Conservative Musings

Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details

Showing posts with label Anthem Blue cross. Show all posts

Thursday, June 22, 2017

Even The "Fact Finders" Are Wrong When It Comes To Trump

FAKE NEWS: Trump Says Something True About Obamacare. So, Naturally, Politifact Lies About It.

BY:

BEN SHAPIRO

JUNE 22, 2017

On Thursday, left-wing fact-checker Politifact, a site known more for its
biases than its quality fact-checking, stepped into a pile of dung once again.
This time, they blasted President Trump with a fake news fact-check that
demonstrates just how dishonest they are.

Here’s their headline:

So, what did the White House say that was so wrong? Trump stated,
“Obamacare has led to fewer health insurance options for millions of Americans.”

This is indisputably true. Just yesterday, Anthem Blue Cross pulled out of
the Obamacare exchanges in Wisconsin and Indiana. Health insurance rates
have risen dramatically. As CNBC reported last week, “As many as 1,200
counties are projected to have just one such insurer next year. More counties
could be left ‘bare,’ or with just one insurer in coming weeks as insurers
announce their intentions.” And this doesn’t take into account the fact that many
Obamacare plans have cut patients off from their doctors – if you liked your
doctor, you couldn’t keep your doctor.

Those who have been added to the insurance rolls under Obamacare aren’t
actually buying health insurance for the most part – they’re being forced
onto Medicaid.

So instead of dealing with that claim, Politifact made up an unrelated claim: that
the number of insured had dropped overall. Nobody said that, though. If you count
Medicaid coverage – which doesn’t actually improve health outcomes – the
numbers are up. But that’s not what Trump claimed.

Here’s Politifact admitting the truth all the way at the bottom of their “fact-check”:

The sole thread of truth is that with the insurance exchanges set

up by the law, the number of carriers has dwindled.

Oh, you mean the only claim here was true? And you made up a series of
alternative claims to knock down?

Politifact is ridiculous. Their drive to check “fake news” from the left only makes
them purveyors of it.

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

ObamaCrapCare Lawsuits Begin

Anthem Blue Cross Misled Obamacare Enrollees, Lawsuit Claims

July 9, 2014 by McClatchy-Tribune

LOS ANGELES (MCT) — California insurance giant Anthem Blue Cross misled “millions of enrollees” about whether their doctors and hospitals were participating in its new “Obamacare” plans and failed to disclose that many policies wouldn’t cover care outside its approved network, according to a class-action lawsuit filed Tuesday.

As a result, many consumers are on the hook for thousands of dollars in medical bills and have been unable to see their longtime doctors, alleges the suit filed in Superior Court in Los Angeles by Santa Monica-based Consumer Watchdog. While declining to comment on the suit, Anthem has conceded that some doctors were inaccurately listed on its plans.

Brought on behalf of Anthem enrollees who purchased individual coverage between Oct. 1, 2013, and March 31, 2014, the lawsuit reflects growing consumer push-back against so-called “narrow network” health plans, which are increasingly common under the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare. Anthem is a major player on California’s health insurance exchange, and the suit includes those who bought coverage online, as well as directly from the insurer.

The suit says that Anthem, the State’s largest individual health insurer, delayed providing full information to consumers until it was too late for them to change coverage. The suit also alleges that Anthem failed to disclose it had stopped offering any plans with out-of-network coverage in four of the State’s biggest counties: Los Angeles, Orange, San Francisco and San Diego.

Anthem spokesman Darrel Ng said that Anthem has agreed to pay the claims of those who received treatment from inaccurately listed doctors during the first three months of the year. However, he said, that policy would not be extended for enrollees who discovered after March 31 that their doctors had been incorrectly listed.

Anthem “intentionally misrepresented and concealed the limitations of their plans because it wanted a big market share,” said Jerry Flanagan of Consumer Watchdog.

The suit comes as the consumer advocacy group is pushing a measure on the November ballot that would give the State’s insurance commissioner greater authority to veto health insurance rate increases.

Insurers have defended plans with limited provider networks as a way of holding down premiums. Surveys have indicated that many younger and healthier customers are willing to give up broad access to providers for lower costs.

But consumers are retaliating with lawsuits and complaints to State regulators. As a result of the rising complaints, State managed-care regulators are investigating whether Anthem and Blue Shield of California provided accurate information about the doctors and hospitals in their plans.

The Consumer Watchdog lawsuit names six Californians who purchased Anthem plans. Among them is a Pasadena physician, Betsy Felser, who had coverage with Anthem for 20 years. Like hundreds of thousands of Anthem customers, she received a letter late last year stating that her preferred provider organization, or PPO, which allows for in- and out-of-network care, was being canceled, according to the lawsuit. The letter suggested a replacement Anthem plan “with the benefits you have come to count on.”

Before agreeing to switch, Felser said she checked with five Anthem telephone representatives, making it clear she wanted to be in a PPO.

“I would never have gotten anything that wasn’t a PPO plan,” said Felser, 47, whose insurance also covers her young son. “They said they would give me the same coverage.”

During those calls, none of Anthem’s representatives told Felser that the insurer was no longer offering PPOs in Los Angeles County, the lawsuit alleges. Nor did they tell her that the Anthem plans offered in her area would not cover care provided by out-of-network doctors or hospitals, according to the lawsuit.

Los Altos Hills residents Steven and Kathleen Moore were “fraudulently induced” into buying a Blue Cross “no deductible plan” that purported to include the family’s regular physicians, the suit says. In actuality, the suit adds, the plan imposed a $10,000 deductible for out-of-network providers and none of the physicians were included in the new limited network.

Fred Crary, of San Jose, a longtime but now former Anthem Blue Cross customer, said he’s not a fan of lawsuits. “But this is so important to families that I think it’s a good step that (Consumer Watchdog) is taking,” said the 59-year-old retired Silicon Valley tech executive.

Crary said Anthem “disenfranchised” people like himself and his wife after they discovered that their doctors would not accept their new Anthem plan, even after he said an Anthem representative had told him that his family’s doctors were on the new plan’s list of providers.

“I had no reason to believe they would not tell me the truth,” said Crary, who has since switched his plan to HealthNet, a similarly priced plan that most of his doctors accept.

The same thing happened to Therese Meuel after the Moraga mother signed her daughter up for an Anthem plan because she was told the girl’s pediatrician would accept the plan.

“They were very vague,” Meuel recalled when she asked an Anthem representative about how she could confirm that to be the case. She said the representative advised her to both check Anthem’s provider list and call the doctor’s office to be sure. Both sources confirmed the pediatrician was on the list. But a few months later, when she made an appointment with the pediatrician — who has taken care of her 17-year-old daughter since she was born — the office told her the doctor was not accepting her daughter’s plan.

Meuel supports the lawsuit, saying she hopes it “will get Blue Cross to get more doctors signed up on their list here.” She too has since switched her daughter to a different plan, offered by Blue Shield of California, that her pediatrician accepts.

–Julie Appleby
Kaiser Health News