Healthcare Headaches

[Nimrod]

We are up for renewal in June and saw a 23.1% increase in our already inflated health insurance premiums. Attached is a summary of the 2,000 page healthcare bill that was recently passed. The reality is disturbing with catastrophic effects to many. In speaking with our health insurance broker he highlighted the main points:


· Earn < $40K, government will subsidize most or your premiums

· Companies will receive a tax credit if you pay employees < $50K

· Medicare benefits (65 years or older) will be reduced and premiums will increase.

· Young (under 50 years of age) and healthy (limited claims / use of insurance) premiums will increase

· Older (50 – 65 years of age) and less healthy (high risk / high use of insurance) premiums will decrease

· Medicare Payroll tax will double from 3.0% - 6.0% (3.0% employee & 3.0% employer).


Bottom line, if you make less than $40K and/or unemployed you are the winner!

Just wait until 2014 when all the good stuff really kicks in.

Good luck to all!

[longfisher]

...to bust Obama back to the stone age before health reform kicks in by raising their rates rapidly in the aftermath of the law's signing.

They're relying on the public to misconstrue these price increases to be a direct effect of the recently passed legislation. Nothing could be further from the truth because the legislation hasn't taken effect yet. No provision no matter how small and minor will take effect fo 90 days.

So, what you're seeing is a pin the tail on the donkey misdirection play. And, the Obama administration's buying none of it. They're advancing the DHHS leader the authority to oversee the rate increases and causing the insurers to actually publish the data on which they based their rate increases. Of course, most people aren't knowledgeable enough to read that data and see for themselves the false assumptions the insurers are making to justify their rate increases. So, the insurers will get away with it.

Their aim, to increase the margin of Republican wins in the Congress and to, thereby, blunt the effectiveness of the legislation through threat and intimidation of Democrats (who are wussies anyway). Like I said, they'll probably get away with it because the issue is so complex only actuaries can understand the data.

One problem though, Pelosi threatend them with exclusion from the exchanges if they did this. Anthem Blue Cross in CA did it anyway, for what reason I don't know. But to be denied access to the Federal Health Care Insurance Exchange is going to be a big deal. Stock value will plummet for those who are denied access, whereas, it will rise for those who pace their price increases and keep them in line with the historical and defensible price increases.

Oh, insurers raise their rates almost every quarter. Tomorrow starts a new quarter. The rate increases I've seen so far for my customer is averaging 27%. So, lots of insurers are getting into this dangerous game.

Maybe they don't believe that they can be barred from the Exchanges?

LongFisher

[Deep C]

The good news is that we'll likely have a new congress and senate and almost certainly a new president in 2012. The word "repealed" sounds like it will be the operative word before this thing even kicks in.

[Double D]

Maybe they don't believe that they can be barred from the Exchanges?

LongFisher

4 years until the exchange kicks in, so 3 years of 25% increases should position the insurers well. Political memory is short

And if they are all raising rates, who's going to be left unexcluded?

[longfisher]

Firstly, the exchanges are probably the most undefined area of the new law. So, what she said about being able to exclude the insurers who misbehave could be B.S. or it could be absolutely possible.

I can't tell now and won't be able to tell until the DHHS puts out the regulations. That could be some time.

But it does sound strange to me that Pelosi says she could exclude insurers from the exchanges, particularly as she implied that she could do so on an individual basis. That would REALLY surprise me if she felt she or the head of DHHS could do something like that.

Oh, one more thing about the exchanges. If she could exclude some (or all?) insurance companies from the exchanges what would then be left, government run plans? Medicare?

Sounds like a backdoor way to the public option to me. Anybody else pick up on that too?

LongFisher