This is the first of many stories that will be forthcoming about insurers making a decision to opt out of the ObamaCrapCare exchanges. Of course this was the intent when the law was passed. Run the insurance companies out, make everyone go to the exchanges and then convert to single payer. It is a brilliant plan and most Americans are completely unaware how cynical ObamaCrapCare is.
Conservative Tom
Millions of Californians could face higher health insurance premiums next year after some of the nation's most prominent health insurers refused to sign up for California's new state-run health insurance exchange.
The move could signal a rocky road ahead for the national rollout of expanded health coverage under Obamacare.
According to The Los Angeles Times, UnitedHealth, the nation's largest private insurer, Aetna, and Cigna all are opting out of Covered California, the state insurance exchange, which announced Thursday morning the winning bidders and their proposed rates and plans for as many as 5 million people shopping for coverage next year.
The goal of the exchange is to offer individuals and small businesses a choice of private health plans similar to those that workers at large companies already receive. But with fewer insurers participating, some argue that individuals will face significantly higher premiums and fewer choices.
Peter Lee, executive director of Covered California, rejected those concerns, telling the Times, "There will be plenty of price competition for California consumers. They will be benefiting from robust competition."
Under the new system, insurers will be selling policies with uniform benefits packaged in four broad categories of coverage, according to the Times.
Though the state's largest insurers, Kaiser Permanente and Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of California, are expected to participate in the state-run market for individual health coverage, policymakers have long been concerned that the new system could drive up rates for healthy middle-income residents once the expanded system incorporates sicker and low-income people for the first time within the same plans.
According to estimates from California Health Benefit Advisers, around 1.7 million are expected to participate in Covered California without subsidies or the individual private market, while another 1.2 million people would qualify for Covered California with subsidies.
In March, state officials issued a report estimating that premiums on individual policies could rise an average of 30 percent for middle-income residents who pay for their own insurance under the new system.
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/US/california-health-care-market/2013/05/23/id/506079?s=al&promo_code=139A6-1#ixzz2UAPKudE7
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!
Conservative Tom
Major Health Insurers Opt Out of CA's State-Run Market
Thursday, 23 May 2013 12:42 PM
The move could signal a rocky road ahead for the national rollout of expanded health coverage under Obamacare.
According to The Los Angeles Times, UnitedHealth, the nation's largest private insurer, Aetna, and Cigna all are opting out of Covered California, the state insurance exchange, which announced Thursday morning the winning bidders and their proposed rates and plans for as many as 5 million people shopping for coverage next year.
The goal of the exchange is to offer individuals and small businesses a choice of private health plans similar to those that workers at large companies already receive. But with fewer insurers participating, some argue that individuals will face significantly higher premiums and fewer choices.
Peter Lee, executive director of Covered California, rejected those concerns, telling the Times, "There will be plenty of price competition for California consumers. They will be benefiting from robust competition."
Under the new system, insurers will be selling policies with uniform benefits packaged in four broad categories of coverage, according to the Times.
Though the state's largest insurers, Kaiser Permanente and Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of California, are expected to participate in the state-run market for individual health coverage, policymakers have long been concerned that the new system could drive up rates for healthy middle-income residents once the expanded system incorporates sicker and low-income people for the first time within the same plans.
According to estimates from California Health Benefit Advisers, around 1.7 million are expected to participate in Covered California without subsidies or the individual private market, while another 1.2 million people would qualify for Covered California with subsidies.
In March, state officials issued a report estimating that premiums on individual policies could rise an average of 30 percent for middle-income residents who pay for their own insurance under the new system.
© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/US/california-health-care-market/2013/05/23/id/506079?s=al&promo_code=139A6-1#ixzz2UAPKudE7
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!
UnitedHealth is a scum-sucking greedy corporation. Good riddance to them and the rest of the for-profit health insurance oligopoly. Maybe now they will face some real market competition for a change from the ACA exchanges. This is one time when I wish one of your predictions came true even if it cost me $20. Seeing UnitedHealthCare go down the tubes would be worth it!
ReplyDelete--David
Of course you neglect to mention that the three largest insurers in the state -- Kaiser, Anthem Blue Cross & Blue Shield -- will be participating in the exchange (along with 10 other insurers) and that the anticipated premiums announced today will be 30% lower than current costs for comparable coverage.
ReplyDeleteThe quoted article says that in March the State Officials said rates would be 30% HIGHER!! Here is the quote:"In March, state officials issued a report estimating that premiums on individual policies could rise an average of 30 percent for middle-income residents who pay for their own insurance under the new system."
ReplyDeleteWhen three large companies pull out of the State, that raises prices due to LESS competition!
As usual, the critics only focus on the people in the individual market. What is the definition "middle income"? Any family with median income would be eligible for subsidies. United Healthcare, etc. will get competition form the companies that participate in the exchanges.
ReplyDeleteEvery study not financed by the insurance industry has reported that there will be a wide range of premium effects. Most healthy, young people not eligible for subsidies will have a higher cost but better coverage. Many millions of older people, sicker people, and poorer people will finally be able to get insurance not available/affordable before Obamacare. Of course, the critics never have anything positive to say about that.
--David
From Forbes….
ReplyDelete"Setting aside the never-ending nonsense peddled by the opponents of healthcare reform, everyone from the Congressional Budget Office to numerous private actuaries have warned that premium shock could be expected to set in once the public began to see the reality of what Obamacare would mean to their pocketbooks. And yet, the only real jolt to the system being felt by these public and private prognosticators today is utter amazement over just how reasonable the California prices have turned out to be….For all the negative chatter about how including older and sicker Americans in the health insurance pools would drive up the price for younger participants in the pool less likely to be ill, what we are now seeing in states like California is that the desire on the part of the health insurance companies to increase market share—thanks to the large influx of customers as a result of Obamacare—is driving prices downward."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/05/24/unexpected-health-insurance-rate-shock-california-obamacare-insurance-exchange-announces-premium-rates/
--David
Good news for California, but bad news for conservative Tom….
ReplyDelete"While Covered California said a direct comparison is impossible because the new plans will provide more benefits, the agency noted that the rates for individuals will be between 29% lower and 2% higher than the average premium for small employers in the state's most populous areas.
Some 13 plans from insurers including Blue Cross Blue Shield and Kaiser Permanente will be available, depending on the region. But other large insurers, including UnitedHealth (UNH, Fortune 500), bowed out.
The least expensive silver plan for a 21-year-old could cost $216 a month, but those earning only 150% of the poverty line (or $17,235 annually) may pay only $44 after receiving federal subsidies. A 40-year-old may pay $276 a month, or $40 after the subsidies.
States are slowly unveiling details of their plans, but California is the largest by far to release its rates. Some 5.3 million Californians may be eligible for coverage through the exchange, with more than 2.6 million of them qualifying for subsidies. "
--David
Fact-checking...
ReplyDeleteCompare Obamacare premiums in Los Angeles to current premium rates…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/california-health-insurance-premiums_n_3328110.html
--David
Every comparison that is presented uses the government supported insurance dollars. Where are those dollars coming from? The dollars only can come from the taxpayers, which has to mean an increase in rates for everyone.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, there are significant revenue streams built into ACA separate from the general fund. We also get hundreds of millions of dollars in rebates from outfits like United Healthcare who have low medical loss ratios, $95 in taxes on the free-loaders who roll the dice and opt out, etc. Same for employers with 50+ employees who opt out. And so on... You know all this.
ReplyDeleteBut the point is that you have been telling me for months that the premiums would be unaffordable for most people. The premium structure in California, Washington, Oregon show that is not true. How about commenting on that?
--David
You are wrong.
ReplyDeletePoint 1--Medical loss ratio refunds go back to the insureds, not the government.
Point 2--$95 fines in unconsequential--most under 30's will pay the fine rather than purchase insurance--this defeats the very idea of ObamaCrapCare.
Point 3--The fees paid by 50+ employers will not even touch the cost to the government caused by the subsidies.
The premiums you will see "promoted" by the states will rise dramatically in the second, third, fourth and later years as the results come in and they find out the premiums will not cover the costs. It is all ObamaCrapCare hype which will soon go away! Initial premiums for ALL government programs start low and then jump through the roof. Check out Medicare for example.
Point 1--Medical loss ratio refunds go back to the insureds, not the government.
ReplyDeleteYes, and the insureds can use that money to pay their premiums. For poor people, that subsidy from their insurance company could pay for much of their premium.
Point 2--$95 fines in unconsequential--most under 30's will pay the fine rather than purchase insurance--this defeats the very idea of ObamaCrapCare.
That is just your assumption. I did a little calculation on this today. If you are one of the millions of uninsured young people working at near minimum wage, you are making around $17,000 a year and your Obamacare premium (California data) is around $528. So the incremental "savings" is $433 (528-95). One health problem can easily cost you $433 when you have to go to the emergency room, and even if you are lucky and never have to go to the doctor this year, you could easily get hit with many times $433 when you finally do have a fairly serious health problem. When that day comes, all your illusory "savings" (and more) are wiped out. You sell insurance, and I bet you use this line of reasoning in your sales presentations. Are young people wise enough to sacrifice 3-4% of their income to protect themselves against a financial disaster? Some will. Some won't. The percentages are yet to be determined.
Point 3--The fees paid by 50+ employers will not even touch the cost to the government caused by the subsidies.
You said it was all coming out of taxes. I said this is only one of the several sources of revenue not from taxes. If your prediction holds, this will be a substantial sum of money. If not, it means large employers see benefit in the program.
--David
P.S. The "10% rule" will keep the insurance companies from blowing the premiums through the roof -- as they have been doing for the last 20 years! That is why it is in the law.
Poor people and youngsters, will not buy insurance, regardless of the price.
DeleteThe issue that you are not aware of is that if a company is losing 20% on every policy, it will simply not continue in that business. A bad year of experience when the company loses big money and is not able to raise premiums to bring it self back to profitability, it will not go out of business, it will go out of the business. If there are enough companies that get out of the business, ObamaCrapCare will accomplish its goal of a single payer.
The Heritage Foundation (a solid gold source for you!) estimates that the revenue streams in ACA will increase federal revenue by $503 billion over 10 years. Most of this money will come from corporations and individuals earning over $250,000 a year (due to their Hospital Insurance portion of their payroll tax increasing from 2.9% to 3.8%).
ReplyDeleteCBO projects that the cost of the subsidies will not hit $574 billion until 2019. The collective revenue streams in ACA cover about half of the cost of the subsidies over 10 years. Cutting the bloated defense budget by 7% would alone pay for the other half. If I am in Congress, I vote for that.
Most of the revenue in ACA is coming from corporations and rich individuals, not, as you predict, an across-the-board tax hike on average Americans like you and me. Trust me, there is not going to be a tax hike by this Congress. We are more likely to be attacked by aliens from outer space than this House of Representatives ever voting for a tax increase! Although it is a moot point now, if the Bush tax cuts had expired on schedule, that would have paid for ALL the ACA subsidies over the next decade. That is a fact, according to CBO estimates.
--David
The increases in taxes will come in years to come. It will not come from this congress, as the bad effects of ObamaCrapCare will not be seen while this congress is in session.
ReplyDeleteThere is an old saying, the sweet taste of a low price is soon forgotten by the bitter taste of an inferior product. That will be the story of ObamaCrapCare. In ten years even David, will be saying that!
Well, let's see, the next Congress will take us through 2016. The ACA will be fully implemented by then. So would you like to make a $20 bet that the 2014-16 Congress does an across-the-board tax increase? If not, how about the 2016-18 Congress? I will take either of those bets. It can't possibly happen unless the Democrats retake the House and get to 60+ in the Senate, and that is not going to happen. On the contrary, the Democrats will probably lose net seats in the Senate next year if the Republicans stop running weak Senate candidates.
ReplyDelete--David