Posted on 02/18/2010 7:06:08 AM PST by Daniel T. Zanoza
According to an article by Amy Goldstein of the Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/18/AR2010021801345.html?hpid=topnews insurance companies who provide health care coverage for individuals have been pushing to levy huge premium increases on their customers in recent months. Goldstein reports "Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of Maine is asking that state to approve a 23 percent rise in premiums for its individual-market customers, after state regulators slashed an 18 percent increase that the insurer requested in 2009."
Even worse, FOX News reported on Thursday (Feb. 18, 2010) Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of California was seeking increases in premium rates as high as 39% for an individual health insurance policy. That company also backed off from its plan to single out individual policy holders for draconian hikes in prices due to public outrage.
President Barack Obama in his plan to reform the American health care system--which represents one-sixth of the nation's economy--from the beginning has attempted to demonize insurance companies. The question I have is: Why would firms, including Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of California, help give Obama ammunition in his fight to revive health care reform legislation which seemed to be dead on arrival?
Something strange is going on here. Either these companies are being run by fools or they are as greedy as Obama claims. Or perhaps the whole thing is part of a sinister master plan to help pass a health care bill most Americans don't want.
Soon Mr. Obama will hold a second summit with Republicans with the purpose of reaching a bipartisan agreement over the health care reform issue. But many question whether Mr. Obama is sincere or whether he is simply trying to paint Republicans into a corner calling them obstructionists. Of course, in this case, the latter is true.
However, the actions of the insurance companies seem to tell a different story. Is it possible a deal has already been cut that will ensure health care reform legislation will become a reality sometime before the general election in 2010? If this is the case, the politicians in Washington, D.C. truly believe Americans are stupid and they won't catch on to what's being foisted upon them until it's too late.
Something smells fishy here. But as fish lovers know, fresh fish does not smell. Possibly the odor we are picking up is far more offensive than rotting seafood.
Whosoever shall not fall by the sword or by famine, shall fall by pestilence, so why bother shaving?
Companies like the Blue Cross and Blue Shields of the world are not in the insurance business. They make a small fraction of their money transfering risk. Most of what they make they make on processing paperwork on expenses that should by and large be paid out-of-pocket by consumers. The Blues all believe that they will be the administrators of the single-payer system. All profit with no risk as Uncle Sam will pay on a cost plus basis.
The Obama state media experts.
I believe nothing issued by the Dem party or their front groups like the AP, Wash Compost .....
So why do we instantly believe their lies consider them facts to analyze anything and make predictions ????
Anthem BC of Kentucky just hit my wife with a 40% increase, 25% for me.
I figure they are covering themselves in the event of a rate freeze as part of some health takeover bill. Doing it now because even if it is a couple of years away, the closer it gets, the harder it will be for them to get the increase.
I attribute 3/4 of our increase to ObamaCare. Remember, the push for most of these increases began back when it looked like DeathCare was a done deal.
Just another example of getting screwed by the government through the back door.
Blue Cross Blue Shield is asking the states to approve these higher premiums for individual policy holders. I don’t trust the lamestream media either, but this report seems to be factual and I do trust FOX News—especially their hard news division.
Dan Zanoza
Can't answer that. But I can tell you who calculated the 40% my wife just got in KY. Me. Actually, to be precise 41.2%
I also suspect a rat. it seems ludicrous that insurance companies would rate rates this much in a recession and during the national health care debate. I think they are trying to stimulate consumer revolt against insurance plans so public support for obamacare increases. This is just WAY TOO suspicious!
A few years back I discovered upon attempting to actually use my Ky Athem coverage, that despite negotiating my regular and timely (And of course outrageous) quarterly payments, I was not insured.
Ky Anthem denied the fact outright.
Using the Ky Office of Insurance I eventually forced Ky Anthem, after repeated perjury by Ky Anthem to that office, to reveal that I had not been insured for at least nine months.
The whole charade of the Ky State investigator was then abruptly shut down.
Ky Anthem is absolutely above any oversight or regulation.
Get different coverage if you can because your Ky Anthem BC/BS policy is not worth the paper it is written on.
This individual *family* policyholder used to have BCBS in Mass.
Year 0 - before mandated health insurance - $1800/mo
Year 1 - mandated health insurance - $1500/mo
Year 2 - mandated health insurance - $2050/mo
Year 3 - mandated health insurance - $3000/mo*
*We moved to another state, so this figure comes from the Mass insurance website if we were to sign up for BCBS for our family today, getting the same insurance we had for Years 0, 1, and 2.
After 2 full years of RomneyCare, our insurance costs would have doubled, given that we kept the same BCBS policy we had in year 0.
But increases usually come with changes in coverage caused by state laws or other mandates .
No changes via the state, to the best of my knowledge. We have individual plans with $5K deductibles.
Oh, and that 40% was not a “requested” increase, it is the new premium as of this past Jan 1.
Here is the rest of the story-———These rate hikes are the direct result of the Golden State’s insurance regulations—the kind that Democrats want to impose on all 50 states. Under federal Cobra rules, the unemployed are allowed to keep their job-related health benefits for 18 to 36 months. California then goes further and bars Anthem from dropping these customers even after they have exhausted Cobra. California also caps what Anthem can charge these post-Cobra customers.
Most other states direct these customers to high-risk pools that are partly subsidized, but California requires the individual market to absorb the customers and their costs. Even as California insurers have had to keep insuring these typically older and sicker patients, the recession has driven many younger, healthier policy holders to drop their insurance—leaving fewer customers to fund a more expensive insurance pool.
This explains why the company lost $58 million in California on its post-Cobra customers in 2009. If they didn’t raise premiums amid these losses, it would soon be under assault from its shareholders, if not out of business.
Rename, repackage, rewrite it a tad smaller, and sell another pig in a poke.
Tennessee has joined several other states in trying to pass a Health Care Freedom Act. NO COLAs for granny, retired Military or retired fed employees. BIG NEW fees for Tricare for Life retired over 65 Military's secondary health ins. (DOD bill already passed, delayed but goes into effect 2011)
New Dem mantra: Woof, woof eat dog food granny....ala let them eat cake.
TRI CARE FOR LIFE This from a google search:
http://economicspolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/tricare-for-life-is-obama-trying-to.html
This option would help reduce the costs of TFL, as well as costs for Medicare, by introducing minimum out-of pocket requirements for beneficiaries. Under this option, TFL would not cover any of the first $525 of an enrollee’s cost-sharing liabilities for calendar year 2011 and would limit coverage to 50 percent of the next $4,725 in Medicare cost sharing that the beneficiary incurred. (Because all further cost sharing would be covered by TFL, enrollees could not pay more than $2,888 in cost sharing in that year.)
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9925/12-18-HealthOptions.pdf
http://www.vawatchdog.org/09/hcva09/hcva110609-1.htm
Bill Would Restrict Veterans’ Health Care Options 11/06/09
Buyer and McKeon Offer Amendments to Protect Veterans and TRICARE Beneficiaries
Congress plans to block Tricare fee increases
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/10/military_tricarefees_blocked_100709w
By Rick Maze - Staff writer, Oct 7, 2009
Tricare fee increases imposed last week by the Defense Department will be repealed by a provision of the compromise 2010 defense authorization bill unveiled Wednesday by House and Senate negotiators.
Snip
The fee increases were announced on Sept. 30 and took effect on Oct. 1, but the defense bill, HR 2647, includes a provision barring any fee increases until the start of fiscal 2011.
Snip
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Bill Matz, president of the National Association for Uniformed Services, said the announcement of fee increases was shocking considering that the Obama administration promised earlier this year to hold off on any new fee Tricare fee increases until fiscal 2011.
“President Obama and DoD assured NAUS and the entire military family earlier this year that there would rightly be no increases in any Tricare fees” in fiscal 2010, Matz said. “We took them at their word, and I can’t believe that a co-pay increase like this was allowed to go forward,” he added.
Bambi doesn't keep his promises...so buyer beware.
It should be called the abortion bill. Obama/Pelosicare would have been passed long ago if it did not include tax dollars paying for abortion.
To all:
CORRECTION:
Erica Perng, Corporate Communications Manager, Blue Shield of California wrote: I work in corporate communications at Blue Shield of California and saw the article you did on Anthem Blue Cross. Unfortunately, your article called Anthem Blue Cross “Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of California.” We are entirely separate companies – Blue Shield of California is a not-for-profit health plan, while Anthem Blue Cross is a for-profit health plan.
************
RFFM.org apologizes for the error and a correction has been made on RFFM.org’s website/blog.
JMZ, Managing Editor, RFFM.org
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.