Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

The Real Reasons Insurers Are Canceling Policies

4 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wendell-potter/the-real-reasons-insurers_b_4296212.html

Now that President Obama has said it's OK with him if insurance companies keep their policyholders in health plans that don't meet the standards established by the Affordable Care Act, at least for another year, the big question is whether insurers will take him up on the offer.

The answer: it depends.

Some insurance executives will view the offer as one they can't turn down. Even though Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's big PR and lobbying group, had nothing good to say about Obama's proposal, keep in mind that she doesn't run an insurance company. While industry executives look to her to comment on what politicians do, they make their own decisions when it comes to their companies' bottom lines.

Here's what Ignagni was quoted as saying in a FOX News story Friday:

"The only reason consumers are getting notices about their current coverage changing is because the ACA (Affordable Care Act) requires all policies to cover a broad range of benefits that go beyond what many people choose to purchase today."

Not so fast. There are other reasons some folks are being told they'll have to change health plans next year. Many of them are having to switch plans not because of Obamacare but because their insurance companies want to move them into policies with higher profit margins.

Insurance companies have been sending similar notices to their customers for years. My son Alex -- and thousands of other customers of a Blue Cross plan in Pennsylvania -- got such a notice four years ago, months before Congress passed the health reform law.

Why? The insurer wanted to move those policyholders out of a plan with a reasonable $500 annual deductible and into one with a deductible ten times that amount. To accomplish that, Blue Cross notified its policyholders that their health plan would not be available in 2010. Their options were to switch to the high-deductible policy, which would still cost them a couple of dollars more each month, or to another plan with that reasonable $500 deductible. If they chose the latter, their monthly premiums would increase 65 percent.


Notices like the one Alex got have provided a mechanism for insurers to implement a years-long industry strategy of shifting more and more of the cost of medical care to their policyholders. And that strategy will continue until every last one of us is in a high-deductible plan.

Some of you are likely old enough to remember the days before managed care when almost all Americans with private health insurance were in indemnity plans. In an old-fashioned indemnity plan, the insurer didn't constrain us in a limited network of doctors and hospitals and didn't call the shots about whether a knee replacement or liver transplant your doctor recommended was really necessary.

Those days are long gone. Everybody eventually got notices that those plans were being discontinued. They were replaced by HMOs and PPOs with limited provider networks and armies of utilization review nurses and medical directors who decided if you would get coverage for your new knee or new liver.

In most cases, it was our employers who killed off the indemnity plans in favor of managed care. But eventually, HMOs and PPOs also fell out of favor. The managed care backlash of the late 1990s forced insurers to abandon some of their utilization review practices and to add more doctors and hospitals to their skinny networks. That led to shrinking profit margins -- and to the latest silver bullet from the insurance industry: high-deductible plans.

Before Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies already were making rapid progress in implementing their business plans of "migrating" their customers from traditional managed care plans to so-called "consumer-directed" plans, the industry euphemism for high-deductible policies. At the same time they've been requiring us to pay more out of our own pockets for care, they've also been implementing a strategy of reducing benefits. Investors and Wall Street financial analysts refer to these common industry practices as "benefit buydowns." That's another euphemism, by the way.

I myself -- and thousands of my fellow Cigna employees -- were notified several years ago, long before I left my job, that our HMOs and PPOs were being discontinued. Yep, we got notices in the mail. If we wanted to stay in a Cigna-subsidized health plan, we would have to switch to a high-deductible plan. The same thing has happened to tens of millions of other Americans in recent years.

Yet if you relied on the Washington media for your news and information about health care, you'd think that insurance companies would never have considered sending policy discontinuation notices to their policyholders until forced to do so by Obamacare.

The truth: they have always done this when profits were at stake.

Which is why some insurers will be happy as clams to be able to keep their policyholders in plans that don't meet the ACA's standards. Many of those plans -- especially the junk insurance plans many folks are in -- are exceedingly profitable.

For people who are in those plans who have complained about their discontinuation notices, I hope they will shop around. Chances are, they'll be able to get much better coverage at a better price. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act.

Guest


Guest

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303985504579205743008770218?tesla=y

Buried deep in the Department of Health and Human Services' press release that accompanied the president's Nov. 14 speech was this sentence: "Though this transitional policy was not anticipated by health insurance issuers when setting rates for 2014, the risk corridor program should help ameliorate unanticipated changes in premium revenue. We intend to explore ways to modify the risk corridor program final rules to provide additional assistance."

Risk corridors are generally used to mitigate an insurer's pricing risk. Under ObamaCare, risk corridors were established for the law's first three years as a safety-net for insurers who experience financial losses. While risk corridors can protect taxpayers when they are budget-neutral, ObamaCare's risk corridors are designed in such an open-ended manner that the president's action now exposes taxpayers to a bailout of the health-insurance industry if and when the law fails.

Subsequent regulatory rulings have made clear that the administration views this risk-corridor authority as a blank check, requiring no further consultation or approval by Congress. A final rule handed down in March by HHS and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services states: "Regardless of the balance of payments and receipts, HHS will remit payments as required under section 1342 of the Affordable Care Act."

2seaoat



We are talking about less than 5% of the market, and the free market will kick in over the next three years as the penalties are factored into the equation. Like the first play of the football game, the projections from that play mean little. However, the hype and shrill cries of failure are amusing, and in fact could be a problem in three years, but right now it is merely wishful thinking............that America will fail.....we will not fail.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:We are talking about less than 5% of the market, and the free market will kick in over the next three years as the penalties are factored into the equation. Like the first play of the football game, the projections from that play mean little. However, the hype and shrill cries of failure are amusing, and in fact could be a problem in three years, but right now it is merely wishful thinking............that America will fail.....we will not fail.
Try to objectively pigeonhole the ideological intent of the link I posted above... be honest. A few words at most.

Markle

Markle

Floridatexan wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wendell-potter/the-real-reasons-insurers_b_4296212.html

Now that President Obama has said it's OK with him if insurance companies keep their policyholders in health plans that don't meet the standards established by the Affordable Care Act, at least for another year, the big question is whether insurers will take him up on the offer.

The answer: it depends.

Some insurance executives will view the offer as one they can't turn down. Even though Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's big PR and lobbying group, had nothing good to say about Obama's proposal, keep in mind that she doesn't run an insurance company. While industry executives look to her to comment on what politicians do, they make their own decisions when it comes to their companies' bottom lines.

Here's what Ignagni was quoted as saying in a FOX News story Friday:

"The only reason consumers are getting notices about their current coverage changing is because the ACA (Affordable Care Act) requires all policies to cover a broad range of benefits that go beyond what many people choose to purchase today."

Not so fast. There are other reasons some folks are being told they'll have to change health plans next year. Many of them are having to switch plans not because of Obamacare but because their insurance companies want to move them into policies with higher profit margins.

Insurance companies have been sending similar notices to their customers for years. My son Alex -- and thousands of other customers of a Blue Cross plan in Pennsylvania -- got such a notice four years ago, months before Congress passed the health reform law.

Why? The insurer wanted to move those policyholders out of a plan with a reasonable $500 annual deductible and into one with a deductible ten times that amount. To accomplish that, Blue Cross notified its policyholders that their health plan would not be available in 2010. Their options were to switch to the high-deductible policy, which would still cost them a couple of dollars more each month, or to another plan with that reasonable $500 deductible. If they chose the latter, their monthly premiums would increase 65 percent.


Notices like the one Alex got have provided a mechanism for insurers to implement a years-long industry strategy of shifting more and more of the cost of medical care to their policyholders. And that strategy will continue until every last one of us is in a high-deductible plan.

Some of you are likely old enough to remember the days before managed care when almost all Americans with private health insurance were in indemnity plans. In an old-fashioned indemnity plan, the insurer didn't constrain us in a limited network of doctors and hospitals and didn't call the shots about whether a knee replacement or liver transplant your doctor recommended was really necessary.

Those days are long gone. Everybody eventually got notices that those plans were being discontinued. They were replaced by HMOs and PPOs with limited provider networks and armies of utilization review nurses and medical directors who decided if you would get coverage for your new knee or new liver.

In most cases, it was our employers who killed off the indemnity plans in favor of managed care. But eventually, HMOs and PPOs also fell out of favor. The managed care backlash of the late 1990s forced insurers to abandon some of their utilization review practices and to add more doctors and hospitals to their skinny networks. That led to shrinking profit margins -- and to the latest silver bullet from the insurance industry: high-deductible plans.

Before Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies already were making rapid progress in implementing their business plans of "migrating" their customers from traditional managed care plans to so-called "consumer-directed" plans, the industry euphemism for high-deductible policies. At the same time they've been requiring us to pay more out of our own pockets for care, they've also been implementing a strategy of reducing benefits. Investors and Wall Street financial analysts refer to these common industry practices as "benefit buydowns." That's another euphemism, by the way.

I myself -- and thousands of my fellow Cigna employees -- were notified several years ago, long before I left my job, that our HMOs and PPOs were being discontinued. Yep, we got notices in the mail. If we wanted to stay in a Cigna-subsidized health plan, we would have to switch to a high-deductible plan. The same thing has happened to tens of millions of other Americans in recent years.

Yet if you relied on the Washington media for your news and information about health care, you'd think that insurance companies would never have considered sending policy discontinuation notices to their policyholders until forced to do so by Obamacare.

The truth: they have always done this when profits were at stake.

Which is why some insurers will be happy as clams to be able to keep their policyholders in plans that don't meet the ACA's standards. Many of those plans -- especially the junk insurance plans many folks are in -- are exceedingly profitable.

For people who are in those plans who have complained about their discontinuation notices, I hope they will shop around. Chances are, they'll be able to get much better coverage at a better price. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act.
It is apparently good that BIG GOVERNMENT KNOWS what is BEST for EVERYONE. 

I missed it.  Who was it that made President Barack Hussein Obama also the House and the Senate?

The Real Reasons Insurers Are Canceling Policies Chin-up-wh-photo

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:We are talking about less than 5% of the market, and the free market will kick in over the next three years as the penalties are factored into the equation.   Like the first play of the football game, the projections from that play mean little.   However, the hype and shrill cries of failure are amusing, and in fact could be a problem in three years, but right now it is merely wishful thinking............that America will fail.....we will not fail.
Five percent...gee, that how many people actually could not afford health insurance or had such pre-existing conditions they could not afford or buy health insurance.  Tell me again why we had to destroy the highest quality health care in the world for that five percent?

And...it's five percent until the companies who offer health insurance start having THEIR policies cancelled.  What great planning!
The Real Reasons Insurers Are Canceling Policies Bth_StampObamaCare

Guest


Guest

ah ha! I knew a bribe had to be in there somewhere.

ObamaCare's risk corridors are designed in such an open-ended manner that the president's action now exposes taxpayers to a bailout of the health-insurance industry if and when the law fails.


VectorMan

VectorMan

ObamaCare will be an off the charts failure, the likes of which have never been seen.

I only use the phrase "ObamaCare", because that bonehead owns it!

Where do you get the eyeglasses Rx that shows everything to be rainbows and butterflies? Is it from some failed "green", govt propped company?


The Real Reasons Insurers Are Canceling Policies Utopia

Markle

Markle

Chrissy wrote:ah ha! I knew a bribe had to be in there somewhere.

ObamaCare's risk corridors are designed in such an open-ended manner that the president's action now exposes taxpayers to a bailout of the health-insurance industry if and when the law fails.
That's true.  If enough young, healthy customers do not sign up for ObamaCare for the insurance companies to make a profit, the tax payers will eat the difference for three years.

I really wonder how long the tax payers will swallow those Billions!

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum