New Yorkers could benefit from a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rule. It caps credit card late fees at $8, or - at the credit card company's discretion - 25% of the minimum balance due.

Consumers in New York and across the country would save about $220 per year.

But Rebecca Garrard, deputy executive director of Citizen Action of New York, said the rule is under fire in Congress.

"We have a problem with some of our congressional representatives who oppose measures such as this," said Garrard. "It's both problematic from a policy standpoint - and quite frankly confusing from a political standpoint, when you think about what the will of their constituents are."

The House Financial Services Committee voted to overturn this regulation a few weeks ago.

Garrard and others ascribed this to Rep. Andrew Garbarino and Rep. Mike Lawler of New York and other committee members who voted for the rule receiving money from corporate donors opposed to the rule.

Despite this,polls show reducing credit card late fees has strong support across party lines.

Aside from CFPB protections being under fire, the agency itself just survived a Supreme Court challenge from conservative groups.

Kimberly Fountain - consumer financial justice field manager with Americans for Financial Reform - said with the decision out of the way, the CFPB can get back to work.

"They're working on requiring fairer credit reports," said Fountain, "reducing the harm of medical debt collection, fighting inequity in home appraisals, increasing consumer rights to control their own data, and much more."

She said she expects battles on consumer protections to continue in Congress.

Other rules the agency worked on include closing a loophole exempting overdraft fees from Truth in Lending Act provisions.

In the early years of the pandemic, New Yorkers paid close to $1.5 billion in overdraft fees.

A recent study from Florida Atlantic University highlights a concerning rise in alcohol-related deaths across the United States, with mortality rates nearly doubling between 1999 and 2020.

The findings point to significant public health challenges, particularly among younger age groups and in the South.

Dr. Charles H. Hennekens, professor of medicine and preventive medicine at Florida Atlantic University and the study's co-author, analyzed data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's "WONDER" database.

"There was a doubling of the mortality from alcohol-related deaths that we saw at all ages," Hennekens reported. "The most alarming spike, nearly fourfold, was in those 25 to 34 years of age."

The number of alcohol-related deaths skyrocketed from just over 19,000 to nearly 49,000. Experts said the findings should be a wake-up call for Florida, where nightlife and tourism are key drivers of the economy. Hennekens urged health care providers to step up screening for alcohol use and educate patients about the dangers.

Hennekens stresses rising rates of obesity and diabetes exacerbate the problem, highlighting one immediate effect of excessive alcohol consumption is liver damage, which can lead to cirrhosis and liver cancer.

"This also contributes to early liver damage," Hennekens pointed out. "These two deleterious effects may be additive or perhaps even synergistic and may contribute to greater and earlier onset of alcohol-related mortality."

While moderate alcohol consumption, defined as up to one drink per day for women and two for men, may have some benefits, Hennekens cautioned against misconceptions. He explained it doesn't matter whether it is a glass of wine, a shot of liquor or one bee, it is about the quantity, not the type. People who drink moderate to large amounts have the highest risk of premature mortality and morbidity.


get more stories like this via email

The number of Medicare enrollees is projected to rise over the next few years as the baby boomer population ages. More than 2 million Illinoisans are currently enrolled in the federal health care program, according to Healthinsurance.org,

The Office-Based Facility Association, a coalition of practitioners, is calling for a change in what they view as an ineffective and unfair pricing structure of the Medicare Physician Fee schedule.

Jason McKitrick, executive director of the association, said other payers linking themselves to Medicare is one of the issues.

"When you've got ongoing cuts to Medicare, that means you've likely got ancillary cuts going on with the private side, with the Medicaid side, etc.," McKitrick explained. "It's the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, ultimately, that's the agency and the federal government that sets the rates for the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule."

The association pointed out the current fee schedule addresses doctor's fees only, not the costly and necessary supplies and equipment needed for their practices. According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data, there are 300 office-based services under the fee schedule for which Medicare reimbursement is less than the direct costs, before even considering other costs like overhead and physician work.

Dr. Sreenivas Reddy, a vascular interventional radiologist in Hinsdale, said in addition to seeing patients, he has to monitor overhead expenses such as office space and employee salaries, both affected by inflation. Not having the proper medical equipment and supplies, he added, limits his ability to perform specialized procedures and forces patients to seek care elsewhere.

"That makes these patients go to the hospital-based facilities," Reddy noted. "We have to close our offices and try to join these hospital-based models. They would love to come to the office, get the procedure done in one or two hours, versus it takes like a whole day in the hospital setting."

Reddy emphasized physicians' reimbursement, based on the current physician pay schedule, has been on the downtrend for the last five years. The group has further concerns about a decrease in the number of private practices causing more medical deserts for interventional radiology, cardiology, vascular surgery, radiation and oncology care.

Farm advocates say price gouging on meat and poultry are taking a toll on Montanans.

A farm group cites U.S. Department of Agriculture data as proof of corporate greed, and says companies are still using supply-chain issues as an excuse for inflated prices.

Companies faced massive supply-chain disruptions during the pandemic. But Ag Department data show most of those problems are gone - and food prices in Montana haven't dropped.

Groceries here are 5% higher than the national average and egg prices are up 50% since last year, according to the Consumer Price Index.

Joe Maxwell, chief strategy officer with Farm Action, said food producers are looking for ways to keep prices artificially inflated.

"And it's just a part of their doing business now," said Maxwell. "They find excuses in the markets to gouge that consumer. And one thing we want to be very clear on is that the consumer knows it's not the farmer. The farmer's getting squeezed just as much as is the consumer."

Food producers have blamed the supply chain, but also plant closures and a strain of avian flu for supply and demand issues - driving up production costs.

Farm Action is the same group which, not long after the official end of the pandemic, asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate egg prices - which had tripled in some cases.

Maxwell said Ag Department data show the numbers did not justify the price hike, and adds corporate food producers have positioned themselves to have outsize control over the market.

"They've got that control over the farmer, not unlike oil companies have over oil fields," said Maxwell. "They now have that control because there are very few buyers of farmers' commodities, so they have that control over the farmer, the producer."

Farm Action has also been critical of large, corporate operations that raise thousands of animals in confined spaces, which have been known to pollute air and groundwater.





get more stories like this via email