ObamaCare Dominoes Falling

American Thinker ^ | April 9, 2010 | C. MacLeod Fuller

[jazusamo]

The predictable consequences of forcing companies to sell healthcare insurance to people with pre-exisiting conditions are unfolding. On Tuesday, American Thinker reported that a mere two weeks after President Obama signed ObamaCare into law, one result was that Massachusetts Democrat Governor, Deval Patrick, "rejected 235 of 274 insurer requests for premium increases for individuals and small businesses over the coming year" -- requests made by that state's three largest nonprofit insurers, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Harvard Pilgrim, and Tufts Heath Plan.

Later in the week, the insurers simply stopped selling policies. 

According to the Wall Street Journal, three of the four largest suffered net operating losses in 2009 and the Democrats' "arbitrary rate cap will result in another $100 million in collective losses this year [...making...] it impossible to pay the anticipated costs of claims, and threatening the near-term solvency of some companies."  The Journal noted,

...state officials have demanded that the insurers-under the threat of fines and other regulatory punishments-resume offering quotes by today and to revert to year-old base premiums.  Let that one sink in:  Mr. Patrick has made the health insurance business so painful the government actually has to order private companies to sell their products (albeit at sub-market costs).

The article also reveals a number of interesting facts, including:

-  Massachusetts' "insurance regulators have concluded the reason [that state's] premiums are the highest in the nation is the underlying cost of health care, not the supposed industry abuses" imagined by President Obama and Governor Patrick.

-  The unsurprising fact that because Massachusetts' universal healthcare mandate prohibits exclusion for pre-existing conditions, people simply "wait until they're about to incur major medical expenses before buying insurance and transfer the costs to everyone else."

-  Once the medical emergency has passed, short-term enrollees drop their coverage - because they know they can demand "insurance" the next time they want it.

-  Blue Cross Blue Shield reported "short-term customers ... ran up costs more than four times the average" and dropped coverage "within three months."  Harvard Pilgrim's experience with such hit-and-run enrollees is that they remained with the plan "fewer than five months and on average incurred costs about 600% higher."

Of course, when their next medical stubbed toe happens, such short-term "purchasers" will return. Under ObamaCare, Massachusetts foreshadows the future of all 50 states - with a socialist-inspired financial vengeance.

[jazusamo]

Deval Patrick gives preview of obamacare.

[Reagan69]

I actually think this is an “intended consequence”.

No insurance companies? No problem. We’re the GOVERNMENT and we’re here to help.

[Ben Mugged]

Only a democrat would put price controls on a non-profit organization.

[unspun]

Mitt Romney and Deval Patrick gives preview of Obamacare.

FTFY ;-`

[jazusamo]

Absolutely correct! :)

[FrankR]

[workerbee]

According to the Wall Street Journal, three of the four largest suffered net operating losses in 2009 and the Democrats' "arbitrary rate cap will result in another $100 million in collective losses this year [...making...] it impossible to pay the anticipated costs of claims, and threatening the near-term solvency of some companies."

But it's FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!! Remember? Along with gas and the mortgage?

[elpadre]

IMO, “Later in the week, the insurers simply stopped selling policies.” is exactly what Obama wants because sooner rather than later it will bring about his goal of single payer health insurance, i.e. Canada, England, ec.

[Buckeye McFrog]

will this provide just the cover (crisis) they need to implement single payer?

[Secret Agent Man]

This is what they want. It’s a win win for them.

Either the companies keep selling at government-fixed prices, and the govt wins,

or they stop and the govt wins because those people will lose their private policy and by law be forced into govt plans. Govt wins.

[Lancey Howard]

Gee, who saw this coming?

[snowrip]

bttt

[Terabitten]

- The unsurprising fact that because Massachusetts' universal healthcare mandate prohibits exclusion for pre-existing conditions, people simply "wait until they're about to incur major medical expenses before buying insurance and transfer the costs to everyone else." - Once the medical emergency has passed, short-term enrollees drop their coverage - because they know they can demand "insurance" the next time they want it. - Blue Cross Blue Shield reported "short-term customers ... ran up costs more than four times the average" and dropped coverage "within three months." Harvard Pilgrim's experience with such hit-and-run enrollees is that they remained with the plan "fewer than five months and on average incurred costs about 600% higher."

My God.

I've always assumed that I must have been missing something when they talked of removing the pre-existing conditions clause, because it seemed blindingly obvious that this would happen if the PEC clauses were completely removed.

This is such an obvious consequence that one can ONLY assume that their intent is to drive insurance companies out of business.

[Lancey Howard]

But it's FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!! Remember? Along with gas and the mortgage?

No, none of it is truly "free".
Ubama pays for it out of "his stash".

[USNA74]

Bingo. This is exactly what they intended to happen. Insurance companies go out of business and then they achieve single payer. Exactly what the Dems want.

[HereInTheHeartland]

They create a “problem”; and then the government is there to provide a solution.

[OneWingedShark]

...One wonders when the bullets will start flying.
Our founders revolted for less.

[Pessimist]

“.....state officials have demanded that the insurers-under the threat of fines and other regulatory punishments-resume offering quotes by today and to revert to year-old base premiums.”

“Paging John Galt... A Mr John Galt”

[Ancesthntr]

This is such an obvious consequence that one can ONLY assume that their intent is to drive insurance companies out of business.

As Patton once said, "A blind man could see it in a minute."

Of course that was/is the goal - no insurance companies, and government MUST come in to "rescue" the system. How neat, they can blame the failure of "greedy insurance companies" and "capitalism" (which hasn't existed in this country for at least 75 years), and get control all at the same time.

Yet, this lack of a PEC clause was EXACTLY what they used to sell it to the idiot public. It is somewhat encouraging to me that about 2/3 of the public hasn't been so dumbed down by the "progressive" John Dewey school system that they didn't see it. However, we have failed to learn how our system is supposed to operate - else there would have been 5 million people protesting in Washington, armed, on the day of the vote.

This will not end well.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

will this provide just the cover (crisis) they need to implement single payer?

That has been the plan all along. For many years they have constructed this scenario to implement their agenda. Single payer is what they want to further their march to the End Game; Total control of every citizen.

Will you take the Oath of Fealty good citizen?