Posted on 06/17/2012 7:16:02 AM PDT by EBH
Just like Greece, seems impossible to go back.
If OmamaCare is struck down or repealed and if a reasonably free market for insurance is allowed, Humana & UHC will drop these extras. Health insurance is mostly paid for by employers & worker-insured. An offered policy with these extras has higher premiums so negotiations in a free market will strip out all but basic and necessary needs of those paying the bills. Cadillac policies will be rare. Insurance isn’t a loving mama, it is disaster survival which leaves some pain, but you are alive.
Humman does not offer HMO’S
Vytorin is a similar combination drug which cost more than the two components yet there is no increased effectiveness.
Humana Inc. (NYSE: HUM) announced that it too will continue to offer important health care insurance protections that were included in the 2010 health care reform law, no matter how the U.S. Supreme Court rules in the case pending before the Court. This makes Humana the second major health insurance provider to authenticate The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010. The Republican party had made the act a centerpiece of the 2010 campaign for Congressional seats, falsely claiming, among other things that the PPACA was "socialized medicine."
It is not.
The announcement by Humana, authenticates the PPACA, or what the Republican Tea Partiers call Obamacare. The announcement was mildly surprising in view of the political conversation over the last two years. Humana is now also on board with Obamacare, obliterating the "socialized medicine" argument for good. In their announcement, the company vowed to keep in place many of the important elements of the PPACA. UnitedHealthcare, a UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH) company, announced recently that it too will continue to offer important health care insurance protections that were included in the 2010 health care reform law. On the political side, the endorsement of sorts by Humana and UnitedHealthcare, strengthens the political hand of President Barack Obama and will force presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney to back pedal on his position. Romney has stated he would "repeal and replace" Obamacare, but this makes that claim an impossible promise to keep.
With a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare on the horizon, Humana Inc. (NYSE: HUM) issued a press statement.
Humana has long said that all Americans deserve affordable, quality health care and that our nation needs a health care system that works for everyone. Regardless of how the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the federal health care reform law, Humana is committed to keeping in place important patient protections contained in the law, including health care reform’s restrictions on lifetime limits, rescission standards, appeals and external review processes, coverage for dependents on family plans to age 26, and preventive services with no cost sharing.
Humana said that it believes its health plan members should have the peace of mind of knowing the company embraces and will maintain these common-sense provisions that add stability and security to health care coverage.
Specifically, Humana will maintain these health care reform provisions:
• Humana will not impose lifetime dollar limits on policies. Humana believes that health plan members should not have to worry that their coverage might run out when they need it most.(And Humana will charge you, or your employer, for it! -- Ed.)
• Humana will maintain the health care reform law’s rescission standard for its individual insurance policies. The company will not rescind (retroactively cancel) individual health insurance policies except in cases of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of material facts by an applicant for insurance. (And Humana will charge you, or your employer, for it! -- Ed.) Humana has long believed that when you buy an individual health plan, you should not have to worry that it might be canceled. Individuals whose policies are rescinded will continue to have available independent third party review of the rescission decision.
• Humana will continue to provide a clear and simple process for appealing claims decisions, as well as the option for health plan members to have their cases reviewed by independent review organizations. (This seems something that is obvious that any customer-friendly corporation should do. - Ed.) Humana believes in providing a clear, timely and accessible avenue for health plan members to appeal and resolve disagreements.
• Humana members will continue to receive important preventive care services with no out-of-pocket cost sharing. (And Humana will charge you, or your employer, for it! -- Ed.) Humana believes preventive care is a valuable investment in the health and well-being of its members.
• Humana will continue to permit dependent family members to remain covered on their parents’ policies up to age 26. (And Humana will charge you, or your employer, for it! -- Ed.) Humana has long believed in giving families the coverage options they need and deserve.
This is NOT Obamacare. This is about as close in magnitude to Obamacare as a small wave on Lake Michigan is to the Japanese Tsunami. Obviously Humana is in the business of selling health care, and if Obamacare doesn't force people to buy their product, well, they'll need to go back to selling it themselves. My question is that if there were marketing reasons for selling health care coverage with these features -- and Humana must have plenty of smart analysts working for it -- why didn't the company do this years, if not decades, ago????
As I see it, it's private company's decision. Let the chips fall...
“The only thing I have been worried about should the Supremes throw out Obamacare is the insurance for the under-26 crowd.”
Have a little concern for some of us middle aged people who have pre-existing conditions (such as cancer) and don’t have employer paid health care. Many people their 50’s are downsized from corporations but too young for Medicare. Once Cobra expires we must go to the market. It is very difficult to get health insurance in the private market if you have a preexisting condition and are over age 50 no matter how many years you and your employer paid into the system. If you can get a policy it is incredibly expensive and has high deductibles. We aren’t asking for a handout, just to have insurance available at a reasonable cost.
My Humana premiums damned near doubled since ‘09. But it’s NOT “Obamacare” if the company does it voluntarily, is it? Its subscribers can choose to stay with the company. Or not.
Fine! That’s their choice. We will soon see if that business model is a success or not.
Not yet, my doctor’s appt. is tomorrow morning. I am mentally preparing myself for insulin. We’ll see.
I definitely fit your middle-aged characterization and am so very thankful for Washington State's medical program. For the last ten years since my Cobra expired I would not have had insurance except for this (I can not go back to work). It is not perfect but is generally adequate. Yes, there are many FReepers who would not pay 7 cents so you and I can have state or any other kind of government-subsidized coverage. I'm glad they don't always win.
these schmucks have been promised something...
A fundamental problem with the "health insurance" market is that it is, in some major ways, not insurance. The problem is not that most "insurance" plans spend a large fraction of the premiums on routine care, but rather the way that covered events are defined. If one has auto liability insurance at the time one gets into an accident, the policy that was in effect at the time of the crash will pay out all claims resulting from it, even if one never again pays a dime to that insurance company. If health insurance were really "insurance", it would define conditions, and provide that if e.g. someone who was screened cancer-free when they signed up for a cancer policy, and if they contracted cancer while the policy was in effect, the policy would cover all lifetime expenses associated with treating the cancer via any means described in the policy documentation. The insured would not have to worry about maintaining a policy with the original insurance company to ensure that it would continue to pay the bills, nor would the insurance have to worry about being branded a "pre-existing cancer risk", since the insured wouldn't need to buy a cancer policy; the already-purchased policy would cover the costs.
The idea that an "insurance policy" should only cover the costs of the first year of treatment should be recognized as absurd, but that's now "insurance" companies operate.
...and that’s a very good point you make.
I agree with your assessment regarding health insurance. It is unfortunate the GOP seems unable to offer a market based alternative to Obamacare. Any alternative will need to address the issues of portability across state lines, pre-existing conditions, pricing transparency, the unproductive bloated administrative bureaucracy required to support the current system, and funding of medical care for the uninsured (as long as we as a society require health providers to provide health care for the uninsured).
In opposing Obamacare without presenting a well conceived viable alternative to the current highly regulated system, conservatives lose credibility with voters who have legitimate issues dealing with the current system.
While I oppose Obamacare due to its threat to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness I do feel the current system fails many who play by the rules. When you can’t buy insurance on the market due to loss of employment and preexisting conditions Obamacare begins to look attractive versus the prospect of consuming one’s life savings in late middle age to pay the inflated cost of medical care at non-discounted pricing for self insurers.
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.