Opinion: Luzerne County has unhealthy stance on right to know
OPINION
The [Hazleton] Standard-Speaker
Much of the talk in Washington these days centers on how to relieve hard-strapped taxpayers squeezed by exploding health-care costs and insurance premiums.
But taxpayers here in Luzerne County deserve a little health-care reform closer to home, under the dome of the county courthouse.
For decades, attorneys who work part-time for the county or county courts have been provided health insurance benefits or payment in lieu of benefits.
Why?
"That's the way it's always been done," Human Resources Director Doug Richards told the Citizens' Voice, the Standard-Speaker's sister newspaper in Wilkes-Barre.
Who are they? How many? What's the cost? We can't tell you that, thanks to a county lawsuit aimed at blocking the newspaper from reviewing health-insurance documents.
We can tell you that your county government spent $7 million on health benefits last year - about $12,000 per employee. With the county planning to borrow $18 million this fall just to get through the year and a likely tax increase on the horizon for 2010, cutting health benefits for part-time employees should be on the table.
But we can't fully argue the point because the county refuses to reveal who those employees are. The county maintains that the release of such information would violate patient privacy rules under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPPA. That's a heap of you-know-what.
The Citizens' Voice, Standard-Speaker and the public are merely interested in knowing which employees are benefitting from county coverage. Any personal medical information could easily be redacted by the county.
The Pennsylvania Office of Open Records agreed with our position when it recently ordered the county to turn over the information, with any personal medical information edited out, under the state Right-To-Know Law. But the county has filed a court appeal of that decision.
We'll continue to press our request for what we believe are public documents.
But in the meantime, we call on the county commissioners to reveal how many part-time employees receive health benefits and at what cost. That is the minimum information the public needs to engage in an informed debate over whether those benefits should continue.
The [Hazleton] Standard-Speaker
Much of the talk in Washington these days centers on how to relieve hard-strapped taxpayers squeezed by exploding health-care costs and insurance premiums.
But taxpayers here in Luzerne County deserve a little health-care reform closer to home, under the dome of the county courthouse.
For decades, attorneys who work part-time for the county or county courts have been provided health insurance benefits or payment in lieu of benefits.
Why?
"That's the way it's always been done," Human Resources Director Doug Richards told the Citizens' Voice, the Standard-Speaker's sister newspaper in Wilkes-Barre.
Who are they? How many? What's the cost? We can't tell you that, thanks to a county lawsuit aimed at blocking the newspaper from reviewing health-insurance documents.
We can tell you that your county government spent $7 million on health benefits last year - about $12,000 per employee. With the county planning to borrow $18 million this fall just to get through the year and a likely tax increase on the horizon for 2010, cutting health benefits for part-time employees should be on the table.
But we can't fully argue the point because the county refuses to reveal who those employees are. The county maintains that the release of such information would violate patient privacy rules under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPPA. That's a heap of you-know-what.
The Citizens' Voice, Standard-Speaker and the public are merely interested in knowing which employees are benefitting from county coverage. Any personal medical information could easily be redacted by the county.
The Pennsylvania Office of Open Records agreed with our position when it recently ordered the county to turn over the information, with any personal medical information edited out, under the state Right-To-Know Law. But the county has filed a court appeal of that decision.
We'll continue to press our request for what we believe are public documents.
But in the meantime, we call on the county commissioners to reveal how many part-time employees receive health benefits and at what cost. That is the minimum information the public needs to engage in an informed debate over whether those benefits should continue.
