I remember reading Justice Scalia's words in his dissenting view this year:
Posted on 11/21/2015 4:19:33 AM PST by SkyPilot
The Department of Health and Human Services attempted to reassure private insurers on Thursday that they'll be able to recover losses from participating in Obamacare by claiming it was an "obligation" of the U.S. government to bail them out.
At issue is a provision within the law known as the risk corridors program. Under the program, which runs from 2014 through 2016, the federal government is to collect money from health insurers doing better than expected and use those funds to provide a federal backstop to other insurers who incur larger than expected losses from rising medical claims. The idea was to provide training wheels to insurers in the first years of Obamacare's implementation, and to take away any incentive for insurers to cherry pick only the healthiest customers.
Republicans, fearing that this could turn into an open-ended government bailout in the event of industry-wide losses, included a provision in last year's spending bill that limited the program, requiring HHS to pay out only from the pool of money collected, rather than supplementing it with other sources of government funding. President Obama signed that bill.
Now that insurers have been able to look at medical claims, what they've found is that enrollees in Obamacare are disproportionately sicker, and losses are piling up. For the 2014 benefit year, insurers losing more than expected asked for $2.87 billion in government payments through the risk corridors program, but HHS only collected $362 million from insurers performing better than expected. Thus, the funds available to the federal government only amounts to 12.6 percent of what insurers argue that they're owed. So insurers are not happy.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
If it’s a picture of Michael Moore, it should say “FOOD...SHOULD BE FREE”
That*s awesome. I don*t remember that. Yeah, it must have been tough to advocate Obamacare while sober.
True. And that has also led to our vastly overinflated markets. If they collapse bigtime, there will be blood on the walls.
I remember reading Justice Scalia's words in his dissenting view this year:
Let me run a fact by folks that some will not like. Americans are so fat now that many could not get an individual health insurance policy. Back in 78 I wrote health insurance for Mutual of Omaha. A younger female came by our office three months in a row trying to get a policy with even a 50% rate increase due to her weight. She was 5’3” and over 210 lbs. I showed her the underwriting guide that clearly stated she had to be under 202 lbs. to get coverage. Three times she failed. I can state that most nurses I saw in Vanderbilt’s ER would fail and not have insurance if they were not on group insurance.
He could not get a private policy either. Why is he on Gov Employees insurance? Why are senators and Congressmen? They are not Gov Employees.
——Wall Street made Billions on this whole scam.——
You have confused me with your statements. The thrust of the piece is that the health insurers over all did not fare well. In fact the reported loss is 2.508 billion. (2.87- .362) Those that did well predicting the risk had 362 million taken back.
It would seem that all the insurors either broke even or lost money.
That being so, who on Wall Street made billions? It doesn’t seem to be the insurors.
Looks like it’s just an end-run around limits on subsidies for the insured.
How willing are private companies willing to risk their own money on a promise of a bailout from obama down the road?
"Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved."
Justice Scalia, June 2015
Perhaps I was unclear. My suggestion for a compromise that would provide extra funding for Obamacare in the current budget is not to preserve it but to take the issue beyond the 2016 election. Otherwise, if there are health insurance cancellations due to a lack of extra funding, there will be a campaign issue and much whining about people who lose their health insurance coverage because of GOP stinginess. I would rather pocket gains now from killing off some Democratic programs, and leave to a new GOP President and Congress in 2017 a free hand to kill Obamacare and put a GOP substitute in place.
I worked for Blue Cross and Blue Shield for 15 years, half of those as a claims examiner (the rest as a programmer for claims examiners), and you are correct. Individual policies have to be very selective since there is basically no risk pool (if I recall correctly). Group policies can spread the risks around, and thereby can allow higher risk applicants. Those obese nurses in the hospital would likely never have been able to get individual policies.
Now that the well has run dry, and forecasts are dire, they are crying in their beer.
Thanks, Obamacare! Health insurer stocks soar - CNN Money Report
Also, if we had a real Justice Department, and real justice, I would wager you that the number of Congressmen, Senators, and high placed Executive branch officials who engaged in what was literally illegal "insider trading" of health care stocks would boggle the mind.
“Of course, Congress could modify the law to fix the problem. I’m sure they’ll be happy to help Obama.”
Exactly correct and that is what will happen. Either that or Obama will re-write the law as usual, and the GOPe Congress will claim it’s helpless.
At Moore’s size and level of health he needs free healthcare. ;-)
the federal government is to collect money from health insurers doing better than expected and use those funds to provide a federal backstop to other insurers who incur larger than expected losses from rising medical claims.
************************************************************************
If this is not the very essence of communism, what is?
“I wish writers/reporters would replace the word “federal government” with “taxpayers”.
It’s as if the “federal government” has some kind of money tree and we have nothing to do with it.””
Profound statement.
.
Baucus drunk? Probably celebrating his cut of the Obamacare zillions.
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.