Tag: Insurance

It Is All So Much BS!

You know when you step in a pile of manure you just have to call it what it is…….

From the AP wire:

President Barack Obama is hailing a Senate vote to propel health care legislation toward final passage, calling it a “big victory for the American people.”By the thinnest possible margin, all 58 Democrats and the Senate’s two independents held together early Monday in a crucial test vote against unanimous Republican opposition. The move overcame a procedural effort that could have scuttled a final vote on the massive bill.

Obama said the Senate showed it could stand up to special interests and move the nation closer to a health insurance overhaul for families.

Please read it again……and think about what you have just read……(pause for reflection)…….

Do you recall the days after he won the election?  It was all abvout how the American people voted for change and how the American people voted for a new way of doing things in Washington….Remember?……

Partisanship is more entrenched than it ever was……..and look at the vote on health care….NOT ONE Repub voted for the Senate health reform bill….even though when read reads like a page out of a GOP playbook……and then Obama calls it a BIG win for the American people……where?…..yes 30 million more will have coverage….the problem is it is a forced coverage with a fine if it is not bought…the insurance companies got 30 million new customers without having to do anything but promise to eliminate the existing condition thing….which means that if you have an existing condition you will be able to buy insurance but it will cost several times more….

And then he goes on to say that it shows that we can stand up to special interests and win…really…if that is so damn true why did insurance stocks hit a 52 week high on the news of the vote?  Answer that one……

This is NOT a final bill but it is pretty much what the final version will look like….I would bet……

The Cost Of Health Care

I would like to say before I start that the AP is a genius….I am gonna post their entire article….why?….most people do not want to click as often as you would think….I would like to thank them for their expert analysis…..

THE ISSUE: How much do Americans who have employer-sponsored health insurance pay in premiums? What do their employers pay? Would that change if the system is overhauled?

THE POLITICS: Health care costs have been increasing. For Americans and the businesses that insure most of them, that translates into higher insurance premiums. The average premium cost for employer-provided insurance has doubled since 2000. These days, coverage for an individual with employer-provided insurance costs on average $4,824 a year, with the employee paying $779 of that amount, according to a 2009 survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research and Educational Trust. For a family plan, the premium is $13,375 with the employee paying $3,515. Under current law, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that in 2016 average premiums for employer-based insurance will rise to about $7,500 for a single policy and about $19,000 for a family policy.

WHAT IT MEANS: Numerous factors will affect the cost of insurance under proposed health care bills, making their impact hard to predict. But President Barack Obama has vowed to lower the cost of health care. The legislation would set up exchanges where companies would compete for customers. It also would provide subsidies for lower-income people.

There you have what the bill as proposed will cost you if it is not changed in the process….read it and weep…….Good plan and is a FAR cry from the stuff dreams were made of……Progressives lose again….now are you not glad you voted the way you did…..

Is It “Corporate Communism”?

I have begun to appreciate MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan…..he seems to be one of the few that are calling a spade …a spade….he is an irritating individual to some of his guests because he will interrupt try and force them to answer a question, instead of the BS talking oints they want us to hear…I give him his props on that….

Back to the point Dylan has been using a term, corporate communism, at lot and I have been meaning to write a post on this and just today he had Elliot Spitzer, the ex-governor of New York, on his show….a side note, Spitzer is a very knowledgeable man on economics,  we as a country could do a lot worse then him on understanding the economics of the bailout……back again….corporate communism…..

Ratigan writes in the Huffington Post:

Lack of choice, lazy, unresponsive customer service, a culture of exploitation and a small powerbase formed by cronyism and nepotism are the hallmarks of a communist system that steals from its citizenry and a major reason why America spent half a century fighting a Cold War with the U.S.S.R.

And yet today we find ourselves as a country in two distinctly different categories: those who are forced to compete tooth and nail each day to provide value to society in return for income for ourselves and our families and those who would instead use our lawmaking apparatus to help themselves to our tax money and/or to protect themselves from true competition.

If you allow weak, outdated players to take control of the government and change the rules so they are protected from the natural competition and reward systems that have created so many innovations in our country, you not only steal from the citizens on behalf of the least worthy but you also doom them by trapping the capital that would be used to generate new innovation and, most tangibly in our current situation, jobs.

If you have just a small amount of understanding of economics then you will see that Ratigan is correct and he should be applauding for saying so…..Americans HATE communism or socialism or whatever you would choose to call it…but they accept the protectionism that prevails in the financial world……they take from the taxpayer and do as they desire with NO checks and balances (where are those people that pitch a bitch about checks and balances as talked about in the Constitution?)

I seldom….I repeat SELDOM recommend a news show because people have their own likes and dislikes, but “The Morning Meeting” with Dylan Ratigan on MSNBC should be required veiwing for any and all economics courses…..whether you agree or disagree with him, it is thought provoking and excellent news source….

NO I do not get anything in return for recommending Ratigan…just the satisfaction of helping people understand what is what with all the bailout cash….and hopefully it will help make the people more angry that they are being screwed without even a kiss….I put this disclaimer in there because in the past I was accused of being a shill for other people….personally I do not agree with Ratigan on some things but I appreciate his effort to get news makers to answer questions, not put forth some talking point given to them before the show.

Obama Pounces On Health Insurance Lobby

And if you believe that piece of fantasy, then I have some land in Florida that I will sell by the gallon…..

Recently the insurance lobby left the fold, so to speak, and issued a report saying that if the Baucus bill or one similar is passed then insurance premiums will go up and very considerably.  This report has been proven to be erroneous but it is still quoted as gospel by those on the Right.  This report is about as reliable as those coming from the Lewin Group, which is funded by the insurance industry…so to say that their findings would be cooked is an understatement.

In his defense Obama hit the airways:

This is the unsustainable path we’re on, and it’s the path the insurers want to keep us on. In fact, the insurance industry is rolling out the big guns and breaking open their massive war chest – to marshal their forces for one last fight to save the status quo. They’re filling the airwaves with deceptive and dishonest ads. They’re flooding Capitol Hill with lobbyists and campaign contributions.  And they’re funding studies designed to mislead the American people. […]

It’s smoke and mirrors. It’s bogus. And it’s all too familiar. Every time we get close to passing reform, the insurance companies produce these phony studies as a prescription and say, “Take one of these, and call us in a decade.” Well, not this time. The fact is, the insurance industry is making this last-ditch effort to stop reform even as costs continue to rise and our health care dollars continue to be poured into their profits, bonuses, and administrative costs that do nothing to make us healthy – that often actually go toward figuring out how to avoid covering people. And they’re earning these profits and bonuses while enjoying a privileged exception from our anti-trust laws, a matter that Congress is rightfully reviewing.

Which his statements made me smile….why?…..he is attacking the industry for our behalf…but is he?

He has waffled on his statement in the past, that he would NOT sign a bill that did not have a public option in it…..now he saying that it is not necessary for a reform bill but that he would prefer that it contained an option.

There is more…..the Congress seems to be reluctant to lift the anti-trust exemption of insurance companies that give them a virtual free ride to run rough shod over the consumer.  This exemption allows insurance to be a virtual monopoly which in turn allows them to control the health insurance market…lets them fix prices, eliminate competition and make obscene profits with no need to justify the mistreatment of the insured.

Now that there is a bill in the Senate with a public option (well, sort of) the question now is, will the White House and the Dems truly go after the insurance anti-trust exemption?  If they do I am sure it will be the same sort of watered down bill that gave us the “public option”.  The industry has too much money on the buying of friends in the Congress to ever let something like this get in their way.

What Are They Cheering About?

Sen Snowe moved, by her vote, the finance committee bill onto the next level of negotiations…..what are you fools cheering about?

Snowe’s vote did NOTHING to further the health bill reform other than moving it out of committee….what part of that is something to cheer?  It has NOTHING in it that would cover the uninsured other than some pale BS about competition, but the bill does not even do that….the bill is just exactly what the insurance companies wanted.  They retain their massive profits and in turn will have access toi millions more customers.  In simpler words, it is NOT reform at all, but rather something I said months ago…a TWEAK!

Snowe’s arguments summarized a growing consensus among Democrats on Capitol Hill – and Republicans no longer in office – that a flawed bill that starts to overhaul the system is better than no bill at all.

Her vote gives political cover to moderate Democrats, puts Republicans on the defensive and gives Senate leaders the latitude to find 60 votes to overcome a GOP filibuster, rather than force health care legislation through the Senate with a special partisan procedure.

If you are one of those, like many citizens and many doctors that wanted a public option to be part of any reform, then you have NOTHING to cheer.

The Senate Finance Committee bill

Who’s covered: An estimated 94 percent of Americans. Illegal immigrants would not receive benefits.

Cost: $829 billion over 10 years.

How it’s paid for: Fees on insurance companies, drugmakers, medical device manufacturers. Additional tax levied on insurance companies. Cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. A fee on employers whose workers receive government subsidies to help them pay premiums.

Individual mandate: Everyone must get coverage through an employer or on their own. Exemptions for economic hardship. The bill requires individuals and families to buy coverage if it costs no more than 8 percent of their income.

Employer mandate: Not required to offer coverage, but companies with more than 50 full-time workers would pay a fee if the government subsidizes employees’ coverage.

Insurance restrictions: No denial of coverage based on pre-existing conditions. No higher premiums allowed for pre-existing conditions or gender. Limits on higher premiums based on age and family size. Limits on allowable co-pays and deductibles.

Changes to Medicaid: Income eligibility levels standardized to 133 percent of poverty ($30,000 a year for a family of four) for all parents, children and pregnant women. Childless adults making up to 133 percent of poverty ($14,400 for an individual) would be eligible for the first time. The expansion would be delayed until 2014.

This is not something to cheer…this was just a political move to give cover to those Blue Dogs that want to be part of the conversation….
There is a distinct odor of compromise….TWEAKING not reforming…just what the insurance companies were hoping for…that is why they spend millions putting congress people in their pockets.
And then there was the threat of premium increases, the newest threat from the insurance companies….but think about that……if they get their way with the reforms they will have a free reign to do that anyway…..so that was BS from the word GO.  BTW, they have already said that the increases next year would be sizable.

Is “Opt Out” Proposal Good Or Bad?

It is about enough of who won what prize and who wants to own a NFL team…there is far more important issues that need analysis……

Since single payer was a NO SHOW in the deliberations and the public option will most likely be in name only….what options are being considered now?  Glad you asked….and this one is a doosey (sp?)…….

As reported in the Huffington Post:

Senate Democrats have begun discussions on a compromise approach to health care reform that would establish a robust, national public option for insurance coverage but give individual states the right to opt out of the program.

How such a system would work is still being debated, according to those with knowledge of the proposal. But theoretically, the “opt-out” approach would start with everyone having access to a public plan. What kind of public plan isn’t yet clear. States would then have the right to vote — either by referendum, legislature, or simply a gubernatorial decree — to make the option unavailable in their health care exchanges.

A simple thought experiment might clarify the issues at hand: What if Medicare had been passed with this ‘opt-out’ provision? To make the thought experiment more appropriate to the situation at hand, we must imagine that the 1965 law creating Medicare had already been subject to the same compromises that the public option has been: that its ability to negotiate with certain suppliers and providers has been negotiated away, and that instead of being available to all older Americans, access has been restricted so that only an estimated 5% of them are expected to join.

A plausible answer is that a number of states, especially in the South, would have chosen not to participate.

This appears to be a weak lame attempt to pacify as many Dems as possible with the chance that a 60 vote super majority can to reached……in other words, it is all about the vote not what is best for the people, who those voting have taken an oath to serve….did I miss something?  Is that not grounds to throw the ilk out of office?

Are There Other Health Ideas?

We have heard all the clap trap about the Dems and we have have heard the plan from the Repubs…wait…my bad there is no plan coming from the Repubs……but there are others out there that have plans…..some pretty good some not so…..but at least they are trying to find a balance….

“A Better Way To Health Reform” written by Martin Feldstein in the WaPo….excerpts quoted below:

A good health insurance system should 1) guarantee that everyone can obtain appropriate care even when the price of that care is very high and 2) prevent the financial hardship or personal bankruptcy that can now result from large medical bills

A good system should not try to pay all health-care bills. That would lead to excessive demand, wasteful use of expensive technology and, inevitably, rationing in which health-care decisions are taken away from patients and their physicians. Countries that provide health care to all are forced to deny some treatments and diagnostic tests that most Americans have come to expect.

Here’s a better alternative. Let’s scrap the $220 billion annual health insurance tax subsidy, which is often used to buy the wrong kind of insurance, and use those budget dollars to provide insurance that protects American families from health costs that exceed 15 percent of their income.

Specifically, the government would give each individual or family a voucher that would permit taxpayers to buy a policy from a private insurer that would pay all allowable health costs in excess of 15 percent of the family’s income. A typical American family with income of $50,000 would be eligible for a voucher worth about $3,500, the actuarial cost of a policy that would pay all of that family’s health bills in excess of $7,500 a year.

The family could give this $3,500 voucher to any insurance company or health maintenance organization, including the provider of the individual’s current employer-based insurance plan. Some families would choose the simple option of paying out of pocket for the care up to that 15 percent threshold. Others would want to reduce the maximum potential out-of-pocket cost to less than 15 percent of income and would pay a premium to the insurance company to expand their coverage. Some families might want to use the voucher to pay for membership in a health maintenance organization. Each option would provide a discipline on demand that would help to limit the rise in health-care costs.

Two related problems remain. First, how would families find the cash to pay for large medical and hospital bills that fall under the 15 percent limit? While it would be reasonable for a family that earns $50,000 a year to save to be prepared to pay a health bill of, say, $5,000, what if a family without savings is suddenly hit with such a large hospital bill? Second, how would doctors and hospitals be confident that patients with the new high deductibles will pay their bills?The simplest solution would be for the government to issue a health-care credit card to every family along with the insurance voucher. The credit card would allow the family to charge any medical expenses below the deductible limit, or 15 percent of adjusted gross income. (With its information on card holders, the government is in a good position to be repaid or garnish wages if necessary.) No one would be required to use such a credit card. Individuals could pay cash at the time of care, could use a personal credit card or could arrange credit directly from the provider. But the government-issued credit card would be a back-up to reassure patients and providers that they would always be able to pay.

I am not endorsing what Mr. Feldstein is saying, but at least he has some ideas…which is more than we can say for a wealth of people on the Right.

What the final bill will look like is anyone’s guess….but I would almost bet that it will look nothing like a real “public option”…..most likely some pale imitation of the original concept…….but I think that ALL viable conceptions and solutions should get their day and then the best of ALL should be the final bill…..it is that simple….no need to turn it into rocket science….

That Is Right…..A Fat Tax!

I have written several posts on the idea of making FAT a sin or making FAT socially unacceptable…..many in the media are jumping on the anti-fat thing, some go so far as to accuse people that are “fat” of all sorts of mortal sins….lazy…gluttony….etc….well, there is another way of doing this….another way of doing what they say cannot be done…..TAX THE BASTARDS! (sarcasm intended).

First it was Alabama…this story came from the LA Times:

The State Employees’ Insurance Board announced a new plan beginning next year in which state employees will be required to receive medication screenings for several conditions, including body mass index. Those considered obese or who have high blood pressure, high cholesterol or high glucose will have to pay $25 a month more in health insurance beginning in January 2011, if they don’t take steps to address their health problems.

The new rule will affect more than 37,000 people employed by the state. Alabama is the first state to issue a so-called fat tax. The state already charges smokers a $24 per month surcharge (which will increase to $25 next month).

Alabama has the second highest obesity rate in the country, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Just over 30% of the population is obese, ranking just behind Mississippi. Still, a fat tax?

And then another Southern state has jumped on the bandwagon.  The NewsObserver.com:

“Tobacco use and poor nutrition and inactivity are the leading causes of preventable deaths in our state,” said Anne Rogers, director of integrated health management with the N.C. State Employees Health Plan. “We need a healthy workforce in this state. We’re trying to encourage individuals to adopt healthy lifestyles.”

State workers who don’t cut out the Marlboros and Big Macs will end up paying more for health care. Tobacco users get placed in a more expensive insurance plan starting in July and, for those who qualify as obese, in July 2011.

The idea of penalizing unhealthy lifestyles and rewarding healthy conduct is hardly new among insurance plans. Public health insurance plans in other states already penalize smokers or reward nonsmokers in insurance costs. South Carolina’s state employees health plan is scheduled to add a $25-per-month surcharge on smokers in January. Elsewhere in the Southeast, Kentucky and Georgia impose surcharges, and Alabama gives nonsmokers a discount.

Tobacco and obesity are leading risk factors for ailments such as heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes and chronic breathing disorders. BioSignia is not under contract with the state health plan, but Smith said that employers like the state are trying to catch employees who are in pre-disease stages to save both lives and money.

Only a fraction of employers, though, offer financial incentives for healthy behavior or wellness programs, such as gym memberships or smoking cessation, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study last year. Differences in employees’ education, health literacy and access to basic health care could affect the usefulness of financial incentives in reducing health-care costs over time, the study said.

How lovely!  What is next….. Beer?  After all beer has a way of showing up on one’s waistline.  Granted there is already some taxation on beer and alcohol, there is always more room for expansion of that tax.

Yes, once again this is government inserting itself in people’s lives…you know the same government that seems not to want to do anything about guns and crime…..or the same government that seems reluctant to do anything about the effects of carbon emissions…that is also the cause of illness and bad for people’s health…..

If this survives any court challenge then the rest of the states will run herd over their employees.  Workers will have something else to make their pay checks smaller….and the insurance companies smile……

CBO Gives Life To Reform

Well in name only that is……

The AP is reporting on the much anticipated CBO report on the costs of the Baucus Health Reform bill……..

The Congressional Budget Office added that the measure would reduce federal deficits by $81 billion over a decade and probably lead to “continued reductions in federal budget deficits” in the years beyond.

The report paves the way for the Senate Finance Committee to vote as early as Friday on the legislation, which is largely in line with President Barack Obama‘s call for the most sweeping overhaul of the nation’s health care system in a half-century.

A win for the insurance industry…..it will cost less than predicted…..and will give the industry millions of new customersa to screw at every turn.  Baucus said of the bill:

“This legislation, I believe, is a smart investment on our federal balance sheet. It’s an even smarter investment for American families, businesses and our economy,”

A smart investment?  For whom?  These guys are more concerned about the balance sheet and while they figure and smile more Americans die or go into bankruptcy.

The measure would require that millions of Americans purchase private insurance for the first time, and would set up a new marketplace where policies would be available.

Federal subsidies would be available to millions of lower-income individuals and families to help defray the cost of coverage that would otherwise be out of their reach. The alternative to government-sold health care, a proposal for nonprofit co-ops that would compete with private companies, was judged largely ineffective by budget officials. Such arrangements “seem unlikely to establish a significant medical presence in many areas of the country,” they wrote.

The legislation also would ban current insurance industry practices that deny coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions, and restrict companies’ ability to charge vastly higher premiums on the basis of age, gender or other factors.

But how will the health bill be budget neutral?

The reform would be paid for through a variety of tax increases and spending cuts, including savings of hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare, the federal health care program for seniors.  (Watch for a future post on this piece of crap).

Is There Optimism About Health Reform?

With the defeat of the public option, not once but twice, in the Senate Finance Committee there seems to be no optimism left among progressives.  So, my question is….is there any optimism left in health reform?

After the two defeats the Dems came out all smiles and cheerful saying that all was looking good…..optimism….good…..

But after all that, is there any real optimism?

Huh….and in a place that should be very telling to anyone that wants to look…..and thanks to thinkprogress.com:

Yesterday, the Senate Finance Committee voted down both the Rockefeller and Schumer amendments, which would have added a public insurance plan to the committee’s bill. As the Wall Street Journal reports, shares in health insurers Humana and UnitedHealth shot up following the votes:

Shares of companies that operate private health plans turned higher or trimmed losses in afternoon trading Tuesday after a Senate committee rejected an amendment that would have created a government-run insurance option. Humana Inc. (HUM) shares, which had been down earlier, were recently up 1% at $38.41. UnitedHealth Group Inc. (UNH) shares gained 3 cents to $25.83.

Private health insurers have bitterly fought the creation of a public insurance option, fearing that such an option would cut into their profits. Yesterday, Life And Health Insurance News reported that the insurance industry has responded positively to the defeat of the public option amendments. “We are pleased by the rejection of both the Rockefeller and Schumer amendments,” said Tom Currey, president of the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors. Janet Trautwein, president of the National Association of Health Underwriters, also told the press that her organization is pleased by the failure of the Schumer and Rockefeller amendments.

There is optimism….but it is not about the well being of the American people, but rather to continuation of the status quo in the health sector.  May I suggest that if you are concerned with the state of the reform then watch the stocks after each vote….that will be more telling than anything you will hear on the MSM.