Even when there was no reason for hope, Abraham kept hoping— Romans 4:18a (New Living Translation)
Recently, the word” hope” has been batted around on the national stage like a new tennis ball in a Wimbledon Grand Slam Tennis Competition. But in a few weeks, Massachusetts will celebrate a powerful undisputable symbol of “hope” – the second year anniversary of Chapter 58. Two years ago, those who had hoped, prayed and worked for quality universal healthcare, even when there seem to be no reason to hope, rejoiced over our new healthcare law. Two years later, this new, experimental law is itself a “hope” – an “endangered hope” – yet to be fully realized in an environment of escalating medical cost, deteriorating economic realities, and an expanding index of human greed.
Last week, this “endangered hope” was almost mortally wounded when the Connector considered loading onto the backs of the poor, sick and most vulnerable indefensible hikes in premiums, co-pays and out-of-pocket maximums, while ignoring insurers, employers and hospitals as possible solutions to the growing financial challenge of funding this reform. Dangerous!
Thankfully, the Connector delayed its vote until later this month. Rick Lord, in his WBUR Blog stated that these increases are reasonable and that “Until we unite to tackle cost drivers head on… this difficult choice is one we must face regularly.”
There is no argument that we must all unite to tackle cost drivers. The Senate President’s release of her cost containment package this week is an important and welcome beginning to this critical dialogue. But Mr. Lord is wrong in asserting that the proposed cost-sharing increases are reasonable. To the contrary, they are dangerous! To my parishioner, Keith Rudolph, and thousands like him, the proposed changes are punitive and potentially harmful.
Keith Rudolph lives with this wife and 2 children in Worcester. He drives a truck for a local company. His family of four is on a fixed income, he is the sole bread winner as his wife is disabled and stays home to care for their 12 year old and 4 year old who has autism.
The financial strains on this family include the high cost of housing, heat and gas. Keith also pays $919 dollars a month in child support for his older children. He works 50-55 hours a week, depending on whether he can get extra shifts at work, and he sometimes drives a tour bus on Saturdays to earn extra money.
Keith recently enrolled in Commonwealth Care and pays $105/month in premiums. Under the current proposal his premiums would jump to $120/month. Keith is currently being monitored by a doctor for his blood sugar level and sleep apnea which require frequent visits to the doctor. Co-pays for these visits are expected to double. Depending on the outcome of his tests, co-pays for prescriptions may also double. In total, the Rudolph family is looking at increased costs of $15-$50 dollars each month – a significant increase in an incredibly tight family budget. Multiply this real story, by the thousands of others who share similar circumstances, and one can easily imagine how the hope of lasting health reform in our Commonwealth is truly “endangered”. Be clear, such action will threaten the very ones that the reform was birthed to protect.
On the other hand, we agree with the conclusion of Celia Wcislo’s, a Connector Board member, blog:
“The proposed course of dramatic cost-shifting to consumers, the state, and taxpayers is neither a short-term nor a long-term solution for funding healthcare reform. Why must working families and taxpayers shoulder the burden alone? Clearly, new revenue sources from hospitals, insurers, and from businesses who fail to provide affordable coverage to their employees, must be considered. “
Finally, we must remember that for families like the Rudolph’s health care is no longer an optional line-item in their family budget. They are now mandated to buy health insurance. If 14% increases in the affordability schedule are going to become an annual norm, the Massachusetts individual mandate experiment will quickly fail as the notion of affordability becomes a cruel joke.
GBIO, the Rudolphs, and thousands of others pray, work and “hope”………for a different conclusion!
Rev. Hurmon E. Hamilton, Jr
Senior Pastor of Roxbury Presbyterian Church USA
Chairman and CEO of Roxbury Presbyterian Church Social Impact Center, Inc.
President of the Greater Boston Interfaith Organization




According to a story in the business section of the March 1 Worcester Telegram and Gazette, the Bay State’s HMOs had a very profitable year in 2007. The Fallon Community Health Plan had net income of $15.1 million on revenues of $916.2 million. Harvard Pilgrim saw income of $45.6 million on revenue of $2.5 billion. Tufts had a net income of $110 million on revenues of $2.2 billion. Lastly, BCBS HMO Blue earned $63.1 million on revenues of $4.5 billion. Executive compensations for the year were similarly impressive, here is the breakdown:
Fallon CEO Eric Shultz–$636,698
Harvard Pilgrim’s Charles Baker–$1.3 million
Tufts CEO James Roosevelt, Jr.–$1.1 million
BCBS CEO Cleve Killingsworth–$3.6 million
Now do we really need to ask who is benefiting from health reform?
Too bad you were such an ardent supporter of this scam and didn’t see this coming. This hasn’t been about health care from the get-go and as a man of faith, you believed what the state was telling you. Welcome to the real world.
Now let us pray this nightmare comes to a swift end before too many hard-working residents are hurt. There are at least 300,000 paying penalties which will subsidize the freebie plans while the penalty-payers can’t pay their bills and still have no insurance.
Your friends at the Connector don’t care. They just need money whether it’s from penalties or premiums so the state can meet its part of the deal with Washington for the waiver money to continue. And if this policy fails sooner than later, it’s not a big deal for them – they made a ton of money in salaries and have their Golden Parachutes.
Meanwhile, our legislators, Winkem, Blinkem and Nod, continue on their merry way supporting this mess despite what they hear from constituents because their leaders told them to do so.
We agree with Rev. Hamilton’s description of Commonwealth Care members and the effects of the proposed premium and co-payment increases on them. Our clients also face these same daily struggles of paying for basic necessities, including medical care. The costs of this program should not be borne on the backs of those least able to afford it; those for whom a $5 monthly increase means a $5 monthly decrease in food. There are other opportunities available for funding this program and these should be explored before the working poor and penalized. These families should also have some stability in their lives with regards to the cost of these programs. Commonwealth Care members should not fear doubling or tripling their health care costs because of this system. We should seek lasting solutions so Commonwealth Care member can get the care they need.
Barbara Anthony, Esq.
Executive Director
Health Law Advocates