A workers compensation reform law is projected to cut an excess of $1 billion for New York businesses.

This means that the average workers compensation premium that employers pay to cover injured employees will drop roughly 20 percent.

Other measures, including the standardization of medical costs, are anticipated to result in an increase in lifetime disability payments as well as a 75 percent raise in the weekly check paid to hurt employees.

By freeing money to employers the reform is expected to boost the local economy, attracting businesses to the region.

But if employers are expected to pay less toward disability and unemployment than what exactly is covering the difference?

I'm not a brilliant mathematician; in fact I can barely wrap my mind around fractions. But if employers are expected to put less money in the pot, yet employees are expected to take more money from the pot, I'm wondering what we're not being told.

It seems too many politicians make vague references to “the evaluation of data as compiled by specialists.”

It's condescending and annoying because if someone shows me a chart of supposed facts and figures, I have no choice but to take their word.

I can't question data that I can't comprehend. And when politicians reference such sources without explanation, why should I assume that they grasp the data?

In a nutshell, if a politician declares that a single reform is going to save $1 billion in taxes, that politician needs to be able to communicate exactly how that is going to occur.

If I can't understand that process, then as far as I'm concerned the supposed reform is nothing more than PR and fluff.

In my opinion the problem with workers compensation is not who is paying into it, but rather who is benefiting from it. Way too many people take advantage of the system and I feel the medical profession is partly to blame. Too many doctors are writing out prescriptions and diagnosing, if not altogether inventing, disorders that prevent people from working.

If the state wants to free up some money, the state should compile some data about who is being paid to sit at home and why.

Because when you start handing out money, you can bet dollars to doughnuts that people are going to figure out a way to get it.

And “other measures such as the standardization of medical costs” are not going to stop that from happening.

Carole Estabrook's column appears Mondays in The Citizen and she can be reached at estabrookcarole@yahoo.com