Skip to comments.Aetna to exit California's individual insurance market
Posted on 06/15/2013 2:04:05 PM PDT by mdittmar
Aetna Inc (AET.N) said on Saturday it has notified California's insurance regulator that it plans to stop selling health policies to individual consumers in the state at the end of 2013.
The company will continue to offer health insurance to employers and Medicare beneficiaries in California, as well as dental and life-insurance products, Aetna spokeswoman Anjie Coplin told Reuters. But people with individual health coverage with Aetna will have to find alternative coverage by year's end.
Aetna had informed California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones of its decision to exit the market, Coplin said, but it was still in the process of notifying members and brokers.
The move comes as California, the country's most populous state, prepares for the fall launch of a state health exchange authorized by President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
I thought I could keep my insurance....
I believe it was Otter who told Flounder something about trust ...
Only 49,000 will lose theirs in California due to obamacare,but they can go to that new government exchange to find some.
Pool insurance favored as are those already in Gov't programs (Medicare).
Individuals who want to live independently and make their own decisions? Forget about it.
“affordability” when there is no one offering the product is about as useful as advertising to fleas.
If Aetna can simply pull out of one of the most lucrative states, it can do the same pretty much anywhere. If you’re in a state that has jumped on the exchange bandwagon, watch your insurance carrier carefully (not just Aetna).
Not that there’s going to be anything you can do about it.
on the brighter side, doctors are slashing prices for those paying in cash
Everything Obama touches turns to crap.
My individual policy issuer dumped Texas before Obamacare.
And some are opening up concierge practices. It’s the 21st Century version of apartment buildings going condominium. Pay a couple thousand per year, flat rate, see them whenever for minor and routine things.
Major items get referred out, of course, so there would still be incentive to hold a Major Medical only policy.
Unfortunately socialists are deliberately forcing us in the opposite direction: less free markets, fewer choices, less competition, more overhead. After 60+ years of interfering with the health care industry, they sense their ultimate goal is within reach - single payer, government run, government controlled health care. Power and votes in perpituity for them, shared mediocrity and misery for everyone else. Very sad to see this happening before our eyes.
I agree but how long until “major medical”-only policies are illegal because this government wants every policy to cover everything?
Interesting thing is that the concierge services seem to be growing fastest in some blue states like WA, OR.
hope you didn’t vote for change counting on that bit of thinking
I agree, but with the ban on new or expanded physician-owned hospitals I have a feeling they will want to ban people paying for their own healthcare. I don’t see the GOPe doing much about it.
I haven't seen a one yet in southeastern WA (red) but maybe they don't market in my trailer park.
Who knows how long? You’re correct, it’s bound to happen if things stay on this course. The idea they have is to sweep everybody into a pool that separates people who have money from their money, to take care of the people who don’t have it. (Except what the gummint keeps “for expenses.”)
It’s reasonable to assume the “poor” in this scenario can be counted on to vote for the politicians who keep the cash flowing their way. Rush Limbaugh went on for a while about this Friday. The Rats don’t just want to keep a lot of people mired in poverty, they absolutely depend upon it. If people insist on getting out of the poverty, they need to import more to replace them, hence the all-out push to legalize illegal aliens.
Major medical 3 years ago was almost 400.00 per month with a 10,000.00 deductible. Hate to see what it is now or will be in a year or two.
Yes and that deductible is yearly, so if you get sick say at the end of the year and continue into the next year you have that 10000 deductible all over again..not affordable for a lot of folks.
I'm in NJ but am looking to establish residency in PA. The savings in car and medical insurance alone would pay the mortgage on a second house. Property taxes are a fraction and state income taxes are half. People are allowed to work in NJ but live in PA and pay PA state income tax rates. Pike County in northeast PA is near 95% white, votes Republican, and has low population density. They have hunting, fishing, boating, skiing, ATV trails, and the doctor's waiting rooms will not be filled to capacity with Obamacare freeloaders. A pilot's license doubles someone's commute range. NJ stinks.
Texas did not jump on the exchange bandwagon but that is only part of the problem. I think it’s going to be interesting to see what California does with the coverage and fees for other carriers like Blue Cross. Several patients of one of my doctor clients currently have coverage through their employer. Even though they work in Texas, their plan is written and handled by BC of California which is where their home office is located. One of them is already complaining loudly about the new regulations and premiums on his policy.
I work with many different carriers in many different states and California BC is absolutely the pits.
So now it's "SO LONG, IT'S BEEN GOOD TO KNOW YA!" (to the golden state once again)
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.