Saturday, July 29, 2006

Feedback from the Hearings on Wednesday

Got this via email from someone who was at the hearing Wednesday:

Hello- I was at the hearing yesterday about chip and iee. Two important
items stood out for me.

1-- I believe we all understand the 5 yr. contract period to have begun in 1/06 or 12/05 and that there is approx. 4.5 yrs. left in the contract. Hawkins was saying that the 5 yrs. begins when full rollout begins. Uresti then asks - does this mean this is a 10 yr. or 20 yr. contract? Hawkins is saying - well we don't know-Huh? are we going to be working into the next millenium on this?

2-- I have understood that if this contract adventure does not work out, the eligibility would revert back to the state. I seem to recall this as something that was mentioned as the fall back position to coax us into supporting integrated eligibility. But no, I was wrong and naive. HHSC atty. Steve Aragon was saying that if, and it's not going to happen because the contract is going to work, but if the contract were to fail, we would have to look for someone else. Not, this will go back to the state, but get used to being private because that's what's happening whether we like it or not. I think this is a new spin position of hhsc.


Anonymous said...

Our best hope for the future is that we get some of these Accenture funded politicians out of Austin in November. Hopefully by then someone can stop this trainwreck before it becomes too big of a mess to fix. I wonder if it's not already too late.

Anonymous said...

It would be too embarrassing to back down. Then the State employees could say "Told you so!"
They are going through with this come hell or high water. Is there a hidden agenda here. Save money by people no getting the benefits?
We have got to get out and campaign this fall.

Anonymous said...

Another thing in the presentation is...WE have lost over 4,000 employees since HB 2292 was signed. ALOT isn't it?

Anonymous said...

What I read on that presentation makes it look like we've lost 6000 employees. It says "If staffed at the FY 2002 level, the current eligibility model would require more than 13,000 staff - an increase of 7000 over current staffing levels". I'm sure those of us who are seeing at least 10 appointments per day (on a GOOD day) can attest to the enormous loss of staff. Here's the URL to that presentation.