AB8
Negotiations have clearly not been going well on health care reform. It was truly puzzling to see the make-up of the revised plan from Arnold. He had not moved much towards the Democrats plan. Obviously, loads had been going on behind the scenes, so it was tough to get a good read on it. However, the pace was troubling. We know a lot more now that the labor coalition has broken radio silence. They will be officially campaigning against Arnold's plan. It will be a mix of field and media. LAT:
Abandoning their facade of cooperation, a coalition of California labor unions and consumer groups says it is gearing up a campaign to discredit Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's healthcare proposal as too expensive for many workers.
Organizers say they will trail Schwarzenegger throughout California to challenge and rebut him, hold prayer vigils and news conferences, press elected officials to oppose his proposal and run critical ads on television. They plan to deride the governor's program as the "Arnold Middle-Class Gouge."
The coalition, which includes most major unions and two prominent consumer groups -- Health Access California and Consumers Union -- has hired one of the nation's most aggressive Democratic strategists to run the campaign.
That last paragraph is actually not accurate. The California Labor Federation, not the coalition has hired Chris Lehane.
The campaign represents a break from labor leaders' strategy, which had been to encourage Schwarzenegger's efforts while gently prodding him in their direction. Leaders say they no longer believe that the governor will ever agree to their priorities without pressure.
"The year for healthcare reform has been a failure, and it has largely been a failure because of the governor," said Art Pulaski, head of the California Labor Federation.
This campaign is not without risks, but they would have never taken this step if it seemed like there was a reasonable chance things could have been worked out at the negotiating table.
They are sticking to their guns. They will not support a plan that forces people to purchase insurance they cannot afford. Nor will they support a plan that does not get significant funding from employers.
If Arnold does not come around and there is no legislative solution, then this coalition is considering taking a proposal directly to the ballot. Most likely it would be pretty similar to AB8, which was passed overwhelmingly by the legislature, but vetoed by Arnold. It was widely heralded by the coalition that is now opposing Arnold's plan.
Months ago, Arnold introduced his official health care plan. Only it was not an actual usable piece of legislation. He could not find a single legislator willing to flesh it out into a real bill and introduce it in the Assembly or Senate. Now, for some reason he is insisting he has actual legislation, a revised more detailed version of his original plan. And still it is orphan legislation, without a legislative sponsor. And still it is unacceptable to all sides. There is no way that this thing actually gets passed as written. SFChron:
The governor unveiled a revised health care plan that included leasing the state lottery to a private company to help pay for expanding coverage to uninsured residents and give a tax break to low- and middle-class families.
But the proposed changes drew only a passive response from Democratic leaders, while consumer and labor groups said the plan does not do enough to protect the working poor from escalating costs.
The key is affordability. Individual mandates are unacceptable if people are forced to purchase insurance they cannot afford and does little in terms of actually covering health care costs. Of course, he is claiming that he already solved that problem.
Schwarzenegger's new plan would provide a tax credit that would be worth about $2,000 a year for a family of four earning up to $72,000 a year.
"We think we've taken a significant step toward increasing the affordability of health coverage for low- and middle-income Californians," said Amy Palmer, spokeswoman for the state Health and Human Services Agency.
Uh. No. Not good enough. Not even close. While Nunez and Perata put out non-committal statements, labor leaders were more blunt.
"He's leaving the middle class out in the cold," said Art Pulaski, executive secretary-treasurer of the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO. "He's offering some support for individuals making up to $35,000 a year, but if you make more than that, there's not support but you are still expected to go out and buy a policy in the individual market."
The individual market is inefficient. Group purchasing drives down costs, as it spreads risk across a larger population. AB8 goes much further in terms of creating large pools that individuals can participate in.
And of course, Arnold is relying on gimmics to help pay for it. This time, he has gone back into the privatize the lottery for more revenue.
Another key change in the governor's plan would lease the state lottery to a private company and use the new revenue to help pay for expanded coverage. The governor's office expects the lottery could generate $2 billion a year for health care.
Schwarzenegger also introduced a sliding scale for determining the cost employers would be asked to pay for worker coverage.
Rather than requiring all employers to pay a 4 percent payroll tax, the governor wants contributions based on the size of a company's payroll. For example, a small firm with highly paid employees would pay more than a similar size company of low wage earners.
Employers providing health insurance for their staff are already paying 7-8% of payroll to cover health care costs. It is beyond me how Arnold thinks that halving, or quartering that is going to pay for health care coverage. The numbers just don't work. Keeping it that low will encourage employers to drop their health care coverage, not add it.
Consider this to be the latest bargaining position for Arnold. The Democrats have AB8, which he vetoed today as their base position. Time is of the essence now. It's make or break it for health care reform. Will they get it done? Millions of Californians are counting on them.
It looks like the affordability issues have been taken care of with regards to AB 8 and it now has the pretty much full support from the labor and consumer groups. The bill is now on the Assembly floor and seemed destined for Arnold's desk. While, he has promised a veto, the more pressure that is brought to bear on him the better. This bill does an excellent job creating large group pools, from both programs open to all to join and an expansion of governmental programs that will help reduce expenses. Naturally, Blue Cross et. all strongly oppose the plan.
He has been pledging to bring the legislature back for a special session. The goal would be to hash out a compromise. Weintraub has a good overview of what's going on and how such an agreement will be likely created. (h/t to Dave). He starts off talking about AB8.
>> read moreHealth care reform continues to be a moving ball. Everything seems to be on the table right now. Unfortunately an initiative to provide funding seems more likely than not. It is a significant risk to go to the ballot, but if it is the only way to ensure affordability, then so be it. Heavens knows the Republicans in the legislature are not interested in making that happen. SacBee:
The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday the Republican governor and Democratic speaker are fashioning a strategy to raise business and hospital taxes through a ballot measure and circumventing Republican lawmakers who oppose any new taxes.
Under the scenario outlined by the newspaper, the Democrats who control the Legislature would pass a bill that doesn't include funding for health care and ask voters to raise taxes.
I really should just leave Arnold's no new taxes pledge alone, but it amuses me to no end to see him breaking that. He seems to have come to the understanding that you have to have a way to pay for his policy goals. I know, complicated right?
Speaker Fabian Nunez has made it clear that they are not close to an agreement, quite yet, but they making headway. He has promised that he would not leave all of the funding on the ballot.
The speaker said Assembly Bill 8, which he put together with Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, would provide 75 percent of the money to cover the 6.7 million Californians without health insurance. Núñez said a possible ballot measure could provide the remaining 25 percent.
Schwarzenegger has said he will veto AB 8 because it would place the economic burden on employers. The governor believes costs should be shared by employers, employees, insurers and government.
Leaving all the financing to the ballot is not an option, said Núñez, D-Los Angeles.
"I'm not going to compromise to put all of the funding for AB 8 on the ballot and be left with a shell (bill)," Núñez said.
They are still leaving the possibility of holding a special session to iron out all of the details. That may be necessary since there are only 5 working days left, due in part to the Jewish High Holidays.
Another day and no sign of a deal, but things seem from the outside to be progressing reasonably well. Still, each passing day is worrying, since there is not much time left. Chron:
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez opened a new round of closed-door meetings Thursday on plans to overhaul the state's troubled health care system to offer coverage to a record 6.8 million Californians without health insurance.
The move came after Núñez, D-Los Angeles, withdrew his threat to put the governor's health care plan before the lower house for a vote Thursday, knowing that it would not get much support from Democratic or Republican lawmakers.
Both sides characterized Thursday's talks as productive, but there was no sign of a breakthrough.
"I'm not going to embarrass the governor," said Núñez. "I think the governor understands at this point the votes are not there. That was my message all along. He now got the message.
"The governor in his heart of hearts believed firmly that he was going to get Republican votes for his health plans and he now knows if we put his plan up for a vote today the votes are not there," Núñez said. "In fact, I was going to try to get as many courtesy votes as possible from Democrats but it turns out not many Democrats want to vote for the governor's plan."
Aaron McLear, a spokesman for the governor, said the meeting was "very positive" but Schwarzenegger remains committed to his proposal.
Arnold was in S.D. today and not in the Capitol. Hopefully, that does not slow things down even further. It is time to get this thing done and pass affordable health care reform.
Seriously man. I get that you really like your plan and that you wish the Republicans would come on. But it just isn't going to happen. You would have had a hard time getting them to play ball at the height of your influence with them, let alone now, when the level of cooperation is arguable at an all time low. I know that Speaker Nunez is bringing you the same message and it is the right one. SacBee:
But as Núñez notes, that's simply too many taxes and mandates for Republican legislators to accept, and the sooner Schwarzenegger acknowledges that reality, the better.
Nunez is still planning on bringing Arnold's plan up for a vote, where he predicts that he will be the only one voting for it, simply as a courtesy to the governor.
"I'm going to take him from the stratosphere, and I am going to ground him," Núñez told me in an interview in his Capitol office. "He needs a little grounding. Nobody likes his plan." [snip]
"I just want him to engage," Núñez said of Schwarzenegger. "Let's get it done. The governor has got the power to do it. He is either going to do it or not. If he doesn't do it, he's failed.
The Speaker also announced that he would support Arnold's proposal for a fee on hospitals as an add on to AB8, not something that would reduce the percentage of the payroll fee, as in Arnold's plan. He wants it to work towards covering more of the uninsured, not reducing the fees on businesses. The worry is that reducing the percentage of the payroll tax on companies will encourage them to drop their coverage to lower levels. Plus, AB8 needs more funding in general.
[Update] In a sign progress is being made. Nunez will not be putting Arnold's plan up for an embarrassing defeat.
The governor is moving in the wrong direction on health care. He has vetoed $55 million for the mentally ill, kept a $45 million tax cut for yacht owners and eliminated a prescription drug discount program that he campaigned on last year. The contradictions of the former are exasperating, but the stupidity of the later really gets me. Anthony Wright:
My understanding was that the Department of Health Services already some potential vendors and a few agreements with drug companies in place.
The state has already put resources in to identifying these vendors and negotiating the agreements. Zeroing out this program means that was completely wasted money. This was one of those classic governmental programs that for a relatively small investment we could bring a very large benefit to many state residents. The program had its roots in the 2005 election, when Arnold sided with the drug companies for their much more modest proposal. He then reversed himself in 2005 and backed the legislative version of the initiative. Now he has flopped all over again, over a relatively small amount of money to appease the Republicans.
This does not bode well for the larger health care reform negotiations. This is the critical week to make progress. We are running out of time on the legislative calendar. To end the year with no deal and Arnold's vetoes actually moving us backwards would be incredibly depressing. Merc:
>> read moreGov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez have been sparring in the press over the relative merits of AB8 (the Democratic plan) and Arnold's plan, which has never made it into bill form. Heck, it hasn't even been fully fleshed out to actually be real legislation, rather than a policy paper. Since, Arnold never took the steps to find a legislator to carry it as actual legislation, Nunez announced today that he was going to do it for him. And he is going to put it up to a vote by midweek. SacBee:
"The governor has threatened to veto the Democratic bill and insists there's support for his concepts and we'd like to see if there is," said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Núñez. Maviglio said the Assembly would aim for a Thursday or Friday vote next week, with the speaker as a possible author of the legislation.
It should go without saying that there is not a whole lot of support for the governor's plan. First of all, it is incomplete. Secondly, the Democrats rather like their plan and the Republicans don't particularly want to reform health care.
Assemblyman Roger Niello, R-Fair Oaks, said there would be few, if any, GOP votes for Schwarzenegger's plan. "There is not a great deal of affection in our caucus for the total package of the governor's proposals," Niello said.
Neither Arnold nor the Democrats want to see this followed to it's logical conclusion: Arnold's bill fails in the legislature and then he vetoes AB8. There will be more negotiations. I am intrigued to see who all votes for Arnold's plan.
The negotiations over health care reform have begun in earnest again. Arnold stated yesterday that he would not support the Democratic plan AB8 for two reasons. He will not sign legislation that does not require Californians to have insurance (individual mandate) and relies on just a payroll fee for financing coverage. Arnold favors his proposal, which would require hospitals and doctors to bear part of the fiscal responsibility for expanding access to health care.
Here is the thing, his plan just isn't politically viable in the legislature. By most indications, requiring doctors and hospitals to pay would necessitate a tax. Passing a tax increase requires a 2/3rds support in the legislature. There is absolutely no way that you could get even a single Republican to vote for it, especially in the wake of the budget impasse (not that anyone thought it was possible before). The only way for it actually make it into law would be a ballot initiative. LAT:
"The governor -- with all due respect, and I love him because he's a good friend of mine -- he has to start operating in the same world that I'm operating in, which is the real world," said Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez (D-Los Angeles).
"In the real world that I live in, I can control and manage a simple majority bill," Nuñez said -- one that does not require GOP support as a tax would.
Schwarzenegger, however, continued to assert that Republicans could be swayed. He said that although budget negotiations were "a tedious process that drove a lot of people up the wall and anger and everything, in the end, that's not the definition of accomplishment or failure."
"The definition of accomplishment or failure is, can we get the reform done or not?" he said.
It's not that Nunez does not want Republican support for major health care reform, it is that he recognizes that it is next to impossible. Much of what the Republicans support simply tinkers around the edges and sticks to their free market philosophy. That is what we have right now and it isn't working. Unfortunately, Arnold's relationship with them is so soured that it is next to impossible to imagine him being able to convince them for the need to significant reform.
Meanwhile, while Arnold stopped by the AARP rally yesterday outside the Capitol, he has not been meeting with the Democratic leadership to try and hammer out an agreement. Instead, he has been seeking to influence the debate by speaking to the press. SacBee:
>> read moreThere has been an incredible shift in public opinion about health care in this state the Field Poll revealed today. The campaign to raise public awareness about the failing health care system has been highly effective, even if voters are more divided about what to do about it. SacBee:
In a dramatic shift in public attitudes, more than two-thirds of California voters now say they are unhappy with the health care system and increasing numbers favor a government-run system covering all state residents, a new Field Poll revealed Tuesday.
The survey of 536 registered voters showed that 69 percent are dissatisfied with the health care system in California, with 42 percent saying they are "very dissatisfied" and 28 percent saying they are content with the current system.
Those numbers -- in a poll taken Aug. 3-12 -- contrast starkly with responses to a similar Field Poll last December. Then, 51 percent of voters said they were satisfied with the way the health care system was functioning, compared with 44 percent who were dissatisfied.
We would need more detailed polling on the subject, but I believe that the campaign has brought more understanding by the public of just how terrible the system is right now and that there is a lot of potential to make it better. Before, people just assumed that was how it was and put up with it, even though many have had terrible experiences with managed care and had been paying increasing amounts for their insurance. Films like SiCKO and other public education programs have brought to the voters attention ways that we can improve the system. While they may disagree on how exactly to fix it, the desire for significant change is great.
"This is a clear signal that people want change," said Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access, a Sacramento consumer group that supports both a single-payer proposal and legislation aimed at reforming the current system.
"What you have here is two-thirds of California saying they want a major expansion of group coverage," he said. "People are looking for reform, and they want the government to make the system fair."
Anthony makes a number of excellent further points about this poll in his blog post today.
Skeptics can read the question about "preferences about ways to improve the health care system" that there's isn't consensus about how to fix the health care system: one-third (36%) support "a new state government-run system" (getting a big bump from 24% in December), and one-third (33%) support "reform within the framework of current health insurance system... through shared responsibilities" (down from 52% in December.)
First of all, let's be clear that very few (14%, down from 18% in December) chose the "rely on free market competition" option. Yet that's the rhetoric of the legislative Republican proposals here in California, and of President Bush nationally.
Second, the poll forced a false choice: From my review of other polling, I think that both the "single-payer" option and the "shared responsibility" options would get higher percentages--in fact, majorities--if the questions were put one at the time.
The false choice is also in the wording. Senator Kuehl has written eloquently about how her single-payer bill is "shared responsibility," with individuals, employers, and government all paying into a common system, building on current programs like Medicare. And many of those who want to replace the current system would surely support expanding public programs and placing more oversight over insurers.
Field ran the same question on the type of system voters would support, so it isn't the shift in numbers Anthony is taking question with, but rather the way the whole thing was worded, compared to other polling on the subject. He argues that voters will support both single-payer and what Field calls here "shared responsibility", if they are asked about them separately. Indeed many organizations and legislators are supportive of both SB840 and AB8.
This poll is over all good news for reformers. The long term goal of passing single-payer got a boost, as did the dissatisfaction in the current system. The skepticism of voters that the legislature will not actually pass anything should not stop anything. Where there is a will there is a way. There most certainly is a will by both the legislators, voters and organizations to get something substantial done in the next few weeks.
Ok. The budget is done. Now to pivot on to the next big debate: health care reform. It has been put on the back-burner while the Senate Republicans threw their temper tantrum. Now it should emerge as the main topic of discussion, a place it held prior to the budget impasse. Here is the latest on what has been going on.
AB8, the Democratic plan, has been undergoing some work under the hood. Several amendments will hopefully be made to increase the affordability of health care, among those include a prescription dug purchasing pool that will have about 3-4 million participants. That will make it 2-3x larger than CalPERS. There is also talk of creating a public insurance program that everyone will be able to participate in. This is similar to a few of the Democratic presidential contenders plans to ensure there is an affordable option for health insurance for all residents. These amendments will be considered in hearings over the next few weeks.
Remember that AB8 is designed to pass on a majority vote and land on the governor's desk. It will not be subject to a two-thirds vote and thus will not require any Republican support. Arnold's plan, which never came together as detailed legislation would require a 2/3rds vote.
Right now, organizations are working to maintain pressure on legislators to enact a reform bill. Thus far, few of them have endorsed AB8 and have been working behind the scenes to improve it from its initial form. Naturally, Blue Cross and others are trying to stall that effort. Its OUR Health Care just went up with two ads, below the fold that are airing in Sacramento. They have also produced print ads targeting individual legislators. Calls are going into offices and letters are being written to the editors. The campaign is in full swing and there is not much time until the legislature is out of session.
>> read moreSometimes I find myself to the right of many of my fellow bloggers out here in California. Perhaps it is my East Coast roots, or my more direct experience working in politics. Health care reform is one of those issues where I diverge and stand with the political establishment.
See, I am pragmatic. I look at SB 840 (single payer bill) and SiCKO and think well gee wiz, it sure would be nice, but it just isn't politically practical right now. I see the statistics on all of the uninsured and know that we can do better than the status quo, even if it does keep in place the private insurance industry. It's why legislators like Shelia Keuhl, ever the fighter for single payer, votes for bills like AB 8 (the Nunez/Perata plan).
Similar dynamics are playing out on in the presidential campaign. The WaPo had an interesting article on the decision making that went into Edward's health care plan. He pulled in two leading academics, one who argued that our system was "so riddled with inefficiencies that it needs to be blown up and replaced by a plan in which people can buy coverage themselves." On the other side was a MIT economist, who argued for an incremental approach that would be politically viable.
A month later, when Edwards announced his health-care plan, he almost completely sided with Gruber. And he is not alone. For the first time since President Bill Clinton's plan for health-care reform, overseen by his wife, collapsed in 1994, the leading Democratic presidential candidates are campaigning in favor of universal health care. But in developing their specific plans, they are embracing the pragmatic steps advocated by the MIT professor and a group of similar-minded policy experts, many of whose ideas were shaped by their first exposure to the perils of health-care politics 13 years ago.
"Plans which minimize the disruption to the existing system are more likely to succeed than plans that rip up the existing system and start over," said Gruber, who has consulted with the three leading Democratic campaigns about their health plans. "It doesn't take a genius to see that. That's not to say that plans ripping it up wouldn't be better -- I just think they're political non-starters."
Politics is not the art of the possible, but rather the practical. That is not to say that what is a political non-starter today will be impractical a few years from now. Indeed, we have seen a great deal of shifting on the issue of reform in the last decade. Republicans are now much more willing to discuss significant changes to the system.
If a health care reform bill does make it through the legislature this year, it will not be perfect. Heck, it may not even be great, but more than likely it will be better than what we have got now. We are not talking about something abstract here. There are life and death matters at stake, not to mention quality of life issues. Millions of Californians do not have insurance and millions more are at risk of losing their coverage. Even more fight their insurance companies tooth and nail to get the coverage they paid for.
We can change this, at least partially. Something is better than nothing.
It is counterintuitive I admit, to claim that the Democratic legislators plan (AB 8) is better than Schwarznegger's proposal, which actually covers more people. The reality is that it is actually worse to force people into crappy plans that they can't afford than it is for them to go uninsured. It is an ugly calculation for sure. Unless you regulate the insurance industry more than what the Democrats are proposing, or offer a governmental run plan (ala Edwards), it is unacceptable to have an individual mandate. Weintraub doesn't seem to get this.
Democratic lawmakers have criticized his plan as too friendly to the insurance industry, and they don't like the idea of requiring individuals to take responsibility for obtaining coverage, even with hefty subsidies for the poor and the working poor. They have proposed an alternative that would put more of the financial responsibility on employers.
Requiring health insurance is not an anathema to Democrats, but the situation must be right. Pushing high deductible plans as a mandated solution is not the way. By the numbers, Arnold's plan assumes that a family of four living on $61,000 a year in Oakland can afford to spend $12,000 (20% of their income) on health insurance. Try paying for rent or food with in that situation. Health Access report (pdf)
Only 2% of the uninsured, who are making more than 300% of poverty ($60,000 for a family of four) choose to turn down employer-based coverage when given the option. The remaining 18% are unemployed or not eligible for coverage through their employer- therefore having no choice. Is it fair to punish people for not having choices?
There is no pool for affordable care that these individuals can use to purchase care. It is only the high deductible plans that assume they can spend up to 20% of their income on health care that are available under Arnold's proposal.
Arnold simply does not go far enough, nor does he raise enough from employers to make his system work in the real world. It is likely that there will be large numbers of individuals who simply ignore the mandate, just like they do with car insurance. It will also encourage employers to drop coverage for those employees who earn below the poverty threshold. His proposal is less progressive, despite the raw numbers he believes will be insured.
The Capitol has been buzzing for weeks about the two Democratic leaders working to combine their health care plans into one bill. Today Assembly Speaker Nunez and Senate Pro Tem Perata announced the details of the new bill, which grabs features from both leaders legislative proposal. This is the start of a new period in the push for health care reform. Now we have on proposal that the legislature can use to negotiate with the governor's office at is is known as AB 8.
Here are two big details.
- Employers my spend at least 7.5 of payroll costs on health care. This requirement extends to all employers regardless of size. Self-employed individuals are exempt.
- No requirement that every resident purchase health insurance (aka individual mandates).
More details should trickle out in the upcoming days, but these are the two biggest bones of contention with the governor. Arnold had proposed that 4% of payroll go to health care insurance, which is woefully inadequate and below what most employers who contribute to health care spend. Earlier today Arnold, anticipating this announcement gave a press conference on health care.
At a separate morning news conference in Sacramento, Schwarzenegger praised lawmakers for moving forward but said, "The only way the healthcare reform is going to work is if you have mandatory healthcare insurance."
Nunez countered during his press conference (see video below)
We also take out the requirement in the bills that everybody must be covered. We know that there is a difference of opinion with the administration, with respect to that. But the reason we decided to pull that from the bill is that we need more time to figure out whether or not there is an affordable health care product for the average worker in California and their families.
We want to make sure that even people who make above 300% of poverty, but are still middle class families can afford at the end of the month to make a premium payment that is consistent with them being able to afford to have a dignified life. And not have to dig to pay 30 or 40% into their monthly budgets in order to to that.
It does not appear that this proposal has enough regulation of the health care insurance industry or an expanded affordable governmental plan that anyone could buy into to guarantee affordable insurance to the middle class. Without that it is unacceptable to require insurance. This will be a huge battle with Arnold.
Back to Arnold's press conference:
He downplayed the significance of the Democrats' legislation, saying the final outcome would be worked out in private negotiations and could turn out dramatically different.
"What you see now is not really what counts," he said. "What counts is the outcome. And it can turn very quickly."
This is posturing, trying to make his plan appear more viable. This is actually a very significant step, setting up a benchmark for negotiations, and a framework of the most important concepts for Democrats. They have staked out their territory.
The Democrats most likely will not be able to get a super majority to override a gubernatorial veto, though they did indicate today that they will reach out to their Republican counterparts. That will be a tough sell, thus the dynamic of private negotiations between the Democrats and Arnold. Meanwhile all sides will work to influence the negotiations or in the case of Blue Cross try and scuttle. It is an enormously important and complex issue and negotiations will be contentious.
Nunez indicated that the Democrats hoped to pass this bill by July 11th setting up negotiations over the summer with Arnold, which could bleed into th fall.
Video of Nunez and Perata's press conference.
