Think of it as a strobe light.
On:
"Lawmakers targeted in probation inquiry; US attorney looking at Democrats who may have gained from Probation Dept. hiring" by Andrea Estes and Scott Allen | Globe Staff, July 15, 2012
Federal prosecutors investigating the scandal-plagued Probation Department are focusing on Democratic legislators who may have benefited from the agency’s allegedly rigged hiring system, including House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, one of the most influential politicians in helping people get jobs under former commissioner John J. O’Brien.
Another corrupt speaker. Must be a qualification for the job.
Related: Against All Odds: The Story of How the House Passed Casinos
It's easy in a dictatorship.
Prosecutors have subpoenaed several lawmakers to testify before a secret grand jury considering criminal charges in recent weeks, including Representative John Rogers, the Norwood lawmaker DeLeo defeated to become House speaker in 2009. Rogers’s supporters have long suspected that O’Brien helped DeLeo win by giving jobs to people close to legislators backing DeLeo, a charge both men deny.
People with direct knowledge of the grand jury proceedings in Worcester say that prosecutors have also called at least two legislators who voted for DeLeo for speaker after people close to them received probation jobs....
See: Boston Globe Probation Office Visit
No wonder this state has so many bulls*** laws. It's a political jobs program.
US Attorney Carmen M. Ortiz has been investigating the Legislature’s role in politicizing the hiring process at the Probation Department for months, even calling former House speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi from his prison cell in Kentucky to testify before the grand jury last winter.
I would guess that is why Sal must die, 'eh?
Update: Inmate says he escaped for treatment
And now that casinos are legal, it's time to dump DeLeo.
But in March, when Ortiz announced the first criminal indictments from the 20-month-long inquiry, only O’Brien and two former top lieutenants were named.
“This is just one step in the ongoing investigation,” Ortiz said at the time.
Since then, prosecutors have been ramping up efforts to identify actions taken by lawmakers that could be criminal, such as accepting probation jobs for family and friends or even campaign donations from probation employees in exchange for voting to increase the agency’s funding or to vote for a certain candidate for speaker. It is a violation for lawmakers to accept something of value in exchange for any official act.
DeLeo, who has described O’Brien as a friend, was one of the most successful legislators at helping people obtain jobs at probation, including his godson, Brian Mirasolo, who, at age 28, became the youngest chief probation officer in Massachusetts history.
But DeLeo strongly denies that he used his connections with O’Brien to win votes from fellow Democratic legislators for the speakership, which brought him a pay increase of more than $30,000 along with a larger staff and far greater influence over state policy.
“There is no way any individual can honestly testify that jobs were traded for votes for speaker, because it did not happen,” said DeLeo spokesman Seth Gitell.
Lying must be one of the qualifications for office in Massachusetts.
Paul F. Ware, the independent counsel who issued a damning report on the hiring practices at the Probation Department in 2010, said he surmises that federal prosecutors are now trying to negotiate a deal with O’Brien to get his cooperation in the investigation of politicians’ culpability.
“In terms of a criminal investigation, I think it’s predictable that the US attorney focus on political figures who may have had a lot more to gain” from Probation Department patronage than O’Brien, said Ware, a former federal prosecutor who is now a partner at Goodwin Procter in Boston.
O’Brien may be more motivated to cooperate since he was indicted on federal racketeering, conspiracy, and mail fraud charges that could result in up to 20 years in prison and $250,000 fines for each count if he is convicted. He also faces state bribery charges for allegedly funneling campaign donations by his employees to then-state Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill in exchange for a job for his wife at the state lottery, which Cahill oversaw. Cahill was not charged in the case, though a senior staff member was.
You can't even trust the stinking trea$urers in this state!
See: Cahill's Karma
Did you see who was at the bottom of it all?
O’Brien “has to be very concerned for his family, and he doesn’t want to spend the next 10 years in jail,” said Ware, adding that he has no direct knowledge of plea deal negotiations.
They didn't torture his kids like they do to get "terrorists" to confess, did they?
O’Brien’s new legal team, appointed to defend him in June after O’Brien said he could no longer afford his own lawyers, declined to comment on any aspect of the case.
A spokesman for Ortiz also declined comment, but one person who follows the investigation closely said that four assistant US attorneys joined in the questioning during recent grand jury sessions, which is more than usual, and their focus was clear: elected officials.
Git 'em!!
People who follow the investigation closely say that prosecutors’ interest in politicians extends back to former House speaker Thomas M. Finneran, a key architect of the probation hiring system.
Finneran pushed through a 2001 state budget amendment that gave O’Brien — a Finneran protege and sometime jogging partner — nearly complete control over hiring and firing in the 1,800-person agency. After that, probation’s budget, which is set by the Legislature, soared and by 2010, probation employed at least 250 people who were friends, supporters, or relatives of politicians and court officials, the Globe Spotlight Team found in 2010.
Legislative leaders had by far the most success in helping people get probation jobs, Ware found. Finneran’s successor, DiMasi, now serving an eight-year prison sentence on an unrelated corruption conviction, was so important to O’Brien that he had a folder to track DiMasi’s recommended candidates for jobs.
Over time, the politically motivated hiring process led to an explosion of less-qualified candidates winning jobs at probation, which is supposed to protect the public from criminals serving their sentences in the community....
They were more interested in protecting their friends, families, and bank accounts.
An amazing occurrence in the great state Democratic bastion of liberalism, 'eh?
Maybe the word STATE is the only operative and important word there, huh? The words wrapped around really don't mean shit, do they?
Prosecutors are particularly interested in the heated 2008 race in the House to succeed DiMasi, who became the third consecutive Massachusetts House speaker to be convicted of a crime. Initially, backers of Rogers thought they could get support from enough Democrats to win, but DeLeo ultimately got the speakership on Jan. 27, 2009, without a vote because Rogers withdrew in the face of eroding support.
In the spring of 2008, amid speculation that DiMasi might step down, the Legislature unexpectedly gave the Probation Department $6 million more than judicial officials requested. First, the House Ways and Means Committee, then chaired by DeLeo, recommended an additional $2.3 million more than Chief Justice for Administration and Management Robert Mulligan requested. Then, probation’s friends in the House increased funding by another $3.7 million.
Just doling out tax dollars while we were all facing increased taxes and cuts in services.
Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!
The windfall gave O’Brien more money for a flurry of hiring....
Former representative Charles Murphy of Burlington, who became the Ways and Means chairman after DeLeo, confirmed that he, too, testified in June....
Related: DeLeo Dropkicks Murphy
Maybe you should have treated him better, Bob!
--more--"
UPDATE: Former aides get immunity in probation probe
Time to turn that spotlight off:
"Health cost bill may not attack key problem; Market clout of top doctors, hospitals drives up premiums" by Liz Kowalczyk | Globe Staff, July 15, 2012
As legislative leaders close in on a major health care cost-control bill, key efforts to attack one of the most-cited reasons for rising medical spending — the market power of caregivers who demand high prices for their services — appear to be in jeopardy.
I can only gue$$ to the reasons why.
In a 2010 report, Attorney General Martha Coakley blamed the leverage of the best-paid providers as a main driver of health care costs. She found that insurers pay some hospitals and doctors twice as much money as others for similar care, because they have name-brand recognition or geographic dominance.
Related: The Massachusetts Model: The AG's Amnesia
Yeah, she didn't name names.
Legislators, too, believed that provider market clout might be driving up premiums for small businesses, and they directed a commission to find solutions.
Related: Memory Hole: Why the Nation Doesn't Need Massachusetts Health Care
That's the SPOTLIGHT, and yet they need more investigation?
Now, the impact of two major proposals in the House plan that are intended to level the playing field — a one-time luxury tax on high-priced providers and restrictions on contract negotiations — is in doubt after lobbying by hospitals.
Also see: The Perils of One-Party Politics: Massachusetts Democracy
So what changes were made before they sent it over for passage?
The Senate proposal, meanwhile, takes a more indirect approach to the problem, including establishing another commission to dig deeper for the reasons for price differences and requirements to publicly track price inequities....
Actually, it is NO BIG SECRET!
Nancy Turnbull, an associate dean in health policy at the Harvard School of Public Health, called provider market power and payment inequities among caregivers “the third rail of payment reform.”
“It’s a critical issue that is going to be largely unaddressed by the bill,’’ Turnbull said.
House and Senate leaders disagree, saying both bills include other provisions that could indirectly reduce price inequities among providers. “There are a number of tools in there,’’ said Representative Steven Walsh, a Lynn Democrat overseeing the House effort. “But there is no one silver bullet.’’
THAT WOULD BE A GOOD and DECENT SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM.
Of course, that would mean eliminating a huge (insurance) industry dedicated to the accumulation of capital and profit.
In a written statement to the Globe, Murray said: “A competitive health care industry is essential to controlling long-term cost growth. That’s why legislators are currently considering a number of new transparency and accountability measures that would help monitor the health care marketplace and shed new light on market dynamics.”
What BABBLE!!!
More expensive hospitals argue that they are voluntarily slowing the growth of their fees.
Yeah, now.
"The largest private-sector effort to tame medical spending in Massachusetts appears to be getting results, as doctors who agreed to work on a budget have cut costs by using less-expensive imaging and lab companies and expanding office hours to reduce emergency room use.... In the Blue Cross program — called the alternative quality contract — physicians, and sometimes their affiliated hospitals, accept an annual budget to care for a large group of patients. The amount is adjusted for how healthy the patients are, but is not affected by the number of tests, appointments, and procedures they get. If doctors exceed the budget, they owe Blue Cross money; if doctors come in under budget, they split the proceeds with the insurer."
It's called rationing FOR PROFIT(?)!
Partners HealthCare, with includes Brigham and Women’s and Massachusetts General hospitals, renegotiated its contract with Blue Cross last year to cut increases in payments to Partners by nearly a quarter of a billion dollars between 2012 and 2014....
That's why you are getting rationed health care, Massachusetts (and AmeriKan) citizen. Oh, it's going to be dressed up in nice terms like Accountable Care Organizations and budgetary care, but a rose is a rose....
There are a number of reasons that politicians’ resolve to address provider market clout may be waning, said health care leaders.
How many rea$on$ do you think it took?
Hospitals have cautioned them that government overreaching could harm life-saving clinical programs, and no one wants to take the lead and then have their approach fail.
Patrick and Coakley have treated the issue like a hot potato, with the governor — whose own administration has reached similar conclusions to Coakley about unreasonable price disparities — calling on the attorney general to use her existing antitrust powers. The attorney general has fired back that the administration needs to use tools short of law enforcement, such as greater oversight of contracts between insurers and providers.
Yeah, I guess Marty is too busy with other things.
She knows who to take on and who not.
Even as leaders wrangle with the issue, Partners and Steward Health Care, the big for-profit network consisting mostly of formerly Catholic hospitals, are trying to expand by annexing more suburban hospitals....
Interesting terminology there.
See: MSM Monitor: Catholic Caritas Makes Deal With the Devil
Cerberus Roars
Now some things really make sense.
--more--"
Related:
"Insurers in Massachusetts will return $57 million to individuals and small businesses because they spent too much of the money collected as premiums on administrative costs or surpluses....
--more--"
Also see: Mass. health coverage architects in demand in other states
Curbing health care costs may cost state $40 million a year
Health care, education consume 63 percent of planned state budget
New Mass. budget would loosen drug firm gift ban"
Insurer settles marketing complaint
