Search Results
Please enter search terms in the box below.   This search is site wide including Retiree Advocate issues from January 2025 forward for pre 2025 issues of the Advocate please go to the Advocate Archives

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents December 2025 Letter from State Medical Associations: "The WISeR Model expands the burdensome prior authorization processes that physicians already experience in Medicare Advantage" October 31, 2025 Dr. Mehmet Oz Administrator Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 7500 Security Boulevard Baltimore, MD 21244 Dear Dr. Oz, On behalf of the undersigned state medical associations, we write to raise concerns about the prior authorization (PA) pilot under the WISeR model as it relates to Medicare. While our organizations appreciate the aim of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to increase accountability, value in healthcare delivery for Medicare beneficiaries, and reduce spending on services deemed low-value or wasteful, we believe the current design of this pilot risks unintended consequences including delayed care, reduced access, and increased burdens on both patients and physicians. Moreover, we are deeply concerned by both the lack of operational details released to date and the pace at which CMS is advancing a program of this magnitude, particularly one that shifts critical decisions away from physicians and patients – without sufficient transparency, stakeholder input, or evidence it will improve patient care. Administrative burden placing barriers to patient access Our organizations are concerned that the WISeR Model expands the burdensome PA processes that physicians already experience in Medicare Advantage (MA) and the commercial insurance markets into Traditional Medicare. The demonstration represents significant departures from current standards and seems to conflict with CMS’ recent, highly laudable achievement of securing a commitment from the health insurance industry to fix the broken PA process, to include reducing the overall volume of PA requirements. PA has consistently been identified by physicians as one of the most burdensome and disruptive administrative requirements they face in providing quality care to patients. In a 2024 American Medical Association survey, 93 percent of physicians reported that PA causes care delays, 82 percent indicated that the process can lead to treatment abandonment, and an alarming 29 percent said that PA had led to a serious adverse event (hospitalization, disability, or even death) for a patient in their care. Beyond the risk for patient harm, expansion of PA requirements under the WISeR model will exacerbate the administrative burdens already associated with PA. Surveyed physicians reported major burdens associated with this process, with practices completing an average of 39 PAs per physician, per week. This significant workload requires practices to hire additional personnel, with 40 percent of the surveyed physicians reporting that their practice employs staff who work exclusively on PA. Growing evidence linking practice burdens to professional burnout for physicians and other health care professionals underscores the importance of addressing administrative workloads. The introduction of such PA protocols in Traditional Medicare also risks creating unnecessary delays in patient care, increasing practice expenses, and diverting time and resources away from direct patient care. Our organizations recognize that CMS intends to use artificial intelligence and machine learning tools in the WISeR Model to help identify potentially unnecessary services more efficiently and consistently than manual reviews alone. We appreciate that technological advances can appropriately create efficiencies when applied responsibly and transparently. However, reliance on AI and other automated tools raise significant risks if not governed properly. We are also concerned that the vendor incentive structure within the WISeR Model could result in excessive denials motivated more by the potential for vendor profit than by fair and balanced clinical judgment. When third-party entities are paid based on the volume of denied services, there is a clear risk that care that is medically necessary for certain patients will be inappropriately denied in pursuit of savings. Physicians are committed to delivering high-quality, evidence-based care to Medicare beneficiaries. However, the prior authorization pilot risks creating barriers to care, undermining patient outcomes, and imposing unsustainable administrative demands on practices. We respectfully urge CMS to cease implementation and work collaboratively with stakeholders to design payment processes that protect the Medicare Trust Fund while achieving value, without jeopardizing patient access. Sincerely, James Jameson, MD President, Arizona State Medical Association John Bastulli, MD, FASA President, Ohio State Medical Association Bridget Bush, MD, FASA President, Washington State Medical Association Peter Blumenthal, MD President, Medical Society of New Jersey Sumit Nanda, MD President, Oklahoma State Medical Association < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents April 2026 Engagement Without Teeth Is Just a Discussion Jeff Johnson On January 29, 2026, the Washington State Investment Board (WSIB) presented an overview of what they do and how they do it during a work session of the Washington State Senate Ways and Means Committee hearing. The WSIB has over $230 billion in assets under management, including 18 pension funds, six Labor and Industry funds, and 16 university funds. The comingled investment fund is where the pension funds are, and they account for $185 billion of the total investment funds. This fund has grown from $80 billion 10 years ago to $185 billion today, making the WSIB one of the largest pension funds in the country. The WSIB has made average returns of 8.4% over the last 20 years, a bit lower if you take out an exceptional and abnormal year, 2021, when the fund made 28.7% in returns. It should be noted that sustainable funds (funds based on environmental, social, and governance criteria) have begun to out-perform traditional funds, such as those invested in by the WSIB. Knowing that, following the work session, the Committee would hear a couple of bills that dealt with divestment of coal assets and ethical investment screens, the WSIB spent some time describing their investment mandate, philosophy, and practices. Washington State law gives the WSIB the “authority to establish policies and procedures designed exclusively to maximize returns at a prudent level of risk.” The WSIB also has “full power over their funds to invest, reinvest, manage, contract, or sell or exchange investments acquired.” The WSIB’s preferred investment philosophy and practice is to hold significant positions in passive equity strategies, meaning that they allow third-party money managers and brokers to choose the investment portfolio for the funds under their care. In fact, the WSIB is proud of the fact that they do not pick and choose companies to invest in but rather have investments across all industries, the country, and the world – “a little slice of everything.” Addressing the issue of divestment from fossil fuels, the WSIB began by stating that they have a “fiduciary obligation to always act in the best interests of their beneficiaries." No one would expect anything less. Specifically, they said, “we do have investment beliefs that touch on this theme of divestment. First, any kind of investment or asset class restraint you put on our portfolio will likely lower returns over time (there is lots of research on that). Second, it will raise costs. And finally, we believe that corporate engagement is really the way to move the needle – you give up your voice if you give up ownership in these stocks.” There is a lot to unpack there, so let’s take a little time to sift through what they said and what they didn’t say. But from the outset, it is important to point out that when you manage the amount of funds the WSIB does, you are never without a voice unless you voluntarily cede it to third party managers. First of all, those of us testifying on the Coal Act are asking that the WSIB divest, prudently and over time, the $2.6 billion they have invested in coal producers. Many of us have further suggested that the WSIB divest from another $5 or $6 billion invested in oil and gas hydrocarbon producers. This is quite different from asking the WSIB to back away from their current asset allocation and climate blueprint/ framework for encouraging corporate hydrocarbon consumers to lower their carbon emissions and develop renewable energy transition plans. No one is asking the WSIB to abandon their climate blueprint work; if anything, we are urging them to be bolder with this work. So, the first thing is to get the WSIB to get rid of existing fossil fuel producer assets and to not purchase any more debt (bank loans, bonds) that finances more fossil fuel extraction. Why do this? To do our part in helping to save the planet – well, sure. But also, because fossil fuels are an underperforming asset. For the past 10 years the value of non-fossil fuel S&P 500 stocks performed four times better than fossil fuel assets. And since 2022 the stock market, as measured by the S&P 500, has nearly doubled (92%) while the value of fossil fuel assets has risen 17%. It's true that an investment’s past performance is no guarantee of its future returns, but the fossil fuel sector is facing long-term competitive risks like never before. Renewable energy, electric vehicles, and electrification are seeing growth around the world and even in the US. The fossil fuel sector’s preferred low carbon technologies don’t work. And the sector’s pivot into producing plastics and petrochemicals is faring poorly. Will divesting from asset holdings of direct producers of fossil fuels lower returns? Perhaps a smidge, particularly if you divest it all at once, but the re-turns will still meet the WSIB’s fiduciary responsibility. And then again, maybe not over the long-term. If you jettison underperforming assets for stronger earning assets over time, you will, in fact, bolster your fund returns. And, if there is a realistic accounting of the financial risk caused by direct fossil fuel assets through climate disaster effects, then just about any other asset would produce safer long-term returns. Will divesting direct fossil fuel assets increase the cost of investing WSIB pension assets? Maybe. A third-party manager would usually charge more for a customized investment portfolio than for one that is just pulled off their shelf. But there are now a great many fossil-fuel strategies “on the shelf” and available to the WSIB. And how much are we really talking about? Financial advisors I have spoken with suggest that the cost of slightly modifying the portfolio should only have marginal costs associated with it. For funds as large as the WSIB, fees for investment products are typically set through negotiation. Given the large portfolio the WSIB brings to the table, to my way of thinking, they could use their financial heft to negotiate a competitive cost. Finally, any increase in management fees would likely be partially or fully offset by superior long-term performance of a fossil-free portfolio as the fossil fuel sector faces long-term challenges, such as declining fossil fuel stock values, increasing social costs due to fossil fuel caused climate disasters, and increasing litigation costs over the damage caused from continued fossil fuel extraction and use. Is corporate engagement, rather than divestment, the best way or the only way to encourage corporations to reduce their carbon emissions and adopt strong renewable energy transition plans? No. But again, let’s be clear what we are talking about. The WSIB is not going to convince Exxon-Mobil to stop extracting oil or natural gas. Unless stopped, they will extract every barrel of oil and every cubic foot of gas that they can profitably extract and sell. However, the WSIB’s divesting from direct fossil fuel producers and not purchasing more fossil fuel debt/loans sends a strong message to other institutional investors that you can earn decent returns on your investment and save the planet at the same time, which will protect long-term returns from the worst climate disasters. Can engagement through voting on corporate shareholder resolutions, discussions with corporate management, and setting strong blueprints for carbon emission reporting and assessing climate risk help change corporate practices? Sure. But the history of corporate engagement over asbestos and tobacco brings into sharp relief how slow and incomplete this process can be. With global temperatures rapidly rising and climate disasters intensifying, we don’t have the luxury of time. The urgency of the climate crisis we face demands that we act thoughtfully but immediately. So, the answer regarding fossil fuels is not to divest or to engage. You have to do both. But we must be clear: engagement without any teeth to back it up , is just a discussion. Finally, the WSIB’s mandate to maximize returns for their pension beneficiaries at a prudent level of risk should not be an excuse for slow-tracking the divestment of direct fossil fuel assets. When the continued extraction and use of fossil fuels increasingly create catastrophic climate disasters, the financial risk of holding fossil fuel assets is exacerbated, making direct investments in fossil fuels categorically imprudent. As British economist John Maynard Keynes said, in addressing the shortcomings of relying on market forces to address economic crises, “In the long run we are all dead.” The WSIB and our unions have the opportunity to acknowledge Keynes’ warning while protecting public employee pensions over the long term and playing an important role in combatting climate change. But this requires not passively investing in direct fossil fuel assets and producers. It requires us to take responsibility for our choices and do some serious picking and choosing. It requires us to act in the best interests of our members, past, present, and future, as well as the planet we live on. Jefl Johnson is a retired president of the Washington State Labor Council and Co-President of PSARA. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents February 2026 Moving Closer to the World of Repair: Seattle-King County African American Reparations Committee Anne Watanabe Every day brings more bad news, including attacks on communities of color. It can be overwhelming and discouraging. But we must not overlook the steady progress being made by dedicated organizations such as the Seattle-King County African American Reparations Committee (SAARC). PSARA has issued a policy statement supporting Black reparations -- the need to redress US chattel slavery, Jim Crow, and systemic racism, and their long legacy of harm to Black Americans. Across the nation, federal, state, and local governments have taken steps, albeit slow steps, to achieve reparations. Several years ago, PSARA Executive Board member, civil rights leader, and former King County Councilmember Larry Gossett convened meetings that brought local elected leaders and over 30 organizations in the African American community together to create a reparations movement in the Seattle-King County area. These efforts led to the creation of the Seattle-King County African American Reparations Committee (SAARC). Larry, together with PSARA Executive Board member Claude Burfect, a long-time leader in the Black and labor communities, brought volunteers together to plan and grow SAARC. Both Larry and Claude continue to guide SAARC. SAARC eventually grew into today’s organization, which advocates for Black reparations. SAARC recently published its 2025 Housing and Labor Report. The report focuses on King County, noting that King County has the state’s highest number of Black residents, but “has one of the state’s sharpest degrees of wealth inequality, far exceeding national rates.” The report points out that housing discrimination has been a major factor in creating wealth inequity. Practices such as redlining, underinvestment by local governments and banks, and other forms of discrimination deprived Black communities of home purchases, a major source of generational wealth. A study cited in the report calculated that the financial impact of discriminatory housing practices in King County ranged from $5.4 billion to $15.8 billion from 1950 to 2019. SAARC’s report cites the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Center for Health Justice, which reported in 2024 that 22 local jurisdictions “have approved a reparations commission or task force, and eleven states have introduced legislation to create one.” The AAMC also cautioned that “reparations, even when broadly defined and not limited to cash payments, are not supported by most of the public,” and that “those committed to health and racial justice must do a better job of connecting the dots between historic injustice and modern-day inequity.” But despite the seeming national lack of support for reparations, a study recently commissioned by SAARC indicates that over 58 percent of King County residents support reparations (compared with 30 percent nationally). Interestingly, the study found that messaging regarding a need to remedy redlining and restrictive covenants received stronger support than did messaging about economic justice. So there is much cause for hope, especially in King County, for repairing the harms of generations of racial discrimination in housing. Furthermore, SAARC’s advocacy has led to state and local government support for a study that is being administered by the Washington State Commission on African American Affairs. SAARC has identified a number of research and policy recommendations; hopefully those will be considered and incorporated into the upcoming state study. SAARC’s “immediate policy recommendations” are for: direct compensatory payments; housing reparations; and county funding for Black/African American entrepreneurs. SAARC has also identified future policy recommendations that address education inequities, health inequities, criminal justice and policing, and environmental racism and displacement. Davida Ingrahm, SAARC Executive Director, notes that SAARC is engaged in building partnerships, including intergenerational partnerships, to identify the policies and common ground that leads all of us into a world of repair. How do we live well together? She urges us to look into the future and focus on what we care about – if we can do that, it is what will happen. Larry’s hope is that Black reparations in the Seattle-King County area will provide a foundation for Black families to build generational wealth through home ownership. He would like to see Seattle become the second city in the nation (behind Evanston, Illinois) to create a robust reparations program related to housing. PSARA will support SAARC in its efforts to achieve these recommendations – so please stay tuned to our newsletter and emails, and please visit SAARC - Seattle/King County African American Reparations Committee to learn more about how we can achieve a future we want. Anne Watanabe is Chair of PSARA's Race and Gender Equity Committee. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents January 2026 Report from PSARA’s Second Annual Public Discussion in Tacoma Dan Grey Threats to Traditional Medicare - The WISeR Project. Threats to Social Security The Tacoma Chapter of PSARA hosted its second annual public discussion, entitled “Social Safety Net Under Attack: Fighting to Save and Improve Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare.” The well-attended event was held on Saturday, December 6 at the beautiful campus of Evergreen State College in Tacoma. Barb Church shared a moving land acknowledgment on behalf of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians. Lynne Dodson spoke about the proud history of this college in Tacoma, thanks to its first president, the late Maxine Mimms. Lynne also spoke about the mission of PSARA and recognized the co-sponsors for the event, including Pierce County Labor Council, University Place Indivisible, Indivisible Tacoma, and Indivisible Gig Harbor, as well as newly elected Tacoma City Councilwoman Latasha Palmer. The three featured panelists from the PSARA Board were Pam Crone, Anne Watanabe, and Robby Stern. Pam started by speaking about the dangers to Original Medicare beneficiaries due to the WISeR project. Washington is one of 6 states in the WISeR ((Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction Model) program. The pilot program expands prior authorization in original Medicare and reimburses artificial intelligence (AI) contractors based on how much money they save the Medicare Trust Fund, i.e. by denials of care. WA Representative Suzan DelBene has introduced HR 5940 to stop WISeR. Her bill is called “Seniors Deserve Smarter Care Act.” Pam reported that WA Senator Patty Murray will also be introducing a Senate bill to stop WISeR. We were all encouraged to ask Senator Maria Cantwell to support efforts to halt WISeR even before it begins in January 2026. Anne then spoke about the well documented, devastating cuts that Trump "Big Beautiful Bill" has for Medicaid in our state. Anne added to the discussion of WISeR and compared it to a home invasion robbery where the effects are dire and immediate. The longer-term goal of privatization of Medicare is comparable to “termites who work 24/7, and you know what they’ve done when the house collapses.” All spoke to the need to “level the playing field”, by making coverage in Original Medicare on par with Medicare Advantage plans including, dental, vision, hearing, pharmacy, and by ending copays, and the need for Medigap supplemental policies. Robby rounded off the discussion, speaking about the threats to Social Security. Closing of Social Security regional offices has left field offices without guidance and much needed support. Recent policy is to shift in-person support to phone support with agonizingly long wait times. Robby spoke about the long-desired effort to “Scrap the Cap” so that wealthy employees, who make more than the current wage cap of $176,100, would continue to pay the same tax rate on their multimillion dollar incomes as those of us with much less income. Robby reminded us that, last year, PSARA helped move Washington State Senate Joint Memorial 8002 (in support of Original Medicare), sponsored by Sen. Hasegawa, to the State House, where it died in the House Rules Committee. Given that there is no fiscal note or cost to this measure, we were encouraged to let House Speaker Jinkins know we want the measure approved by the House and sent to the US Congress as the will of the people of our state. Robby credited Connecticut Representative John Larson with introducing the “Social Security 2100 Act” in Congress. While no action will occur before the new Congress is sworn in in January, 2027, we can let our Washington Congress members know of our support to strengthen and preserve Social Security. Following questions and answers, Dan Grey, a PSARA Tacoma chapter member and volunteer for Radio Tacoma, interviewed Anne and Robby. Their 28-minute interview can be heard on the radiotacoma.org website click here for the direct link to the broadcast. Dan Grey is a member of PSARA in Pierce County. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents October 2025 A Fake Drug War Against Venezuela Cindy Domingo In less than a month, three boats off the coast of Venezuela have purportedly been bombed by US naval forces now stationed off the coast of Venezuela. The first boat sank on September 2, allegedly carried eleven people, and it was unclear whether any survived. Reports in the media suggested that the bombing may have been an artificial intelligence film as well as questions whether the boat may not have been a drug smuggling operation since high speed drug boats carry few passengers in order to carry more drugs. The story quickly left the media pages until the latest boat sinkings in mid-September. These boat bombings have followed a heightened build-up towards war against Venezuela since August of this year. On August 7, the bounty for the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro increased from $25 million to $50 million, with US Attorney General Pam Bondi accusing Maduro of collaborating with foreign terrorist organizations to smuggle drugs into the US. It was during the first Trump administration in 2020 that a bounty was placed on Maduro for $15 million and then in January 2025 it was raised to $25 million. On August 8, the US military deployed eight warships, 1,200 missiles, 10 F-35 fighter jets, a nuclear submarine off the coast of Venezuela and some 4,500 military personnel including 2,200 Marines and amphibious assault crews. These moves were followed by the bombings of the small boats. In addition to Maduro’s bounty, increased financial sanctions, lesser bounty rewards and travel visa restrictions have been levied against others in Maduro’s administration and Venezuelan state oil and transportation officials. These provocations under the guise of a drug war come even as there is little evidence that Venezuela and President Nicolas Maduro are involved in any drug smuggling. Juan Gonzalez, former senior director for the Western Hemisphere at the US National Security Council, has stated clearly that there is no credible evidence that Maduro directs any narco-gangs. Furthermore, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2025 report notes that only 5% of drugs going to the US pass through Venezuela; that in fact the country has consolidated its status as a territory free from coca leaf cultivation or drug production, as well as free from international criminal cartels. Yet Trump continues to push the narrative that Maduro is the head of a cartel called “Cartel of the Suns” and the attack on Venezuela is part of his War on Drugs. Trump’s real purpose is “regime change” in Venezuela, a strategy that was implemented in 2019 when Trump and other countries proclaimed Juan Guido as President of Venezuela even though not one person in Venezuela voted him into office and Maduro had won in the national presidential elections. And the real reason for regime change is the US wants control of Venezuela’s oil resources, the largest deposit of oil in one country in the world. Venezuela’s oil resources have been a lifeline to Cuba and lays the basis for important trade with China and Russia. The US war against Venezuela has been met with resistance in and outside Venezuela. In response to the warships, Maduro mobilized Venezuela’s popular militia that reportedly counts for 4.5 million members with its purpose to defend the country’s sovereignty. On September 1, Maduro was quoted by Al Jazeera that the US is “seeking a regime change through military threat…Venezuela is confronting the biggest threat that has been seen on our continent in the last 100 years…If Venezuela is attacked, we would immediately move to armed struggle in defense of our territory.” Maduro continued to state that he would declare Venezuela “a Republic in arms.” The September 1 issue of Venezuelan newspaper Ultimas Noticias reports that governments of 80 nations have repudiated the presence of US warships in the Caribbean and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), an alliance of 33 countries, convened an emergency session to address the crisis. The 10 countries of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our Americas (ALBA-TCP) have unanimously condemned the US deployments. The Presidents of Mexico, Columbia and Brazil have been outspoken about the US military aggression as well as they know they are also targets of Trump’s manufactured War on Drugs and plans for regime change. Cindy Domingo is PSARA's Co-VP of Outreach and a veteran activist with LELO (Legacy of Equality, Leadreship, organizing), APALA (Asian Pacific Ameri- can Labor Alliance), and Standing for Democracy. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents June 2026 The Barbed Wire Barbara Flye < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents April 2026 Honoring Jesse Jackson Cindy Domingo Today, as we face a crisis in our democracy of monumental proportions, the passing of Jesse Jackson forces our nation to remember the type of movement that must be built to regain political power for working people in this country. Coming to power in the 1980’s, Jackson brought us to the realization that the progressive movements must vie for power in the electoral arena. Jackson built an inside/outside structure in relationship to the Democratic Party, which had a long-term impact for the participation of people of color and working people. Jackson’s vision was first reflected in his 1984 Presidential election campaign. He then went on to become a major player and candidate in the 1988 Presidential election. He used his powerful oratory and organizing skills to build an organization that reflected one of his most important campaign themes, multiracial unity. In Nikhil Pal Singh’s book, Climbin' Jacob’s Ladder: The Black Freedom Movement Writings of Jack O’Dell , O’Dell, one of the key visionaries of the National Rainbow Coalition, stated that, “The Rainbow Coalition is a mass political movement, which should seek to provide a center of social authority, political judgment, and activist training as an alternative to the organs of mainstream governance and the two-party system.” O’Dell emphasized the necessity of building and maintaining an independent organization, “capable of effecting a basic realignment in US politics, in favor of Peace, Justice and Progress.” Because of Jackson’s and the Rainbow Coalition’s power base, Jackson was able to negotiate the rules within the Democratic Party and at the national convention. These changes altered the race and class representation and participation at national and local levels, elections of state delegates to state party conventions and the National Democratic conventions, and the construction of party platforms at all levels that represented a peace and justice peoples’ agenda. For many of us who participated in the Washington State Rainbow Coalition (WSRC) in the 1980s, it was our first foray into the electoral arena besides registering and casting our votes. Many in the WSRC joined the Democratic Party through participation in their legislative district party structure. By 1988, the WSRC had 1,000 members, strategically positioned in seven of the eight Washington State Congressional districts. At that time, Washington had a caucus system, through which people met by precinct to debate issues and positions, and elected people to vie for delegate positions for the national Democratic Convention, supporting a presidential candidate. At the caucus level, resolutions, positions on issues, and platforms were also discussed and voted on. For the WSRC, this was where our independent progressive movement impacted the process; our positions on major issues facing the US working class were debated, voted on, and passed onto the next level. At the Washington State Democratic Party Convention in 1988, the WSRC passed a resolution calling for a two-state solution to the Palestine/Israel conflict. The issues taken up by the WSRC are reflected in the founding convention of the WSRC in 1989. These included platform priorities on Washington State budget and taxation, Rainbow Coalition positions on foreign policy, the politics of AIDS, and many other issues that remain relevant today. Many WSRC members became delegates to the 1988 National Democratic Party Convention, where Jesse Jackson gave his famous speech about how his grandmother made a quilt from scraps of clothes to form a beautiful quilt. Jackson likened that quilt to the multi-racial, multi-class movement that was needed to win the 1988 election and political power for working people. I have such great memories of seeing my sister-in-law and other WSRC members on national television in the front rows as Jesse Jackson gave that speech. At Jesse Jackson’s funeral, former President Barack Obama gave credit to Jackson for his historic 2008 presidential victory. Kamala Harris also stated that she would not have been elected as vice president without the work that Jackson had done decades before. In Washington State, Seattle’s first Black mayor, Norm Rice, served two full terms from 1990-1997, acknowledging that his victory was due to the influence of Jackson and the WSRC. Rice hired a number of WSRC leaders, including Charles Rolland, who later became the first African American to become Chair of the State Democratic Party. Other WSRC members went on to run for political office with a progressive platform, even after the WSRC disbanded. The 1988 Jackson presidential campaign and the Rainbow Coalition opened the door for working class people to run for office, a door that can never be closed again. Today, as we see the Trump administration move to cancel or steal the 2026 midterm elections, we must remember the power unleashed by Jackson and the Rainbow Coalition. Free elections are a central component of our democracy and we must stand up and protect our right to vote! We hope you will attend Standing for Democracy’s and Free Washington Project’s April 8 webinar at 5:30 pm on protecting the 2026 midterm elections. Go to www.freewaproject.org for details and to register. Cindy Domingo is a veteran activist with LELO (Legacy of Equality, Leader-ship & Organizing) and APALA (Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance). She is PSARA's Co-VP for Outreach. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents April 2025 PSARA to Olympia Lawmakers: “No Cutbacks! Tax the Rich!" Tim Wheeler Beaming with delight, GRC Committee Chair Pam Crone greeted a crowd of grassroots lobbyists gathered in a conference roomof the Washing- ton State Labor Council in Olympia, on Mar. 18. The African American, Asian American, Latino, and white activists were reporting back on their meetings with Washington State legislators to press their demands for increased funding for healthcare, public schools, rent stabilization for people who live in manufactured homes, and a wealth tax. They were all participants in PSARA Lobby Day, including activists from Seattle, Tacoma, Gig Harbor, and other cities andtowns. A delegation of five PSARA members drove down from Port Angeles, Sequim, and Port Townsend. “We had meetings with38 legislators and their staff,” Crone exclaimed. “One staffer told me, ‘You guys are everywhere!’” Crone, PSARA’s former lobbyist, urged the crowd to keep the pressure on. She warned against Republican schemes to bury legislation with crippling amendments proposed to stall passage until the 90-day legislative session ends. She hailed Senateapproval by a landslide vote of 30 to 19 Senate Joint Measure 8002. SJM 8002, now pending in the House, urges the WashingtonCongressional delegation, President Trump, the House, and the Senate, calling on them and CMS to halt privatization ofMedicare, and to enact measures to “level the playing field” between so-called Medicare Advantage (MA) and traditional Medicare. The measure urges Congress to cap out- of-pocket costs. It would eliminate the need for supplemental insurance that traditionalMedicare recipients must purchase. SJM 8002 also calls for adding to traditional Medicare dental, vision, and hearing benefitsoffered by MA. David Loud, a member of the PSARA Board and a leader of Health Care Is a Human Right, said SJM 8004, which urges theCongress to sup- port universal health care, was approved by the State Senate, 30 to19. Advocates of Medicare for All will rally on the steps of the Capitol in Olympia on April 2 to urge approval of universal health care in Washington State, Loud said. Rep.Pra- mila Jayapal, Democrat from Washington’s 7th Congressional District, is the author of Expanded and Improved Medicarefor All, which will be introduced in the US Congress. Bobby Righi of Seattle, Co-Chair of PSARA’s Climate & Environmental Justice Committee, told the debriefing that lawmakers in her legislative district support PSARA’s legislative agenda. And one legislator was clearly distressed about Gov. Bob Ferguson’sstate budget with $4 billion in cuts. Coupled with the enormous cuts to health, education, and welfare programs inflicted by theTrump-Musk Administration, it adds up to disaster for the poor, the sick, children, and the elderly. “ It is going to take hard work to come up with a budget compromise,” she said. “We have to put pressure on Ferguson.” Michael Righi warned that an atmosphere of doom is hanging over the legislature. He pointed out that there is no economicrecession, no lack of wealth that could be taxed to pay for these life and death programs. “We should have the position: NO CUTS!” he said. The crowd erupted in applause. These warnings were on display in earlier sessions. A lawmaker from LD 24 told the delegation from the Olympic Peninsula that “Ferguson is strangely silent on the (Wealth) Tax bill,” which the LD-24 legislator promised to support. He spoke atlength about the worsening budget crisis with cutbacks in vital programs that serve children, the elderly, and the poor, and the Ferguson conundrum: He ran as a progressive yet now governs as a “fiscal conservative,” proposing budget cutbacks cheered by the MAGA Republicans. Insurance Commissioner Patty Kuderer, a former legislator, told the PSARA delegation, “Our health care system is morally bankrupt.” She spoke of her being born prematurely with many life-threatening problems. She became “a proponent of universal health care where everyone has access.” Health care, sheadded, should not be a field for “making profits…This should be a country that cares about people.” When she was a legislator, she told her constituents, “Out of 400,000 people I represent, only 400 were impacted by thecapital gains tax...I want taxes to go to health care, education.” It will mean, she added, “A robust economy, poverty plummeting, crime in decline.” Her aide, Bryon Welch, said a delegation from the Insurance Commission is headed to the nation’s capital to meet with theWashington State congressional delegation to urge them to take action against the “relentless, misleading ads for MedicareAdvantage. We are going to Washington D.C. to make sure that Medicare is not completely privatized.” Robby Stern, President of the PSARA Education Fund, presented him with Give Us a Real Choice, a 63-page PSARA primer onthe urgent need to “level the playing field” between traditional Medicare and MA. Stern said the book “lays out very clearly ourmembers who have had problems with Medicare Advantage. We’re not saying eliminate Medicare Advantage, but what we are saying is that senior citizens should have a real choice.” Later, the delegation gathered in the Capitol building to hear House Speaker Laurie Jinkins. “We prefer progressive taxes ratherthan budget cuts,” she said. “Start building on the taxes we already have, the Capital Gains Tax.” The crowd erupted in applause.“When you build support for programs that people want, they are willing to pay taxes to pay for them.” PSARA Co-President Karen Richter urged Jinkins to push SJM 8002. It is necessary, Richter said. “We really need the backing ofthe State Legislature to exert pressure on Washington D.C. to take action to level the playing field.” Tim Wheeler is a veteran activist and journalist, a member of PSARA's Executive Board, and a leader of PSARA organizing in Clallam County. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents July 2025 Tim Wheeler Reads From His Latest Book No Power Greater: The Life & Times of George A. Meyers Saturday, July 26, 1:00 – 3:00 p.m. WSLC Offices, 321 16th Avenue S, Seattle Please join PSARA and our own Tim Wheeler for the Washington state debut of Tim’s latest book, No Power Greater: The Life &Times of George A. Meyers. Tim will read from the book, take questions and comments, and also lead us in song with his trusty autoharp. Copies of No Power Greater will be available for purchase. Tim has generously offered to donate all proceeds from book sales at this event to PSARA. The Retiree Advocate published a review of the book in our May issue. To read the review, go to PSARA.org, click “Newsletter,” then “Advocate Archives,” and search for “202505 May Advocate.” The remainder of this article is an excerpt from this fascinating book: A couple of days before Christmas, 1941, the Maryland Council of the CIO met at a convention in Baltimore. The nation was reeling from the December 7 sneak attack on Pearl Harbor two weeks earlier by Imperial Japan; the US was suddenly plunged into war. Yet even so, sharp partisan politics intruded when the industrial union leaders met in Baltimore. John T. Jones, a leader of the United Mine Workers, had quit as President of the Maryland- DC branch of the CIO. He was following the lead of UMW President, John L. Lewis… John L. Lewis was furious at FDR for rejecting his appeal that he supports the steelworkers in the 1937 “Little Steel” strike marked by the infamous massacre by Chicago police of steel union strikers. Lewis was so angry at FDR that one week before the November 1940 presidential election, Lewis urged union workers to vote for Republican Wendell Wilkie. Lewis vowed that he would resign as CIO President if Roosevelt was reelected. The overwhelming majority of union workers rejected Lewis’ appeal and Roosevelt won in a landslide. Lewis followed through, announcing his resignation as President of the CIO, pulling the UMW out of the CIO. All UMW leaders who held leadership posts in the CIO, including Jones, also resigned. George was chosen unanimously to replace Jones. George Meyers said of his election to lead the Maryland-DC CIO: To my great surprise, at the Council convention…I was unanimously proposed to succeed him. Need- less to say, I was both surprised and honored but only agreed to run if the convention elected an African American as one of our vice presidents. It did, and Joe Neal, a leader of the Steel Local at Sparrows Point near Baltimore, became the first black officer of the Maryland-DC Council. George A. Meyers gave unstinting leadership to the Maryland-DC CIO during his two-year tenure as President. His highest priority was to build labor support for the war effort. For him defeating fascism and organizing unorganized workers were two sides of the same coin... Equally high on the CIO agenda was fighting Jim Crow exclusion of African American workers at plants like Glen L. Martin, Fairchild Aircraft, Beth Steel, the shipyards, and all other jobs in Maryland. Along with fighting racist hiring practices, the CIO demanded equal hiring and equal pay for women workers < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents June 2025 Social Security Attacks Continue Steve Kofahl It seems that nearly every day we learn about a disturbing new aspect of the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on Social Security, the Social Security Administration (SSA), and SSA employees. I write this on May 12, with a Washington Post piece (“The hidden ways Trump and DOGE are shutting down parts of the government”) in today’s Seattle Times. The article reveals that some SSA employees are running out of pens, paper, and printer toner because the US DOGE Service, on February 26, placed a $1 spending limit on each government-issue credit card that managers use to make purchases and pay for services. They cannot pay their phone bills, or for translation services, for example. Less than a dozen people at SSA, an agency with 1,300 work locations, are now authorized to make decisions on any purchase requests, causing lengthy backlogs and delays. How’s that for making government more efficient? Less than a week ago, Wall Street billionaire Frank Bisignano was confirmed 53-47 by the Senate to serve until January 2031 as SSA Commissioner. A self- described “DOGE person,” he was called out by the usually mild-mannered Oregon Senator Ron Wyden for lying to the Senate Finance Committee, when he denied having worked with DOGE and Trump’s Acting SSA Commissioner, Leland Dudek, for months before his confirmation. It was during this time that the SSA website crashed 3 times in 10 days, in March. Bisignano, who comes with a reputation for slashing jobs and treating workers disrespect- fully, has said that he intends to replace SSA 800-number agents with Artificial Intelligence (AI). Speaking of AI, SSA has already been utilizing it to some extent in the disability determination process. The National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI) has formed a task force that issued a report last month citing a number of concerns. One is the presence of bias in medical care and in medical record-keeping. How do we identify and mitigate it? NASI believes it imperative that hu- mans make the adjudicative decisions, including whether to obtain additional existing medical evidence or request a consultative exam paid for by SSA. SSA had more than 84,000 employ- ees in 1980, compared to about 50,000 today, with half as many Americans receiving benefits compared with today. Each of 1,200+ field offices had at least one SSA field representative to reach those who lived far from an office and needed a home visit, or to be served at one of the Agency’s hundreds of con- tact stations (sites like courthouses and social service agencies, most at no cost to SSA). They also made presentations to educate people about SSA programs. There are no more contact stations, and no more field representatives. With SSA having largely withdrawn from communities across our nation, it shouldn’t surprise us that lies about Social Security are believed by too many Americans. Why else would anyone agree with Elon Musk that Social Security is a 90-year Ponzi scheme, that benefits are being paid on the records of 150-year-olds, or that undocumented workers are receiving payments (they’re not!)? Incorrect payments, which include underpayments as well as overpayments, are about 1 percent of total benefits paid. Incorrect payments (which could be greatly reduced by restoring staff) and fraudulent payments are not the same thing, and there is, in fact, very little fraud. Reports of changes that affect eligibility or payment amount are received by SSA, but often go unworked for many months due to job cuts. Implementation of the Social Security Fairness Act, which restored benefits for public retirees who had been subject to Government Pension Offset or the Windfall Elimination Provision, is also being slowed by staffing losses. Nearly three mil- lion records require adjustment, but some won’t be processed for a year. Of 182,000 new applications filed by those who hadn’t applied previously because no payments were due before the law was changed, 15 percent have not been processed. The Trump administration intends to strip all civil service and union rights from about 20 percent of the SSA workforce, including the Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) who conduct dis- ability hearings and render decisions. That would make it easy to intimidate or remove ALJs who allegedly approve too many cases. Thankfully, we have been getting some help from the courts and others. In April, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction to block DOGE from accessing the sensitive personal information in SSA records. On May 7, 15 House Republicans (none from Washington) wrote to Bisignano to express concerns about staff cuts and office closures. Two days later, another judge issued a two-week temporary restraining order blocking implementation of a February 11 executive order directing major “reorganizations” at SSA and 19 other agencies. The Administration appealed to the 9th Circuit within hours. H.R. 2550, the Protecting Ameri- ca’s Workforce Act, which would restore federal employee rights that have been stripped away, already has 220 House co-sponsors. We have a long and difficult fight on our hands, but we can and must win it. We have to pull back the curtain and reveal what’s really going on in the other Washington, reach out wherever possible to tell the story to others, and take action by attending rallies and/or calling members of Congress from both parties. Steve Kofahl is a former President of AFGE 3937, representing Social Security workers, a member of PSARA's Executive Board, and Co-Chair of PSARA's Social Security Task Force. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents June 2025 Chaos Monkey Goes After the Federal Reserve Michael Righi Trump wants lower interest rates. Probably so he and his family can borrow cheap money to pump up the value of their crypto coins, then dump them and leave ordinary investors with the losses. Maybe he needs money to build a golf course in Dubai. Or wait, maybe that’s going to be a “gift.” So call me cynical. He is also worried that his tariff chaos is going to slow production and the economy. Lower interest rates might encourage more spending and support the economy he is effectively tanking. Trump the autocrat wants the same power over interest rates that he has over tariffs. So he is threatening the Federal Reserve and its chair, Jerome Powell. Firing Powell would be illegal; his term is not up, but this is Trump, right? And the Federal Reserve system was created to function independently of the president and Congress, on purpose, supposedly to insulate the Fed from political pressure. The Fed was initially created in 1913 to stop the financial crises private banks kept causing. Bankers would make riskier and riskier loans to pump up profit, some loans would go bad, banks would collapse and production and jobs would disappear. The Fed, once created, then lent money to bail the banks (and depositors) out, and prevent depressions. How to Make Money That is a crucial understanding – the Federal Reserve Bank creates money, out of thin air. You write a check, you draw down your account. The Fed writes a check by changing some numbers on a computer – only based on their authority as the country’s central bank. The Fed works through the private banking system. The Fed buys financial assets, Treasury bonds, or lately even mortgage-backed securities. That money winds up in the banking system, enabling banks to make loans. That’s more money in the economy. So the Fed enables banks to create our money supply. The Humphrey-Hawkins law passed by Congress mandates that the Fed keep both inflation and unemployment low. The Fed does this by controlling short-term interest rates. Those are often conflicting goals. Low interest rates (“easy money”) encourage borrowing and spending and so more jobs. But that also allows businesses to raise prices. High interest rates (“tight money”) have the opposite effect, slowing the economy. This all sounds technical and value- neutral. That’s what the Fed and Wall Street and financial elites want us to think, that Fed policy is apolitical and technocratic. Tell that to homeowners who lost their homes in the 2008 financial crisis while the Fed bailed out big insurance and bank corporations. Or to cardholders and small businesses now as the Powell Fed allows Capital One and Dis- cover to merge and raise their charges. The Fed Is Not Independent The Fed is run by bankers and Wall Street financiers, and influenced by what the corporate elite wants. High interest rates protect the assets of the financial elite from inflation, reducing their value. High rates also keep the economy from creating jobs, because then workers’ wages and willingness to organize might interfere with corporate profit. But financial crisis might call for extended periods of low interest rates, to keep Wall Street afloat, as after 2008. As wages have stagnated or fallen for decades, low rates also encouraged families to run up debt to maintain living standards. Whatever the capitalists in power need, the Fed tries to provide. Its power is relatively easy to access for the wealthy, easier than going through the somewhat more democratic legislative process. With Trump going after him, it is tempting to defend Powell and the Fed. That just puts us back into the space of bad choices. Neither represents what the working class needs. The Fed itself is soon likely to face both inflation and unemployment, a result of Trumpian chaos and uncertainty. If leaving it to the Fed is not the answer, then what is? That also should be up for discussion. There are ideas out there. Regional and local public banks could loan money for public infrastructure, such as transit and clean energy. Postal banking would enable those shut out of banks to borrow and make transactions. Michael Righi is a retired economics professor and a member of the Retiree Advocate Editorial Board. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents December 2025 How the Trump Administration Is Changing Nonprofit Organizations: Chaos to Follow Katie Harris Did you know that, in the Trump regime, up now means down? That’s right; Trump’s administration is issuing guidance and executive orders that turn the nonprofit sector on its head. Existing laws are being reverse engineered to make it discriminatory to reverse discrimination. Organizations working to reverse inequities and injustice are scrambling to understand how they’re affected, and how to position themselves to avoid nuisance complaints and lawsuits. Advocacy and service organizations will have to recast how they represent their work, hiring, and programming. But first, what, exactly, are executive orders and guidance? Executive orders are directives, signed by the president, that have the force of law. They can be nullified by the courts or modified through legislation, but they remain in effect until they are rescinded by a president or expire on a specified date. Trump has issued hundreds. For handy reference, the National Council of Nonprofits has published a chart of executive orders with sizable sector impacts. Organizations centering diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); immigrant justice; health care; envirormental justice; LGBTQ+; and civic access are among those hardest hit. Unlike executive orders, official guidance does not have the force of law. However, guidance from Attorney General Pam Bondi has a huge impact on organizations. Guidance for Recipients of Federal Funding Regarding Unlawful Discrimination redefines how the federal government considers DEI. Centering the interests of a specific population is now discrimination on the basis of a protected characteristic. The Guidance maintains that programs that “separate or restrict access based on race, sex, or other protected characteristics…generally violate federal law by creating unequal treatment or reinforcing stereotypes, regardless of the stated goal.” But lest we assume consistency matters, “failing to maintain sex-separated athletic competitions and intimate spaces can also violate federal law.” Therefore, “organizations should affirm sex-based boundaries rooted in biological differences.” The assaults on organizations are mind-boggling in scope and very destabilizing. Among the most impacted: Race-based scholarships and program participation; Preferential hiring or promotion; Access to facilities or resources based on race, ethnicity, income level or census tract. Language to serve as proxies for “preferential treatment” is explicit in Bondi’s Guidance . Cultural competence, lived experience and diversity statements are cited as examples of proxies. Instead, organizations are supposed to be “merit-based.” In other words, the protected class is now those who benefit from the “affirmative action of generational wealth,” as Michelle Obama aptly put it. The Department of Justice, alone, canceled 373 grants, totaling $500 million, affecting 221 organizations. These grants had been approved by Congress, which sets policy through its power of the purse. Eliminating these grants puts the president’s actions at odds with Congressional intent. But, with this administration, that’s the point. The implications are huge. Government grant cycles have been canceled. Foundations have redirected their grants to maintain the operations of vital organizations under sustained assault. Legal service organizations are deluged by preparing legal challenges to fight these orders. Nonprofits must also expect nuisance complaints and lawsuits requiring defense, intended to divert resources away from programming. One tool will be scrutiny of IRS Form 990, the detailed nonprofit tax filing, which anyone may inspect online. (Religious congregations are exempt from public scrutiny). Ongoing foci in the 990 for right-wing trolls include: Using contractors in lieu of staff. Expect increased scrutiny here. The IRS criteria are clearly spelled out; Fundraising costs that appear disproportionately high, relative to the budget; Advocacy activities that might constitute lobbying in excess of thresholds; Lack of conflict of interest and whistleblower policies; Absence of financial policies and procedures. Meeting minutes, annual reports and job announcements will also face scrutiny. One growing vulnerability: agencies record meeting minutes using Zoom instead of taking written minutes. It is very tempting, but don’t do it. People say all sorts of things in meetings that shouldn’t be captured for all time. Expect meeting minutes to be requested with complaints. Referring to a contractor as a deputy director in a recorded board meeting, for example, could leave an organization very vulnerable. We can expect complaints around phrasing of job postings and program eligibility. Any public-facing document is a potential avenue of exposure for an organization. To read the Attorney General’s memo, search for Guidance for Recipients of Federal Funding Regarding Unlawful Discrimination. A tool kit for protecting nonprofits from scurrilous attacks is Nonprofit Toolkit: Resources for Organizations Facing Government Investigations . A New York Times article about what’s coming is "You May Not Be Trump’s Target This Time, but You Could Be Next." Katie Harris is the Retiree Advocate's Copy Editor. < Back to Table of Contents