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Treatment of AIDS-related illnesses is notoriously expensive. But that can
be equally true for some cases of Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, leukemia and some
other cancers, and for such other illnesses as degenerative neurological and
muscular ailments for which long-term intensive care is involved. Notably, it
was made clear in the findings of the courts that it was not the disease --
was not AIDS -- but was the cost of treatment regardless of the ailment, that
made it legal under the existing law for qualified employers to abandon
otherwise binding agreements. Cost, then, rather than the quantity and quality
of promised benefits became the criteria for both the law and the employer as
to how binding a commitment is. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 egal, the courts say. But ethical? Obviously, the ability to default is not
ethical to the abandoned employees and retirees. But management argues that
its first responsibility is to the business and its survival and to the
investors to whom the business belongs. It would be unethical to bankrupt an
otherwise healthy enterprise merely to satisfy a commitment, especially when
the resulting bankruptcy would compel abandonment of that commitment anyway. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 What is missing, then, from the ability of employers to adopt
self-insurance, is the implied guarantee of protections by the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act -- that if the employer fails to keep its
promises, the federal government will deliver the protection. And there is
reason to question whether the federal -- or any other -- government should
accept such a responsibility. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 To a large degree, that back-up doesn't exist, except for a shrinking
number of employers, because both the administration and the Congress saw the
potential cost and both wanted to appear generous without being obligated to
be generous. They tried to please everyone, but have wound up serving no one. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 As often happens, promises have a habit of coming due -- only too often to
find the cupboard bare, nobody home, and the safety net in shreds. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 What the courts discovered in this case is that there are huge escape
hatches in the existing law. What the case offers the nation is another
argument for adoption of a national health care program. Rather than more of
the empty promises, band aids, and cosmetics of the past, or the half-measures
and jerrybuilt compromises that comprise most of the current proposals, is a
solid, effective and truly comprehensive national, cradle-to-the-grave health
care system for everyone. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Tom Bigler is a Times Leader columnist. HIs column appears on Sunday and
Wednesday.

U.s. Needs Total 
Health-care Plan 
For Everyone 
(commentary) 
By Tom Bigler 
Times Leader Columnist 
There Are Shocking Consequences To The Refusal Of The U.s. Supreme Court To

U.s. Needs Total Health-care Plan For Everyone (commentary) By Tom Bigler Times Leader Columnist There Are Shocking Consequences To The Refusal Of The U.s. Supreme Court To