Friday, December 22, 2006
Criminalizing Poverty, Part II
I got a surprise today when I got home from work around 4:10 p.m. (Bear with me. The time's important.) The surprise was not a good one. A while ago, I posted about filling out a MinnesotaCare application. The app went through okay and we got a notice that our coverage would continue. I waited for a bill. It did not enter our household until December 18, 2006 - this past Monday. The statement was dated December 13, 2006, with a due date of December 14, 2006. Got that? We didn't get the bill until FOUR DAYS AFTER IT WAS DUE! We wrote out a check and sent it on December 20, 2006. Today, the surprise. We got a cancellation notice from MinnesotaCare for not paying our bill on time. And, here's the kicker: The cancellation notice was dated December 14, 2006.
I immediately tried to call MinnesotaCare to let them know the situation and got a round-about system that never did give me the option to talk to a real person. I did find out the hours for the office: 8 a.m. - 4:15 p.m. I guess they figure that poor people sit on our butts all day watching TV. Funny that. I was at work all day. In fact, while there, I heard a program on MPR about what constitutes good design in both objects and systems. You now have an example of poor design, unless, of course, the MinnesotaCare system is purposely designed to criminalize poverty. It succeeded in making me feel like the lowest scum who'd ever slithered on earth. (No offense to you scum out there.)
I immediately tried to call MinnesotaCare to let them know the situation and got a round-about system that never did give me the option to talk to a real person. I did find out the hours for the office: 8 a.m. - 4:15 p.m. I guess they figure that poor people sit on our butts all day watching TV. Funny that. I was at work all day. In fact, while there, I heard a program on MPR about what constitutes good design in both objects and systems. You now have an example of poor design, unless, of course, the MinnesotaCare system is purposely designed to criminalize poverty. It succeeded in making me feel like the lowest scum who'd ever slithered on earth. (No offense to you scum out there.)
Labels: bills, criminals, design, minnesotacare, mpr, poverty, work
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Criminalizing Poverty
I received the renewal application for MinnesotaCare yesterday. The program works pretty well, except for a couple of things. One is the tone of the application. There are constant reminders that if you screw up the application and don't report every single cent and asset, you will be charged with fraud. (A $250,000 fine!) If you don't send in each and every proof for those assets, plus proof of citizenship, you will be dropped from the program. It says so under each item you have to report.
The second issue is the time requirement for notifying MinnesotaCare of changes. The application arrived yesterday and is due December 1. What's that, a couple weeks? To pull together birth certificates, bank statements, insurance statements, pay stubs, proof of insurance from employers, plus other miscellaneous proofs. If there is any kind of change within the year you are receiving MinnesotaCare, you are required to report that change within 10 days. TEN DAYS. Plus, you better remember what things MinnesotaCare requires you to report on within 10 days. (They don't give you any reminders with the monthly bill.) Don't know if that's 10 calendar days or 10 business days, but it seems to be 10 calendar days, in which case you can kiss a couple of weekend days goodbye, and any holidays that happen to fall within the time period. There is no way you're going to get ahold of a worker on weekends and holidays. Many people on MinnesotaCare fall into the category of working poor. If you work when the MinnesotaCare office is open, you'll have a devil of a time finding time within your day to call as well. The upshot is that you can easily play phone tag with a worker and not ever speak to someone within those 10 days.
What the tone and the unrealistic deadlines do is set up the feeling that the poor are criminals trying to take advantage of the system. In fact, it's almost as though the unrealistic deadline is an attempt to prove that the poor are criminals by setting them up to fail.
When the state comes up with these forms & rules, do they ever talk to poor people to find out what works for them? Or is that too much to ask? (I know, I know. We poor people are asking for a handout, so we should just shut up and take what we get.)
I'm not sure I have any suggestion to alleviate the tone of the forms, but I do have a simple solution for the deadline. Instead of making it 10 days, how about making it a billing cycle of 30 days? Would you expect business people to pay a bill in less tha 30 days? Why do we demand more of the poor? To remind people of the changes they need to report, MinnesotaCare can print a simple statement on their monthly bills listing the types of things people need to report. (Everything but this is now printed on the bills.)
I feel a letter to my legislators coming on.
The second issue is the time requirement for notifying MinnesotaCare of changes. The application arrived yesterday and is due December 1. What's that, a couple weeks? To pull together birth certificates, bank statements, insurance statements, pay stubs, proof of insurance from employers, plus other miscellaneous proofs. If there is any kind of change within the year you are receiving MinnesotaCare, you are required to report that change within 10 days. TEN DAYS. Plus, you better remember what things MinnesotaCare requires you to report on within 10 days. (They don't give you any reminders with the monthly bill.) Don't know if that's 10 calendar days or 10 business days, but it seems to be 10 calendar days, in which case you can kiss a couple of weekend days goodbye, and any holidays that happen to fall within the time period. There is no way you're going to get ahold of a worker on weekends and holidays. Many people on MinnesotaCare fall into the category of working poor. If you work when the MinnesotaCare office is open, you'll have a devil of a time finding time within your day to call as well. The upshot is that you can easily play phone tag with a worker and not ever speak to someone within those 10 days.
What the tone and the unrealistic deadlines do is set up the feeling that the poor are criminals trying to take advantage of the system. In fact, it's almost as though the unrealistic deadline is an attempt to prove that the poor are criminals by setting them up to fail.
When the state comes up with these forms & rules, do they ever talk to poor people to find out what works for them? Or is that too much to ask? (I know, I know. We poor people are asking for a handout, so we should just shut up and take what we get.)
I'm not sure I have any suggestion to alleviate the tone of the forms, but I do have a simple solution for the deadline. Instead of making it 10 days, how about making it a billing cycle of 30 days? Would you expect business people to pay a bill in less tha 30 days? Why do we demand more of the poor? To remind people of the changes they need to report, MinnesotaCare can print a simple statement on their monthly bills listing the types of things people need to report. (Everything but this is now printed on the bills.)
I feel a letter to my legislators coming on.
Labels: criminals, deadline, healthcare, minnesotacare, poor
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
The All Important Profile
Is cageyness an asset or a liability? In Robert Scoble and Shel Israel's book Naked Conversations: How Blogs Are Changing the Way Businesses Talk with Customers, they discuss how important transparency is in a blog. But, dang! What about identity thieves? I heard Jon Gordon, MPR's host of Future Tense, comment on how over forty percent of people online use pseudonyms or avatars. He wondered why they were doing so. Has he ever seen Dateline's show featuring the capture of online pedophiles? If only one person decides to be dishonest about his/her identity, even if the reasons are noble or just for fun and creativity, the rest of us are put at a disadvantage.
On the other hand, professionals who want to get noticed and credited for their work are quite open about their backgrounds. If a criminal tried to steal the identity of a well-known person, hopefully the rest of us will catch on. Of course, this doesn't mean that well-known people plaster their social security or credit card numbers all over the internet.
So, here's the deal on my profile and the revelation of personal information. I'm on the fence. I'll reveal some, but not so much that I think it'll be a personal safety hazard. Hey, it's the best I can do. At least I'm using my real name.
By the way, wouldn't it be wonderful if criminals could put those creative minds to something more societally constructive?
On the other hand, professionals who want to get noticed and credited for their work are quite open about their backgrounds. If a criminal tried to steal the identity of a well-known person, hopefully the rest of us will catch on. Of course, this doesn't mean that well-known people plaster their social security or credit card numbers all over the internet.
So, here's the deal on my profile and the revelation of personal information. I'm on the fence. I'll reveal some, but not so much that I think it'll be a personal safety hazard. Hey, it's the best I can do. At least I'm using my real name.
By the way, wouldn't it be wonderful if criminals could put those creative minds to something more societally constructive?
Labels: blog, creative, criminals, identity, profile, technology
