Posted on 11/15/2019 11:46:23 AM PST by re_tail20
New rules from the Trump administration on Friday would require insurers and hospitals to disclose upfront the actual prices for common tests and procedures to promote competition and push down costs.
The sweeping changes face stiff pushback from the health care industry and could be challenged in court. Even in an ideal world where information flows freely, patients and their families would have to deal with a learning curve to become comfortable with the intricacies of health care billing.
“This shadowy system has to change,” Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said. “The patient has to be in control.”
A final rule would apply to hospitals and a proposed regulation would apply to insurance plans. Disclosure requirements for hospitals would not take effect until 2021; for insurers, the timing is unclear. The requirements do not directly affect doctors.
Officials say the rules would shine a spotlight on the confusing maze of health care prices, allowing informed patients to find quality services at the lowest cost. Prices for an MRI scan for example can vary by hundreds of dollars depending on where it’s done.
Insurers would have to create individualized estimates of what patients would owe out-of-pocket due to deductibles and copayments.
Insurance companies and hospitals say the push for disclosure goes too far. They say the government would force them to publicly disclose rates they negotiate as part of private contracts normally beyond the purview of authorities.
Insurers also contend the plan could backfire, prompting providers that are accepting a bargain price to try to bid up what they charge if others are getting more. Azar called that “a canard,” saying transparency does not lead to higher prices in any other area of the economy.
If the industry goes to court, it could be a long time before consumers...
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
This kind of competition could kill insurance companies. It would drive down costs so much that insurance would be a bad deal for all but the most expensive and cutting edge treatments.
Gonna be interesting watching the courts twist themselves into a pretzel coming up with a justification for why this info needs to be kept secret.
After all, they’re the ones running the country.
I’m not sure about that. I believe many (most?) states already have this kind of requirement for auto insurance.
HOORAY Chief. More winning. Ain’t no ways tarred.
Well, you are REQUIRED to have auto insurance - if you want to drive on publicly supplied roads, just as you are required to have a license.
This is a VERY GOOD thing.
“The sweeping changes face stiff pushback from the health care industry.....”
Not to mention the Representatives and Senators who receive payola in return for giving the healthcare INDUSTRY carte blanche.
A patient is expected to pay for a service.
They should know prior to agreeing to or having that service performed how much it will cost (with some variables).
Follow the money, find out which democrat screams the loudest about it
This is good. I was self-employed/insured for most of the last 20 years and since I was a cash customer, the physicals/basic tests I needed (blessed with only needing that) were negotiated up front and at a cheaper price than charged to those with insurance. My doctor was pretty cool about it, he made money and didn’t have to do any paper work.
You’re required to have LIABILITY insurance. The regulations about posting rates for repairs relates to COLLISION and COMPREHENSIVE insurance, which is not required by law.
Stop making sense penguin. : )
I expect it is good for the small stuff like that when you pay it yourself.
In the last two years my son ran up about five million dollars in medial expenses. It wouldn’t matter what the prices are for two reasons;
1. The insurance company pays for it so he doesn’t care.
2. If he had to pay it himself he couldn’t so he doesn’t care.
"What do you mean, $10 for a single Tylenol? Can't I just bring one in from home instead?"
“Disclosure requirements for hospitals would not take effect until 2021; for insurers, the timing is unclear.”
Why wait two years? Why not now? In two years every liberal federal judge will have ruled against it.
Exactly.
That’s why I have only liability on one of my cars, Comprehensive on two others (lots of deer around here) And collision for the car I’m still making payments on.
The bottom line was that the surgery was going to cost him $22,000 between the deductibles and copays under his insurance coverage. And this was coverage that was already costing him $800/month.
He eventually negotiated with the doctor and surgical facility directly and paid cash for it.
It cost him less than $8,000.
And he was able to afford it easily because he immediately canceled his medical insurance plan and saved himself $800 he was paying every month for "insurance coverage" that was completely useless to him.
Because most insurance carriers and hospitals probably already have contracts in place with rates for various procedures through the end of 2020.
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.