Posted on 03/04/2010 9:37:44 AM PST by cajuncow
WASHINGTON (Associated Press) -- Keeping up the pressure for President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius chastised top insurance executives Thursday over proposed double-digit rate hikes she said top the list of reasons that Congress must quickly pass his plan.
Obama's chief health care Cabinet member convened a White House meeting with the CEOs of Wellpoint, Aetna, Cigna, UnitedHealth Group and other companies, as well as state insurance commissioners from Kansas, West Virginia and Pennsylvania. On the agenda: proposed premium hikes Sebelius said are making consumers' jaws drop around the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at ww2.cox.com ...
Pretty stupid of them to not postpone those hikes until after the elections. It is has a HUGE talking point for Obama.
Just curious Sec’y what providing healthcare for people and their families here illegally adds to the demand curve?
These exact same premium hikes took place in 2009-—and in most states, insurers get away with it because THERE IS NO COMPETITION. Where did the hikes NOT occur? In the Federal Employee Health Benefits plan, where hundreds of companies compete for the pool of potential insureds.
For supposedly savvy and monlothic faceless cruel concerns these insuance companies showed an major case of stupid. Or did they?
I keep waiting for them to be more forceful with the fact that these “double digit increases” only affect a very small number of customers...I thought I read something like 6%...
But its not happening.
So what is going on? Are these companies deliberately trying to sabotage Zerocare opposition?
Am I crazy?
[Where did I put that tinfoil???]
The list, ping
Comrade Liz has been reassigned her Dem party propaganda post to Cox Commie News !
Liz is a very dedicated Dem party propagandist.
The COX Family pours millions into the Dem party.
I don’t think you’re crazy. I think maybe at least some of these insurance companies actually want ObamaCare, because with the individual mandate they think that they will get 30 million new customers, primarily young & healthy folks in their 20’s.
Not stupid if they want the bill to pass, and they do.
Insurance rating is regulated by the state. Premiums are largely driven by the cost of services consumed. The margin of profit is actually less than 3%. Medical care is extremely expensive. That expense is exacerbated by the cost of malpractice insurance, the need to order unecessary tests so the physician can cover his hiney, the use of really expensive technology, and union benefits.
The legislation tackles this expense in the Medicare provisions, where it is going to ration care and limit payments for treatments of conditions based on a best management protocol for that condition. It will also limit payment to providers for each type of service. This is a prototype fro what a general single payer plan would do.
Under insurance, the consumer is detached from the true cost of the bill, because he is only paying the deductible, coinsurance or out of pocket. That consumer “share” is one of the cost containment factors. The larger the share, the more consumer oversight and interest in managing the cost of his own care. The problem is that many people can no longer afford that share - even with insurance policies.
Policies also include “cost containment” features to protect the insured group such as exclusions and limitation of benefits for pre-existing conditions. The legislation proposes to eliminate these exclusions, forcing insurance policies to accept people with known medical conditions into the group insurance pool. This will increase claims and expenses and drive group insurance premiums through employers even higher.
Pelosi talks about capping premiums. That is ridiculous. Insurance is merely a pass through third party payment system. It pays claims. The claims are the driver for costs. Unless you reduce the cost magnitude of claims, you will not reduce the premium. Price-regulated companies are entitled to a fair profit which has been set by court cases as 10%. Price caps on premiums will go nowhere.
Pretty stupid of them to not postpone those hikes until after the elections. It is has a HUGE talking point for Obama.
Unless you buy the conspiracy theory that their actuaries have told them that profit returns on health insurance have peaked, and it is all downhill from here. Then you are looking to shove your risk off onto the Gubbermint and cash out. I which case you would conspire with the Kooky Kansan to help Obama.
Unless those hikes are SPECIFICALLY to give Obama his talking points.
Sure, he takes every opportunity to slam them -- so what? They are pragmatic capitalists, and are more than willing to take a little meaningless commentary from 0 (because if you haven't noticed by now, so much of what 0 says regarding 'big, bad, fat-cat corporations, or insurance companies', or bankers, or any other group he wants to demonize to stir up the mobs, is meaningless on the surface, and has import only to the extent that it buys him space to advance his agenda. Blah blah put-downs from the big 0? Sure, I'd take it too, if the backside meant a few more billions in my pocket.
If 0's healthcare (or Pelosi's, or Reid's -- whichever flavor you get, the bottom line will be generally the same) becomes law, the insurance companies will rake in WAY more than they do now. Not in direct healthcare coverage. (Oh no, 0's precious vision won't allow for a challenge to his government). But in augmentary coverage. Which anyone who wants reasonable healthcare will have to buy, if they want to avoid endless lines, cursory 'consults' from supporting staff, treatment and therapy appointments that land on next year's calendar, and the 'death panel's' letter:
"Sorry, but your condition does not warrant the treatment you are requesting at this time. Please take two aspirin for any discomfort, and have your heirs get back with us in about 6 months so we can update your condition to 'deceased'. If you choose to challenge this panel's findings, please contact your representative's office to request the required congressional approval for your waiver."
Since the 0's healthcare regs will reduce the amount paid to doctors for seeing patients on 'the plan', and increase the number of people on, 'the plan', many doctors will simply refuse to see any government-insured patients, unless they have the (expensive) supplemental coverage.
And since the supplemental coverage will not be the primary health insurance, it will fall outside government regulation. So the insurance companies will be largely unregulated in a hugely lucrative market to which many people will be driven by the cumbersome, and generally incompetent and inefficient, program, staffed by government employees and faceless bureaucrats, that the government will create.
Do we understand now why health insurance companies have been such huge contributors to the Democrat party?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.