Angela Lattimore racks up more than $1,900 in medical bills every month.

But with income of just $1,500, she can only afford to pay around $300 and still provide a home for herself and her 10-year-old son.

She and other kidney dialysis patients say Medigap insurance would help. And next Wednesday they plan to ask the state Senate Banking and Insurance Subcommittee to release a bill that would enable them, and thousands of other disabled residents, to get it.

Lattimore, 36, has suffered from end-stage renal disease since her pregnancy, requiring her to undergo dialysis, a treatment that cleanses the blood in place of the kidneys.

Medicare pays for 80 percent of the procedure, medication and doctor visits. But that leaves patients to pick up the other 20 percent.

Lattimore, of Seneca, says her share is $1,200 for dialysis, $120 in drugs, and $600 for doctors.

While people 65 and older can buy private Medigap insurance to pick up much of the extra costs, younger Medicare beneficiaries by law cannot. Their only other option is the state’s high risk insurance pool, whose premiums are too costly for many people.

For those who are eligible, Medicaid picks up the additional costs. But Lattimore, who worked as an executive assistant at a marketing firm before she got sick, says she gets $150 too much in Social Security Disability to qualify.

About 500 of the 7,500 South Carolinians undergoing dialysis, and another 130,000 disabled people, have no secondary insurance, said Mary Higginbotham, manager of legislative affairs for the National Kidney Foundation of South Carolina.

“A lot of these patients are stuck in the middle, forced to spend down their assets so they qualify for Medicaid,” she said.

But many would rather get supplemental insurance, whose premiums run about $200-$250 a month, she said.

Legislation sponsored by Sen. Harvey Peeler, R-Cherokee, would allow them to do that, saving the state about $1 million a year in Medicaid costs, she said.

State Sen. Thomas Alexander, R-Oconee, said the measure is “good policy” for affected residents because it eases their financial hardship and saves taxpayers’ money.

“And in these budget times, every dollar makes a difference,” he said, noting 29 other states have adopted similar measures.

Lattimore, who gets dialysis four hours every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, hopes South Carolina will become number 30.

“Paying a premium would be so much more affordable than the balances I’m trying to pay now,” she said. “There is no way I can pay these bills.”

Greenville Online.Com ]]> http://senatorthomasalexander.com/2010/03/08/patients-in-gap-ask-state-to-let-them-buy-coverage/feed/ http://senatorthomasalexander.com/2010/02/11/sc-bill-could-ban-teen-drivers-from-using-cell/ http://senatorthomasalexander.com/2010/02/11/sc-bill-could-ban-teen-drivers-from-using-cell/#comments Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:34:56 +0000 http://senatorthomasalexander.com/?p=112 South Carolina senators are considering banning teens under 18 from driving while holding a cell phone to their ear.

A Senate Judiciary subcommittee is set to debate the bill on Wednesday.

It is among six bills in the Legislature this year that would bar drivers from text messaging, using a hand-held cell phone, or both.

Last week, a House panel gave initial approval to a bill barring both for drivers of all ages.

The bill proposed by Republican Sen. Thomas Alexander of Walhalla specifically deals with young drivers. A handsfree system would be exempt.

Offenders would be fined up to $50 for the misdemeanor.

WLTX

The Senate gave key approval Tuesday to some real estate buyers and investors in hopes of giving a boost to property sales.

The Senate, after tense negotiations for the first month of the legislative session, approved legislation that would eliminate additional taxes at the point of sale on second homes, businesses and commercial real estate in South Carolina for sales that occur this year. Additionally, those properties would get a 20 percent tax exemption for such sales in the years after.

The compromise proposal, which still must get a two-thirds vote on a final third reading, is considered by some lawmakers to be a major concession between competing interests in the state, whose differences so far have thwarted a deal.

The state Senate has given key approval to property tax breaks for anyone who buys commercial property or a second home this year.

Such properties would get smaller tax breaks if they change hands after 2010.

The goal is to encourage commercial property sales. The costs would be borne by local governments and schools, rather than the state.

The way it would work is if a property other than an owner-occupied home or an industrial property changes ownership in 2010, that property would be taxed based upon the previous owner’s assessment. For example, if a property assessed at $200,000 sells for $250,000, it would continue to be taxed as if it were worth $200,000.

That’s a big change from current law, which requires that properties be reassessed after an ownership change. For a buyer, the legislation could mean locking in property values, for tax purposes, that are years out of date. And for multimillion- dollar commercial deals, the difference could be worth a lot.

The tax break would cost an estimated $35 million this year, but there would be no loss in state revenue. Instead, local governments and schools would lose the money, and might need to consider cutting services or raising tax rates as a result.

After 2010, commercial properties and second homes would be reassessed when sold, but the new assessment would then be reduced by 20 percent. Second homes were included because they are taxed as commercial property, and excluding them could have raised legal challenges.

The plan is a compromise between the S.C. Association of Realtors and groups representing municipalities, counties and school districts. The Realtors group has been pushing hard to reduce or eliminate the point-of-sale reassessments, and pulled out of a previously announced compromise deal after deciding it didn’t go far enough.

Sen. Thomas Alexander, R-Walhalla, led the talks that resulted in the current plan. “We still have to do a third reading tomorrow, and hopefully we’ll have the votes,” he said Tuesday night. “It’s tremendously significant, because it (the legislation) says that South Carolina is open for business and open for investment.”

Local government and school associations were concerned about the loss of property-tax revenues, but agreed to the deal. “We all agree the economy of our state should be our top priority,” said Miriam Hair, executive director of the Municipal Association of South Carolina.

The effect of the Senate plan would vary dramatically from county to county, depending on when reassessments were conducted. For example, Berkeley and Dorchester counties both just completed reassessments, so the value of locking in a prior owner’s assessment would be limited there. In Charleston County, being taxed on property values from 2003 could represent a big discount.

A final vote is expected this afternoon in the Senate, and the legislation would then go back to the House, which passed a different plan last year.

Post and Courier

Jennifer Smith of Grapevine, Texas, Judy Teater of Spring Lake, Mich., Shelley Forney of Ft. Collins, Colo., Rob Reynolds of Omaha, Neb., and Elissa Schee of Citra, Fla., all have lost family members in vehicle accidents they said were caused by drivers who were either using cell phones or text messaging.

The five are all founding members of FocusDriven, an advocacy group for cell-free driving that was formally introduced this week at a news conference hosted by the U.S. Department of Transportation and the National Safety Council.

The group, the Web page for which went live Wednesday, is hopeful they can be a “valuable resource for those who have lost loved ones as a result of the senseless and preventable practice of distracted driving,” said FocusDriven’s president, Jennifer Smith.

Smith’s mother was killed in a car crash in September 2008 by a man who was talking on his cell phone while behind the wheel.

According to U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, cell phone-distracted drivers killed more than 6,000 people and injured more than 500,000 people in 2008. He did not provide statistics for 2009.

“I first met several of the founding members of FocusDriven at our Distracted Driving Summit, and I’m deeply impressed by their commitment to turn these tragic events into positive actions that will help save lives,” LaHood said. “Their stories are not just heartbreaking; they’re also a clear and compelling call to action.”

LaHood said that 20 states and the District of Columbia have passed legislation banning texting while driving.

“This now is a hot-button issue at the state level, and we hope it will become a hot-button issue at the congressional level,” LaHood said.

He added that he issued an executive order banning texting-while-driving for all 57,000 employees of the transportation department while operating department vehicles.

In South Carolina, where there is no law against texting while driving or using cell phones while driving, an official with the state Highway Patrol said distracted driving is a leading contributor to vehicle crashes.

“Driver inattention is the primary cause of crashes in South Carolina,” said Lance Cpl. Josef Robinson of the state patrol. “Minimizing distractions is something we always encourage.”

He said troopers also are constantly encouraged to limit their use of wireless devices while behind the wheel.

Since January 2009, 12 bills have been proposed in the South Carolina House and Senate that would outlaw or limit texting or cell phone use while driving and establish civil lawsuit procedures for victims’ families.

All bills have been referred to various committees for review. None have been voted into law.

State Rep. Don Bowen, R-Anderson, pre-filed legislation (House Bill 4189) that would make it against the law to receive, read or send a text message of any kind while driving a vehicle.

State Sen. Kevin Bryant, R-Anderson, also has pre-filed legislation that would allow a law enforcement officer to issue someone a ticket for sending and receiving text messages or e-mails while driving a vehicle, but not to initiate a traffic stop based on the infraction.

State Sen. Thomas Alexander, R-Walhalla, has introduced legislation that would prohibit anyone under the age of 18 from using a wireless device or cell phone while operating a vehicle.

In Anderson, one local employer is not waiting for lawmakers but has already made it against company policy to use cell phones and wireless devices while operating company vehicles.

Effective Wednesday, MedShore Ambulance Service workers will be in violation of company policy if they use any wireless device while operating a MedShore vehicle or while driving their personal vehicles while on company business.

MedShore chief compliance and professional standards officer Don McCown said the company’s position was partly based on its highly visible role in the community.

“We want to lead the way in driver safety as a community leader,” he said.

MedShore Chief Executive Officer Greg Shore said, “We’re really pushing for the second team member who is not driving to man the radio and the cell phone. If someone is operating the vehicle alone, they must pull over. They are not allowed to use electronic devices.”

Shore, who also is the Anderson County coroner, said his experience with vehicle fatalities has taught him that, no matter the distraction, a driver whose attention is pulled away from the task at hand puts a lot on the line.

“Whether it is against the law or not,” Shore said, “it is up to anyone who gets behind the wheel to be accountable and responsible for staying focused. An accident can happen in an instant, and the only way to limit the risk is to take the task of driving seriously. Whatever the phone call or the message, it can wait while you get where you are going, or at least pull over and stop in a safe location.”

Anderson County Sheriff John Skipper said although he was not aware of any internal policy at the sheriff’s office that limited use of cell phones and wireless devices by deputies and other employees, he did support the idea.

“I know that Don Bowen has proposed legislation down in Columbia,” Skipper said. “I’m certainly behind any measure that would lead to fewer vehicle accidents.”

Anderson Police Department spokesman Randall Williams said he did not know of any department policy limiting the use of cell phones and other wireless devices by city officers.

For LaHood, waiting for Congress or state lawmakers to force drivers into a behavior change is not good enough, he said.

“We’re not going to wait on Congress,” LaHood said. “We are on a rampage about this. … You simply cannot drive a car when you have a cell phone or aBlackBerry in your hand. Putting an end to this dangerous practice of driving while distracted is now a top priority.”

independentmail.com

These are her props.

Through a program called Doclink, Councill uses these tools to teach the dangers of smoking to fifth-graders in Anderson County schools. Doclink is a program started with $1.5 million from AnMed Health.

“It always grosses the kids out when you tell them that cigarettes contain the same chemicals we use to embalm dead people in,” Councill said.

With the help of volunteers, Councill teaches the “Tar Wars” program, and other health programs, to nearly 10,000 students in a year with a budget of about $85,000, a budget that has shrunk over the years. The nonprofit Doclink, which is housed in a physician’s office off Reed Road, did have two full-time employees. Now there’s just Councill.

Programs like this one could benefit from a bill being considered by the South Carolina legislature to raise the tax on cigarettes by 50 cents a pack, to a total 57 cents a pack.

Legislators and smokers talked about the tax as a new report this week listed South Carolina 44th in the nation for its spending on anti-smoking programs. The same report also said South Carolina’s cigarette tax is the lowest in the nation at 7 cents a pack. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, the American Lung Association and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation released the report.

S.C. Sen. Thomas Alexander, who is chairman of the Senate subcommittee looking at the cigarette tax legislation, said the tax has not been raised since 1977.

South Carolina has spent $2 million in state funds and $1.2 million in federal money for tobacco prevention programs, compared to the $62 million recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

North Dakota is the only state to spend what the CDC recommends on anti-smoking programs.

S.C. Sen. Kevin Bryant of Anderson said he is not sure how he feels about the state spending more money, specifically money from an increased cigarette tax, on tobacco use prevention programs.

“I have not done the research to see how effective these programs are,” Bryant said.

When Doclink began 10 years ago, the staff surveyed students about their risk behaviors, allowing them to remain anonymous, said Dr. David deHoll, who specializes in orthopedics and has been part of Doclink since it began. A couple of years ago, the survey was conducted again.

“There’s less risk behaviors in the schools where we’ve been able to interact, compared to those where we have not,” deHoll said. “But we won’t really have the true results of our work for decades.”

Councill said the “Tar Wars” presentation has been shown to nearly every fifth-grade class in Anderson County. “But if you only hit kids with this one time, it doesn’t really help,” Councill argued. “They need to be hearing this message over and over again — not just from Doclink.”

To make that happen, Alexander said, more money needs to be made available and a consistent source of funding is needed. The increase in the cigarette tax could generate up to $143 million in the first year, Alexander said.

“However, I do believe it could be a declining source of revenue,” Alexander said. “I think that’s why it is important to get the money in hand before it’s appropriated and allocated.”

Alexander said the cigarette tax will likely be a matter debated, and possibly voted on, in the next legislative session to start in January.

Bryant said he doesn’t believe the legislature should pass such an increase that doesn’t specify how the money is to be spent. As a pharmacist, he said, he is not opposed to a cigarette tax, altogether, but he wants to know where the money will be spent and wants to see corporate taxes decreased in the process.

“Take the same amount, and lower corporate income tax, which would boost job creation,” Bryant said. “Anytime you raise taxes, you are drawing money out of the pockets of consumers in an economy that’s hurting already.”

Smokers like Kathy Gibson and Patty Smith don’t like the cigarette tax at all, saying it’s unfair. Both said they have been smokers for 20 to 25 years. Each said she will continue to smoke, if she wants to, whether or not the tax is increased.

“If you tax cigarettes, why not other stuff, like candy?” Smith said. “It’s an easy tax. They know where to get extra money fast. They pick things like beer, gas or cigarettes. They know they’ll make a fast buck on those. And they know smokers will spend the money.”

“They don’t like us when we smoke,” Smith said, “but they sure like our tax money.”

Independent Mail

The tax on cigarettes in South Carolina isn’t just low, it’s the lowest anywhere in the nation.

“South Carolina does have the lowest cigarette tax in the nation: 7 cents,” said Sen. Thomas Alexander, a Republican who represents Oconee County. ”

The last time it was increased was in 1977.”But now there’s a push to raise that tax by another 50 cents per pack next year. The increase would generate $143 million per year, $5 million of which would be spent on programs to discourage young people from smoking.

“It’s going to prompt kids to quit. It’s going to prompt adult smokers to quit. And over the lifetime of those individuals, we’re going to see a tremendous savings in health care costs for our state,” said Kelly Davis of the South Carolina Tobacco Collaborative.

But if South Carolina is on the verge of bringing cigarettes taxes in line with other states, a report out today by a University of South Carolina graduate student gives the state low marks for cigarette prevention.”Last year, South Carolina ranked last in the nation, spending no state funds and only a $1 million federal grant on tobacco prevention,” said graduate student Geri Guy.

While most funds, including the 1998 tobacco settlement, are used to offset health care costs, officials say little is earmarked for tobacco prevention. Plus, the last proposed increase in cigarette taxes was vetoed.”We have a governor who’s made it clear from day one of his service that he’s opposed to any tax increases,” said Sen. Mike Fair of Greenville County.But supporters say they hope next year will be different.

The House of Representatives has approved the tax hike, and the state senate is expected to vote on the measure when the South Carolina Legislature convenes in January.

WYFF4

The centerpiece of many teens’ lives — the cell phone — has been targeted by state lawmakers who want drivers to take their fingers off the buttons and wrap them around the steering wheel.

Three Upstate legislators are seeking separate crackdowns on cell-phone use while driving.

One bill would ban texting for all drivers regardless of age but continue to allow talking on cell phones. Another would specifically target drivers under 18, prohibiting them from using cell phones unless they were talking with a hands-free device.

Abernathy announced during Monday’s meeting of the City Council that he will introduce a measure outlawing texting while driving when the council next meets on Dec. 21.

Abernathy said he had broached the idea to state Sen. Thomas Alexander of Walhalla, who plans to push a similar initiative in the legislature.

Alexander told him that “passage in the legislature was uncertain, but it might help if we started it at the city level,” Abernathy said.

The mayor said he was impelled to the action after reading a newspaper article detailing a study that showed texting drivers are twice as likely to be involved in an accident as a driver with twice the legal level of alcohol in the blood.

It could be a matter of life or death, Abernathy said.

The mayor acknowledged that enforcement could be difficult and he said he had no proposed penalty in mind.

“But I think if we put up some well-placed signs saying that texting while driving is banned, I think it would have an effect,” he said.

Cities and states across the nation are moving toward prohibiting texting while driving.

A statewide ban in North Carolina went into effect Dec. 1. The ban imposes a $100 fine and court costs upon anyone caught sending text messages while driving on a public road or in a public parking lot. The punishment may not include driver’s license points or insurance surcharges, and a conviction does not constitute proof of negligence in civil lawsuits against drivers.

Independentmail.com

by Ray Chandler

Who: Santa!!

Where: Applebee’s on Hwy 123, Seneca SC

When: December 12, 2009 7:30 am- 9: 30 am

Why: to benefit Safe Kids

Cost: Adults $7.00 Children (12 & under) $4.00

Please call 864. 885. 7912 for tickets.