The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents September 2026 Social Security on the Ballot Steve Kofahl Candidate Trump assured voters that he would not touch Social Security. In fact, he and his appointees have man-handled it administratively in the past 18 months, removing 7,500 SSA (Social Security Administration) employees while aggressively driving the public to online self-service with unreliable AI “assistance.” As we approach the mid-term elections, it’s important to understand that crippled service delivery is not the only threat to the program. Some in Congress wish to cut benefits, in order to “save” Social Security, using the dwindling Trust Fund surplus as justification and a commission operating behind closed doors as the method. Defenders of the program, on the other hand, call for the rich to pay their fair share by scrapping the cap on earnings subject to taxation, and for increased benefits. On August 5, just nine days short of the Social Security Act’s 91st birthday, these competing alternatives were put on display at a Senate Finance Committee hearing titled “Exploring Process Approaches for Addressing Social Security Solvency.” Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-ID) stated that the 1983 Greenspan Commission “demonstrated the value of creating a forum in which policymakers could work through difficult issues and build consensus on a bipartisan basis.” He credited the 2010 Bowles-Simpson Commission recommendations as having informed subsequent discussions, despite having insufficient support for passage. The Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member, Ron Wyden (D-OR), said, “Today Republican members of this panel will claim they have the solution: an unaccountable 'commission' that will rubber stamp benefit cuts like increasing the retirement age.” He pointed out that, thanks to last year’s “Big Beautiful Bill," the Trust Fund reserves will be depleted in the last quarter of 2032, rather than in early 2033, costing them $168 billion according to the SSA Chief Actuary. His bottom line is to work on a bipartisan basis to update Social Security and require billionaires to pay their fair share of payroll and income taxes. Wyden said he wishes that the Committee was there to have a substantive debate. “Instead of talking about talking, this body should get to work on finding a resolution to the Social Security solvency challenge and having that debate in public view.” He stated that Democrats on the Committee had put forward their own ideas, and that through those plans Social Security can be secured indefinitely into the future without any cuts to current or future beneficiaries. Testimony by AARP Executive Vice President Nancy A. LeaMond stated, “Our message is simple, and it has two parts. First, Congress should strengthen Social Security for future generations without cutting the payments Americans have earned and are earning. Second, Congress should do this work itself - openly, transparently, and deliberatively through regular order - rather than outsourcing it to commissions or forcing it through fast-tracking procedures that restrict debate and amendments.” Later in her statement she said, “AARP wants Congress to act - sooner rather than later - and we will support members of both parties who take up that work. What we oppose is narrower, and I will say it plainly: we oppose cuts to Social Security, and we oppose processes that would obscure those cuts from the American people. If defending the benefits Americans have earned counts as impeding progress, that says more about the proposals than it does about AARP.” LeaMond went on to point out that the Greenspan Commission is no model to emulate, and that its own members acknowledged that it failed to produce a solution. It took traditional negotiations between the leaders of the two parties and the President to produce a solution that was then endorsed by the Commission and made its way through Congress under regular procedures. AARP opposes the PROMISE Act (S. 4979), the Fiscal Commission Act (S. 4012), and the Bipartisan Social Security Commission Act of 2026 (H.R. 9187). A recent AARP survey revealed that 81% of older Americans (89% of Democrats, 77% of Republicans) reject the idea of cutting Social Security in order to save it. Rebecca D. Vallas, National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI) CEO, presented her own views, as some of the 1,400 members of the Academy may have others. She explained the importance of retirement and disability insurance protections to Americans, from both political parties and among Independents. Vallas noted an unusual level of agreement among 2,200 Americans ages 21 and over who were surveyed through a partnership of NASI, AARP, and the US Chamber of Commerce. Eighty-five percent want to see Congress prevent cuts or increase benefits even if doing so requires raising taxes on some or all Americans. Scrapping the cap ($184,500 in 2026) was the single most popular option tested in the entire survey. She urged consideration be given to taxing pass-through and investment income, as provided in The Social Security and Medicare Fair Share Act ( S. 1174). The policy package preferred by 82% of respondents even supports a slight, gradual increase in the contribution rate for everyone, from 6.2% to 7.2%, along with scrapping the cap. Steve Kofahl is a retired president of AFGE 3937, representing Social Security workers, and the Co-Chair of PSARA's Social Security task force. < 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

Democracy Depends on Truth and Facts As a potential harbinger to the future in our country, Cindy Domingo reports on the challenges to democracy in the Philippines. Read

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents August 2026 The Barbed Wire Barb Flye < 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 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 May 2026 Vertical Integration: Fighting Monopoly Katie Harris In "Vertical Integration – How United Health Group Consolidated Power" (see the March, 2026, Retiree Advocate ), I described how vertical integration in health care enables a company, such as UnitedHealth Group (UHG), to own interrelated goods and services pertaining to the business of medical care. One unit of the company can charge another unit of the company whatever it wants, with few exceptions. For example, an acute care facility might buy expensive diagnostic equipment from another entity owned by UHG. Vertical integration eliminates incentives to trim costs or evaluate product quality. Increasing market share brings with it leverage in negotiations with profound consequences for smaller players. UHG’s breadth is staggering, including, for example, medical financing, data processing and information management. The year 2010 marked a major strategic shift for health insurance companies that hastened the pace of vertical integration in health care. What changed? The Sunlight Report, a deep dive into UnitedHealth Group’s acquisition strategies, identified two factors. First, consolidation of the health insurance industry had been so robust that there were few players left and few opportunities to pick up underperforming companies to grow market share and profitability. Second, 2010 is when the Affordable Care Act (ACA) became law. The ACA required that 80% - 85% of health insurance premiums be spent on health care. Any excess would have to be returned to customers. However, this provision didn’t apply to delivery of health care services. Buying physicians’ practices and clinics provided opportunities to both inflate the percentage of insurance premiums spent on health care delivery, and channel UHG’s nearly 50 million insurance customers into receiving care through those medical practices. But physicians also had to be receptive to buy-outs. The American Hospital Association’s Physician Practice Acquisitions: What Drives Them and Implications for Consumers and Payers , cites the overwhelming administrative burden and lack of bargaining power in negotiating rates as key factors in small medical practices throwing in the towel. UHG now employs more than 10 percent of physicians in the United States. Even larger practices can’t break even. The late Polyclinic, a 101-year old, 210-member, physician-owned practice in Seattle, sold to UHG in 2018. Poly-clinic, now doing business as Optum Care, is where I receive my medical care. At the time of the transition, I asked each of my doctors why they sold. My doctors – those who remained, that is – described defeat; they could not grow the scope of the practice, such as palliative care, to be comprehensive, current, and competitive without resources they didn’t have. According to the Seattle Times , whereas 38 percent of Washington’s physicians were in solo practice in 1996, less than 4 percent maintained independent practices as of 2018. The attractiveness of acquiring physicians’ practices doesn’t just apply to publicly traded companies such as UHG. In its research study, the Association of Private Equity Acquisition of Physician Practices With Changes in Health Care Spending and Utilization , the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that the acquisition of physicians’ practices was associated with increased spending on health care, such as allowed billables and more frequent visits per patient. The dismantling of the Department of Justice is taking its toll on addressing these issues. As online news service Disruption Banking’s Richardson Chinonyerem notes, “The deeper risk isn’t that United Health is guilty of fraud; it’s that America’s institutional ability to hold such power accountable is evaporating. "Numerous criminal and civil suits are stalled, delaying addressing UHG’s infrastructure, its practices and their impact on service quality, cost, and inability of non-affiliated service providers to compete. What to do in the absence of action on the executive side? Senators Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) have introduced the Break Up Big Medicine Act (S3822) to force an end to consolidation of medical goods and services, financing, data management, and market positioning. “There’s no question that massive health care companies have created layers of complexity to jack up the price of everything from prescription drugs to a visit to the doctor. The only way to make health care more affordable is to break up these health care conglomerates,” said Senator Warren. “Our bill would be a monumental step towards ending the stranglehold that corporate giants have on our broken health care system.” Congressmember Jayapal expects a companion bill to be introduced in the House. This legislation is modeled after the Glass-Spiegel Act, passed in 1933, which separated investment and commercial banking activities in response to involvement in stock market investment. While the legislation won’t pass before the mid-terms, its prospects might improve thereafter. Still, we can anticipate that the staggering profits of the health care industry behemoths will be channeled into massive resistance to efforts to break them up. At the state level, in Washington State, most efforts to rein in vertical integration in healthcare have been defeated by industry lobbying. In the 2026 legislative session, SB 5387, died. It sought to limit corporate involvement in the practice of medicine. Another bill, HB 2548, that did pass, gives the state more oversight over mergers and acquisitions related to healthcare. Washington State’s health advocates are working overtime to overcome the power of the insurance and hospital lobbyists, but it's been an uphill climb. The PSARA Education Fund will work to integrate into our educational forums and written materials information about the dangers of vertical integration and the need to pass the Break Up Big Medicine Act. PSARA will join with local allies to advocate that our WA Senators and Representatives cosponsor the legislation and work with national allies to position the legislation for passage after the 2028 election. Additionally, PSARA will work with state legislators and allies to reverse corporate control of medicine at the state level. Katie Harris is copy editor for the Retiree Advocate and a member of our editorial board < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents February 2025 Warning: Trump's Nominees May Be Hazardous to Your Health Mike Andrew Most of Donald Trump’s high-level nominees will be confirmed by a Republican-controlled Senate. That’s not good news. For PSARA members – and anyone else who is concerned about protecting our rights to affordable, science-based health care – two are especially problematic: Dr. Mehmet Oz and Robert Kennedy, Jr. Mehmet Oz: From Respected Doctor to Snake Oil Salesman Oz has been picked to head CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services), the agency that manages Medicare and works with state government to oversee Medicaid. Oz was once a respected heart surgeon and a professor at the Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons. He then became a TV celebrity, appearing regularly on the Oprah Winfrey Show from 2004 through 2009. Winfrey then began producing Oz’s own TV show, on which he promoted so-called “alternative medicine” schemes. In 2012, Oz entered into an arrangement with Usana Health Sciences, a multi-level marketing company selling “nutrition” supplements. Oz was paid over $50 million over a five-year period to promote Usana products on his show. During the COVID epidemic, Oz falsely claimed the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment for COVID-19. What Oz did not reveal at the time was that he owns at least $630,000 of stock in two companies that manufacture or distribute hydroxychloroquine, Thermo Fisher and McKesson Corporation. Not only is the drug ineffective against the COVID virus, but it can also actively harm patients who take it to combat COVID-19, according to the World Health Organization. Along with internet entrepreneur Jeff Arnold, Oz is also a an owner of Sharec- are, Inc., an online medical “information” venue that accepts paid advertisers and promotes the use of their products. Among their advertisers: Colgate-Pal- molive; Pfizer; Unilever (Dove skin-care products); health insurer UnitedHealth- care; and Walgreens drug stores. All this naked profiteering and all these potential conflicts of interest should be disqualifying in and of themselves. But wait! There’s more. We haven’t even gotten to Oz’s views on Medicare, the public health service he’ll be overseeing in the Trump administration. You remember the old saying about the fox guarding the henhouse? Oz thinks of health care as just another commodity. If you’re rich enough to pay for good care, fine. If you’re not… Well, Oz has already told us what he foresees for low-income Americans. I In a 2012 speech to the National Governors Association, Oz declared that "(low-income people) don’t have the right to health, but they have a right to access – a chance to get that health." How do they “get that health?” Oz proposed that lawmakers host cheap 15-minute health screenings “in a festival-like setting" to help those who are uninsured. During his 2020 campaign for the US Senate, Oz announced a health care plan, which he called "Medicare Ad- vantage for All.” That’s right, Oz wants to turn all health care in the US over to private insurance companies and all the overpayments, outright fraud, de- lays, and denial of claims that go along with private Medicare Advantage plans. Oz will be a disaster in his role as head of CMS. RFK Jr.: The Worm Ate More Than We Thought Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has been nominated to be the Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and therefore Dr. Oz’s boss. True, RFK Jr. has some interesting ideas about eating healthy foods and restricting artificial additives, but his views overall align with the contrarian anti-science ideology of right-wing populism. Kennedy chairs the Children's Health Defense, an anti-vaccine advocacy group he joined in 2015. The group claims that exposure to vaccines, certain chemicals, and radiation has caused a wide range of conditions in many American children, including autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), food allergies, cancer, and autoimmune diseases. Children's Health Defense has actively campaigned against vaccines, fluoridation of drinking water, acetaminophen, aluminum, and wireless communication, among other things. The group has been identified as one of two major buyers of anti- vaccine Facebook advertising in late 2018 and early 2019. Kennedy and Children's Health Defense have falsely claimed that vaccines cause autism. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Kennedy promoted multiple conspiracy theories related to COVID, including false claims that Anthony Fauci and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation were trying to profit off a vaccine, and suggesting that Bill Gates would cut off access to money of people who do not get vaccinated, allowing them to starve. In August 2020, Kennedy appeared in an hour-long interview with Alec Baldwin on Instagram and touted a number of incorrect and misleading claims about vac- cines and public health measures related to the pandemic. Public health officials and scientists criticized Baldwin for letting Kennedy's claims go unchallenged. In addition, Kennedy has spread the false HIV/AIDS denialist claim that no one has isolated the HIV virion and "No one has been able to point to a study that demonstrates their hypothesis using accepted scientific proofs." He has also asserted that anti-HIV drugs, which have saved millions of HIV-positive patients, are toxic and should be banned. The Kennedy-Oz team managing HHS and CMS would be a one-two punch to the gut for affordable, science-based health care in the US. Mike Andrew is the Editor of the Advocate and Executive Director of PSARA < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents March 2026 Kaiser Permanente’s Hand in the Cookie Jar Robby Stern In February 17, 1971, President Nixon’s domestic advisor, John Erlichman, briefed President Nixon on a conversation he had with Edgar Kaiser, the founder of Kaiser Permanente (KP). Erlichman was describing KP to the President as an example of the newly emerging Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO). They were considering whether the HMO model was a possible alternative to the call for nationalized healthcare. Erlichman told the President, “All the incentives are toward less medical care, because…the less care they give them the more money they make.” Nixon responded, “Fine." Flash forward 50-plus years. A New York Times (NYT) article written by Reed Abelson and Margot Sanger-Katz, published on January 14, 2026, revealed that KP had reached a very large settlement with the Department of Justice (DOJ) concerning Medicare fraud claims amounting to an estimated one billion dollars. The settlement was for $556 million to be paid to the federal government and two whistle blowers for overbilling by KP’s Medicare Advantage plan. The lawsuit dated back more than 12 years and asserted that KP affiliates in California and Colorado reported their patients were sicker than they actually were. Medicare Advantage (MA) insurers are paid a certain amount per patient (capitated payment) based on the individual’s health-related risk factors rather than Original Medicare’s fee for service. The NYT article explains what the whistleblowers exposed. “One of the whistleblowers, Dr. James Taylor, a physician and coding expert, who worked for Kaiser in Colorado, described meetings in which he was told to find additional diagnoses that could be worth millions of dollars. ‘The cash monster was insatiable,’ he said." According to the NYT article, “In the Kaiser case, executives routinely pressured doctors to add thousands of diagnoses, sometimes weeks or months after the patients had been treated, according to the Justice Department, which joined the lawsuits in 2021. The extra diagnoses helped the company earn bonus funds from the government. MA insurers are paid higher insurance premiums when plans cover sicker patients.” The NYT article went on to say “The Justice Department lawsuit stated ‘The doctors would sometimes sit together at lunch or after work, with food and drinks provided by Kaiser, to code their visits with additional diagnoses...the insurer linked doctor and facility pay bonuses to adding more diagnoses.' “According to the lawsuit, the government estimated that Kaiser received one billion dollars from 2009 to 2018 from additional diagnoses, including roughly 100,000 findings of aortic atherosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries. But because its doctors would be forced to follow up on too many people, the organization stopped automatically enrolling those patients in a heart attack prevention program.” KP indicated. when they reached this settlement, that they decided to settle the lawsuit “to avoid prolonged litigation.” The settlement allowed KP to state that they never did anything wrong. Had the settlement required KP to admit wrongdoing, they could have been excluded from the MA program. KP is not alone in this practice. MedPAC, an independent congressional agency, created in 1997, analyzes and provides policy advice to Congress regarding the Medicare program. They issued reports in March, 2025, and January, 2026, indicating that MA insurers were overcharging the Medicare Trust Fund by $85 billion in 2025 and are projected to overcharge by $76 billion in 2026. Instead of profits (because KP is a “nonprofit”), Kaiser has extensive “reserves," supposedly to cover times when costs exceed revenues. As of the beginning of 2026, KP’s estimated financial reserves were estimated at $67 billion held in cash and investments. Here is an example of KP’s investments. Innovaccer, Inc. is the company that has been selected by CMS/CMMI to implement the WISeR program in Ohio. WISeR is the newest privatization attack on Original Medicare. Created and overseen by CMS/CMMI, WISeR expands the use of prior authorization in Original Medicare, using artificial intelligence as a tool for determining if certain procedures recommended by a Medicare beneficiary’s physician will be covered by Medicare. Innovaccer receives a higher reimbursement rate for denying coverage for these procedures. A leading investor in the funding of Innovaccer Corporation is Kaiser Permanente. Evidently, they hope to receive significant returns from the reserve funds invested in Innovaccer. In 2024, KP’s top nine executives were paid, according to their Form 990 filed with the IRS, approximately $56 million in salaries, with CEO Greg Adams’ salary close to $13 million (one million+ per month)! The salary numbers do not include additional perks that add significantly to the total compensation package. While Kaiser’s executives may earn less than executives of for-profit Medicare Advantage corporations, KP executives and the KP system are a part of overcharging our worker-funded Medicare Trust Fund by Medicare Advantage. We, the people who paid into the Medicare Trust Fund, are learning that our hard-earned wages are being fleeced by both for-profit and not-for-profit insurance corporations. After knowledge comes action. CMS has issued a 2027 Advanced Rate Notice related to reimbursement rates for MA insurers. There is an opportunity for public comment with a deadline of February 25th. The CMS proposal of an increase of 0.9 of 1% is meeting stiff resistance from the insurers who received an outrageous 5% increase in 2026. Our voices will need to weigh in. Please look for a PSARA email with instructions on how to register a comment and suggested language for a message. Robby Stern is President of the PSARA Education Fund and a member of PSARA's Executive Board. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents July 2026 Congressional Review Act Makes WISeR Repeal Possible Robby Stern There is a new congressional effort to terminate the WISeR program CMS (Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services) has imposed on Traditional Medicare beneficiaries in six states including Washington. Senator Ron Wyden (OR) requested that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determine if this private, for-profit, AI pilot program required congressional approval. The GAO issued an opinion that it did require congressional approval. The GAO stated that WISeR qualifies as an agency rule under the Congressional Review Act. CMS was legally required to seek the approval of Congress for the program. The GAO decided that WISeR changes the rights of both health care providers and Medicare beneficiaries. While CMS argued that the program is “voluntary,” GAO found that in reality health care providers are forced to use the new AI system or face “strict prepayment reviews.” Because of the GAO ruling, Congress can pass a joint resolution under the Congressional Review Act to repeal the WISeR model. There is a 60 day window to take action. Sen. Wyden immediately introduced SJR 192 to terminate WISeR and Senators Murray and Cantwell as well as 18 of their colleagues are original co-sponsors of the resolution. Rep. Landsman and DelBene introduced a companion resolution in the House, HJR 187. SJR 192 is better positioned because of the smaller number of co-sponsors needed to bring WISeR to the floor for a vote. The resolution was assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee and on June 9th, the Judiciary Committee discharged SJR to the Senate floor calendar. Under the provisions of the Congressional Review Act, SJR 192 relating to the WISeR program must be brought to the Senate floor for a vote. Unfortunately, the majority leader, Sen. John Thune, determines the date the vote will take place. If it passes the Senate with a simple majority (a big if ), it then goes to the House, and if the House passes the Resolution, WISeR is terminated. The good news on the House side is that very recently, a House subcommittee, working on the 2027 Health and Human Services budget allocation, voted unanimously to defund WISeR in the coming fiscal year. That amendment is a long way from actually being in the next fiscal year budget but it is an indication that WISeR is unfavorably viewed by both Democrats and Republicans. With all of this interesting news, it is still a bit of a long-shot that this Congress will terminate WISeR. If SJR 192 passes the Senate, we will need to act collectively to get as many Washington House members as possible to support the Resolution. Stay tuned and we will be in touch about SJR 192. At this point, sending a message to Senators Murray and Cantwell thanking them for being original co-sponsors of SJR 192 relating to the WISeR program would be a very good thing to do. Robby Stern is President of the PSARA Education Fund and a member of the PSARA Executive Board < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents September 2026 Fossil Fuel Divestment and Engaging With Corporate Clean Energy Transition Plans Both Necessary Jeff Johnson On July 26, 2026, former Washington State legislators Reuven Carlyle and Mark Mullet wrote a response in the Seattle Times to a July 10 op-ed, regarding divesting state funds and public pension funds from fossil fuels, written by Jeff Johnson, former President of the Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO and Greg Devereux, former Executive Director of the Washington Federation of State Employees. What follows is a letter Jeff Johnson sent to Reuven and Mark in response. Dear Reuven and Mark, Let me begin by saying I commend you both on your years of public service in the legislature. Having worked the legislature for over 30 years, I recognize the personal sacrifice and commitment that you both made, to make the state a better place to live. I found your July 26 argument short-sighted, inadequate to address the financial responsibilities of the state in a world increasingly defined by climate chaos, and in some ways just plain misleading. Fossil fuel assets have been significantly underperforming the market for the past decade. In spite of exogenous price shocks by Putin’s war in the Ukraine and Trump’s war in Iran, the declining value of fossil fuels relative to other more profitable assets should be concerning from a fiduciary perspective. Nonetheless, as climate chaos has literally set parts of the world on fire, caused an increasing decline in bio-diversity, threatened water and food sufficiency, increased ocean acidification and warming, and fueled a climate refugee crisis, the financial industry has recently invested trillions into growing and developing the fossil fuel industry. The Washington State Investment Board (WSIB) and Washington State, with its $8 billion plus investments in fossil fuels, are part of this problem. The hidden costs, or what economists call externalities, of climate chaos are extraordinary but not often spelled out. The rising cost of property insurance, food and water costs, lost jobs, housing, public infrastructure, uncompensated health care costs due to climate change added to the personal and public costs of mitigating climate disasters are eating up greater and greater chunks of personal and public budgets. This impacts every level of government and every worker and retiree. A few extra dollars in a weekly paycheck or a monthly pension payment increasingly falls short of in-creased costs due to climate change. You argue that “evidence decisively” shows that divesting from fossil fuels will not increase state or pension returns nor help fight climate change. You cite academics who show that divestment from fossil fuels has not raised the cost of capital and therefore not constrained the operations of fossil fuel companies nor cut emissions. This is not surprising given that banks, insurance companies, and bottom-feeding private equity corporations continue to rapaciously invest in fossil fuels. But this misses the real point. No one is arguing that divesting from fossil fuels will immediately cause emissions to fall. Nor is anyone arguing that it isn’t important to engage with non-fossil fuel companies over clean energy transition plans. What we are arguing is that public and private institutional investors can meet their fiduciary responsibilities to protect their assets (pension or otherwise) and tackle climate change head on. Over 1,700 institutions worldwide, managing over $40 trillion in capital assets, have made commitments to not purchase fossil fuel assets and divest from existing fossil assets. Of these 1,700 plus institutions, 35% are faith based, 15% are educational, 12% + are philanthropic, 12% are pension funds, 11% + are governmental, and about 9% are for-profit companies. What these organizations recognize is that both budgets and investment portfolios are moral documents at the same time that they realize they can meet their fiduciary duty without holding fossil fuel assets. Given the existential crisis climate change presents, you can no longer say, with a straight face, that we will address climate change only through legislative change, and continue to negate that work through the financial investments we make. The accelerating climate chaos that our world faces requires us to use every tool at our disposal to stop this assault on the existence of our planet. Relative to climate change, it is a false dichotomy to say the work of the legislature and the work of Washington State Investment Board must remain in two separate lanes and never the two shall meet. Climate chaos is accelerating at such an alarming pace that legislative policy fixes are just not enough. While the Climate Commitment Act and Clean Energy Transformation Act were good first steps, they are by no means a reason to feel content. As the state law requiring all electricity in Washington State to be carbon-free by 2045 approaches, utility companies in the state are making plans to greatly expand power plants fueled by natural gas. While this will lower carbon emissions, it will create more methane emissions, which heats the atmosphere even more quickly. This is unacceptable. Given the declining value of fossil fuel assets, divesting these assets over a five-year period of time can increase our pension and state fund returns, while meeting the fiduciary obligations of the WSIB. That’s what the NYC pension funds found when they divested from $4 billion of fossil fuel assets. According to Monte Tarbox, Chief Investment Officer, since divestment, the NYC pension funds have seen an improvement in returns. There is no reason to scare our hardworking public sector teachers, firefighters, or state employees that divesting from fossil fuels will reduce their pension benefits. Divestment is a tool. I would like to see Washington State catch up with the over 1,700 institutions sending a message to the fossil fuel industry and to the financial industry that major sectors of civil society reject the false narrative that divestment will lower portfolio returns, that one can’t have a profitable and diversified portfolio without fossil fuels, and that, when it comes to our very existence, we should leave what we invest in to the bean counters. I will close this letter with a statement from Archbishop Desmond Tutu from a press conference at the 2014 United Nations Climate Summit. "Climate change has become the human rights challenge of our time. I commend the individuals and institutions who are announcing divestment of their assets from fossil fuels and are investing instead in the clean energy needed for human survival." Finally, I want to be able to, someday, tell my nine-month-old grandson, Alessandro, that I am truly sorry for what we have done to this planet and that we finally woke up and did everything we could to reduce the destruction that is caused by fossil fuel induced climate change. Best, Jeff Johnson, Retired union leader, pensioner, garlic and flower farmer, and Co-President of PSARA. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents May 2025 Autoworkers, the UAW, Trump, and Trade Tariffs and the Autoworkers Michael Righi Our orange king has put 25 percent tariffs on imported cars and trucks. Wait! They are suspended for a couple months, but not for all countries. Not for China, of course. And maybe special consideration for parts made in Canada and Mexico. By the time you read this, who knows what the situation will be? But a couple things are clear. While Trump and Miller and the rest of them blather on about bringing industry back to a bunkered USA, their broad and haphazard tariffs are leading straight to recession and job loss. Uncertainty will crash business investment. Intermediate goods that firms need will cost more, and they will cut back and lay workers off. Tariffs are a tax that falls most heavily on goods bought by working families. So they will feel both the inflation and the job loss. Trump says “we” will need to suffer a little pain in the short run. Except not Apple or purchasers of I- phones or computers, they are exempt. Blow Up Free Trade Fundamentalism We should not mourn the end of so- called “free trade." Neoliberal economists, corporate Democrats and many NY Times pundits are howling about the end of the postwar trading system. But we do not want the corporate trade model that is embodied in the North American Free Trade Agreement and the opening of trade with China. That has allowed multinational corporations to exploit foreign workers and environments, moving factories overseas and devastating working class communities in the US. NAFTA and trade with China have led to a loss of 70,000 manufacturing plants in the US and millions of jobs. To quote Shawn Fain, president of the United Auto Workers, “Our union is hell bent on ending the free trade disaster of the last 30 years.” It is workers who have borne the brunt of trade dislocations, not the auto companies. During the 1980’s the US Big Three – Ford, GM, and Chrysler (now Stellantis) – faced sharp competition from Japanese cars. Tariffs and quotas were enacted to stop imports and force foreign car companies to locate plants in the US. They built factories in non-union states. Then, with NAFTA in the 1990’s, the automobile corporations moved many parts and assembly factories to Mexico, and a little bit to Canada, setting up complex supply chains. A typical car sold in the US today has parts that have crossed borders several times. Most have 40 percent or more “foreign content.” The top 10 global automakers raked in $70 billion in profit in 2020. Now that has doubled, to $150 billion, as they raised prices 30 percent during the Covid crisis. Over the last 15 years, they have bought back $370 billion in stock from their wealthy investors. Meanwhile, workers’ wages were stagnating until the recent UAW con- tract made significant gains. But those wage increases apply only to union workers, and the majority are non-union. Now, 43 percent of car parts and assembly jobs are in Mexico, where workers average $3 an hour. That’s down from $6 an hour in 1993, before NAFTA. NAFTA opened up Mexican markets, especially corn, to US agribusiness, driving down prices and driving families off the land. Many headed north to maquiladora auto parts and assembly plants, pushing down wages. Moving jobs to Mexico, in this race to the bottom, is still going on. One example: Stellantis recently moved Ram truck production from Warren, Michigan, to Mexico. Instead of paying $37 an hour, the company pays $3. They don’t lower prices, they just send more profit to Wall Street. The UAW has calculated how much US factory capacity is sitting idle. Enough to build two million cars and hire 50,000 more workers. Every auto assembly job creates seven more in the supply chain. So Tariffs Would targeted tariffs on imported cars and trucks help bring autoworker jobs back? The UAW thinks so. (Just to be perfectly clear, Shawn Fain and the UAW, while in favor of auto tariffs, are opposed to 99 percent of the Trump agenda, including the detention of union members and protestors.). But tariffs are only a first step – the trade agreement with Mexico and Canada (formerly NAFTA) must be renegotiated. It must include provisions for a minimum manufacturing wage way above $3 an hour. It must have a labor board to enforce labor organizing and bargaining rights. In the long run, the UAW wants to be making the electric cars and batteries we need. That will require strong government action forbidding stock buybacks and excessive CEO compensation, and forcing the auto companies to invest and innovate. Trump wants trade chaos and scapegoats. Corporations want free trade and profit. We want fair trade, so that all workers can make a living on a living planet. Michael Righi is a retired economics professor and a member of the Retiree Advocate editorial board. < Back to Table of Contents