| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Dems scramble after warning from health insurers |
| 2009-10-13 |
| Insurance companies aren't playing nice any more. Their dire message that health care legislation will drive up premiums for people who already have coverage comes as a warning shot at a crucial point in the debate, and threatens President Barack Obama's top domestic priority. Democrats and their allies scrambled on Monday to knock down a new industry-funded study forecasting that Senate legislation, over time, will add thousands of dollars to the cost of a typical policy. "Distorted and flawed," said White House spokeswoman Linda Douglass. "Fundamentally dishonest," said AARP's senior policy strategist, John Rother. "A hatchet job," said a spokesman for Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont. But the health insurance industry's top lobbyist in Washington stood her ground. In a call with reporters, Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, pointedly refused to rule out attack ads on TV featuring the study, though she said she believed the industry's concerns could be amicably addressed. At the heart of the industry's complaint is a decision by lawmakers to weaken the requirement that millions more Americans get coverage. Since the legislation would ban insurance companies from denying coverage on account of poor health, many people will wait to sign up until they get sick, the industry says. And that will drive up costs for everybody else. Insurers are now raising possibilities such as higher premiums for people who postpone getting coverage, or waiting periods for those who ignore a proposed government requirement to get insurance and later have a change of heart. The drama threatened to overshadow Tuesday's scheduled vote by the Senate Finance Committee on a 10-year, $829-billion plan that Baucus has touted as the sensible solution to America's problems of high medical costs and too many uninsured. The Baucus bill is still expected to win Finance Committee approval. The insurance industry is trying to influence what happens beyond the vote, when legislation goes to the floor of the House and Senate, and, if passed, to a conference committee that would reconcile differences in the bills. It's at that final stage where many expect the real deal will be cut. "We've got ourselves a real health care shooting war now," said Robert Laszewski, a former health insurance executive turned consultant. "The industry has come to the conclusion that the way things are going in Congress, we'll have a ... formula that will be disastrous for their business, so they can't stand on the sidelines any longer." |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #13 Max Baucus any relation to Jim Baucus ? The voice of "Mr Magoo" |
| Posted by: Maggie Slalet3910 2009-10-13 23:02 |
| #12 the ads should be vicious and the Donks will be screaming about "swiftboating" and "Harry and Louise"-ing. |
| Posted by: Frank G 2009-10-13 19:52 |
| #11 Another hidden gem in the Baucus bill is a surtax on people who have their own insurance = 40% of their premiums. |
| Posted by: Frozen Al 2009-10-13 17:37 |
| #10 Your public servants serving you |
| Posted by: Elmomonter de Medici7891 2009-10-13 15:09 |
| #9 "How much would you be willing to pay so that the government would leave you alone?" -depends on how much ammo is. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2009-10-13 14:45 |
| #8 I'm sure they can do it when they change who gets to appoint a replacement for Ted. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2009-10-13 13:20 |
| #7 According to an article in the Globe yesterday, the regulators in Massachuetts want to move to a capitation plan And If i'm not mistaken Steve this will require changing state law as Mass made capitation plans illegal 20 or so years ago. |
| Posted by: Beavis 2009-10-13 12:23 |
| #6 According to an article in the Globe yesterday, the regulators in Massachuetts want to move to a capitation plan, in which providers get paid a set (never enough) amount and then are required to take care of everyone in their plan. This shifts responsibility onto the providers and away from the state pols, which is why the pols like it. Capitation has failed everywhere it's been tried. You'd think someone would pay attention to such details. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2009-10-13 11:09 |
| #5 At the heart of the industry's complaint is a decision by lawmakers to weaken the requirement that millions more Americans get coverage. Since the legislation would ban insurance companies from denying coverage on account of poor health, many people will wait to sign up until they get sick, the industry says. And that will drive up costs for everybody else. Congresscritters slipped in an amendment: One amendment adopted would weaken the individual coverage requirement by delaying and reducing penalties attached to the requirement. The maximum penalty for a family of four would start at $200 in 2014 and rise to $750 in 2017. So with guaranteed issue why would you buy coverage before becoming ill? The donk way push irresponsibility. |
| Posted by: Beavis 2009-10-13 09:03 |
| #4 ...I think we do that pretty much every April. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-10-13 08:03 |
| #3 It is just plain stupid. Washington DC is NOT America. |
| Posted by: newc 2009-10-13 07:05 |
| #2 Nice plan ya got there. Shame if anythin wuz ta happin ta it (wink wink)... |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2009-10-13 00:32 |
| #1 My brother in Taxachusetts called me this evening. I asked him how the state-wide insurance plan is working out. He didn't know. He has to pay the state $350 so that he doesn't have to join the plan. Next year his bill will double. How much would you be willing to pay so that the government would leave you alone? |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2009-10-13 00:09 |