If a new healthcare policy will require insurance companies to accept everyone, regardless of preexisting conditions, these companies want the government to require every American to buy coverage, or suffer a tax penalty. The board of the America's Health Insurance Plans endorsed such an arrangement this week, offering support to an impending change from the current system. The president of the group said:
We're going to provide all the technical background that we have assembled, all the experience we've assembled at the state level, and we're going to work very hard with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. We want to make sure that whatever reforms are advanced, no one falls through the cracks.
Perhaps bolstered by the support from the industry that the Clintons lacked in the 90s, Barack Obama's chief-of-staff in waiting Rahm Emanuel told business leaders last night that the Obama administration will not accept incremental reform — they're looking for truly universal healthcare. He said that the Obama administration will "throw long and deep" on other major issues as well.
With the insurance companies putting down their arms, and even offering assistance, it looks like real healthcare reform could happen in the near future. Throw in the possibility of a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority, and the possibilities for change seem endless. Do you think Congress will ditch its tendency for inaction? Do you want it to?
Marciano
Hogan
By Malene Birger
"We want to make sure that whatever reforms are advanced, no one falls through the cracks."
Yeah, right. Hasn't it always been the biggest goal of health insurance companies to make sure nobody falls through the cracks? It couldn't possibly be in their monetary interest...
What a racket.
1Just to nip this one in the bud:
Socializing medicine does not make Obama a socialist.
2yep, Obamas way or no way.... no compromise... true universal coverage, even if it means hurting millions of Americans... Sounds very bi-partisan to me!!
3My thoughts exactly Mich - classic case of 'We'll scratch your back if you scratch ours...'
As for the next 2+ years of congress - no I don't think ti will get too much done unless the Dems get more cohesive. At this point, I don't know that Obama has the moxie to keep his party in order - but that's just my opinion. We won't know for sure for another couple of weeks.
4(sarcasm)
5Organic, there is a VAST difference between socialized medicine (where the government runs all healthcare), and what Obama has proposed.
If you don't understand it, maybe you should actually check out his policy ideas.
Obama's policy allows for people to chose private health insurance, they do not have to take the government's policy, it is just another option. "Truly universal" in the regard that it will be AVAILABLE to anyone, not that everyone has to take it. I do think this post is misleading in that they are implying that Obama endorses the insurance industry's position.
I do not find it shocking that the health insurance industry wants to mandate insurance coverage. That, however, is not Obama's policy except in regards to children who are incredibly cheap to insure.
6Jillness, socialized medicine exists to the extent that the government controls medical care. I have not missed that Obama supporters do not see anything as socialized until the government owns all means of production. By this measure, we have no democracy, capitalism, or socialism.
7Jill-
Good points. I want to make sure I understand the issue at hand - the insurance company wants to tax people who do not want their insurance coverage (including those who accept the government's coverage) OR those who choose to not have ANY insurance coverage? It was not clear to me from the article.
8Keep your exaggerations if you like. They seem to make you very happy!
9"Organic, there is a VAST difference between socialized medicine (where the government runs all healthcare), and what Obama has proposed."
I think we should be careful with this exaggeration claim. There are no countries which currently have the government running all health care.
This means, by your standard: there is no socialized medicine anywhere.
10What about the issues of insurance companies not covering people with tricky terms and panels who look to the interest of their employer (the Insurance co.) instead of the patient - that is a MAJOR problem with people who already have ans pay for health insurance.
...I could see how a mandate would work, it would be like car insurance, who knows, it might be better than what we have now.
11"Obama's policy allows for people to chose private health insurance, they do not have to take the government's policy, it is just another option. "Truly universal" in the regard that it will be AVAILABLE to anyone, not that everyone has to take it. I do think this post is misleading in that they are implying that Obama endorses the insurance industry's position."
Why would I, Joe business owner, want to keep my group health Ins for my employees, when I know that my employees can now go get it themselves cheaper than I'm currently providing it? Why wouldn't I just kick the Ins company out at this point? (Just so you know, this is exactely what is happening. I'm frantically fielding calls trying to keep what I have in place.)
12Zeze, I don't think you can compare mandatory car insurance to mandatory health insurance. Liability insurance is the only mandatory level of car insurance. That is done to protect other drivers from you, not to protect you.
13Just what I was gonna say Mich
14Yes, I know that, but since everyone else has it or has to have it, in essence you are protected too - in case anyone hits you, govt mandates they have insurance to cover you.
Mostly though, I was talking about the system and enforcement, I could see it working in the same way, or similar to how car insurance works - insurance companies adjust rates to cover losses and turn profit, but because we all have it, it keeps rates reasonable by comparison, and because it is a mandatory govt must make sure it is affordable for constitutional purposes.
15Good point UD.
How are we paying for this again?
16Zeze, there's a very different purpose for mandatory car liability insurance and mandatory health insurance. Car liability insurance is to keep you from hurting other people, not to protect you from yourself. Although car insurance functions to protect everybody, that is not the primary purpose. Furthermore, car insurance is only mandatory for those who choose to drive, so it is not 'mandatory' in the way that health insurance would be 'mandatory'.
As far as the rest of what you said, it doesn't apply. There is not government sponsored car insurance for those who can't afford other car insurance. So there's no government car insurance model for a government health insurance agency to follow.
17"Joe business owner, want to keep my group health Ins for my employees, when I know that my employees can now go get it themselves cheaper than I'm currently providing it?"
Because Joe the business owner gets a tax cut for offering health insurance to his companies. Also an exceptional benefits package lures top talent.
The Obama health care plan has many, many different aspect to it. Like removing catostrophic illness from being the responsibility of group insurance, cutting costs in health care processing, reforming malpractice insurance, prescription drug reform, etc.
How can you critize a plan when you haven't read all of the nuanced details of it?
18I see what you're saying Mich, I'm not saying they will be identical, obviously there is a major differences between them and the purposes will be very different, but as a mandate for insurance I saw the closest parallel in car insurance being mandatory. The would definitely share some qualities and the insurers would likely react in somewhat similar ways - not the same, but similar.
Because this is new and we haven't tried it before, one way to look at it would be to compare it to car insurance mandates.
19Of course insurance companies will want everyone to have health care. If by law, they have to accept everyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions, and most likely provide it at some sort of government-subsidized price, they are going to be losing tons of money.
What better way to recoup their loss than a law requiring health coverage?
20Jill - I don't think that the tax incentive for Joe the business owner is going to compensate for the cost of covering employees' health insurance. It's horribly expensive.
I'm not totally convinced at how Obama is going to cut medical costs. I've read some about his mandate for electronic records - and quite frankly - it's BS. All healthcare providers were supposed be paperless this year (or is it next...I'll look it up). I know this because I have a family member who closed his medical practice and started a company that gets hospitals on a totally paperless system.
I admit that his plan has some great ideas, but I do not believe that they are achievable. The fact that the insurance companies are getting on board makes me think that they only see profit in this latest venture - not cutting costs. IMO - the only way to cut costs is to pass the burden of smart shopping onto the consumer.
21I work at a hospital and have seen first hand the damage that government runs programs cause. Switching to paperless is highly costly initially... and guess what else it does, cuts back on the number of employees... therefore increasing the jobless rate... Mighty high goals Obama has, but everything has a cause and an effect
22Most major hosptials are totally electronic i.e. most HMO's are, but some of PPO ( private practice) providers aren't.
23One of the hospitals near me is transferring to a paperless system. If it weren't for the company in charge of making that change, my brother would be out of a job.
24People get so caught up in " oh my but this may put people out of work" and the emotions of that, that we forget that the amount of people out of a job compared to the huge amount of people who currently don't have healthcare.
25I think the best thing about hospitals going paperless is that every week we get to hear stories on the news about medical records being accidentally posted online.
I'm not entirely on board Obama's plan. I do think that insurers should have to offer coverage to everyone and that coverage should be available to everyone, but I have a really tough time accepting that everyone must buy coverage. I can't see the price coming down enough to reasonably expect everyone to be able to fit that into their budgets.
26I would rather have a job then healthcare!!!!!!!!!!
27"Because Joe the business owner gets a tax cut for offering health insurance to his companies. Also an exceptional benefits package lures top talent."
What tax incentive is better than "no Charge"
28Also, if I have to pay a benefits person to administer said healthcare Ins, that's another cost that I, Joe business owner have to incur for an insurance that I can eliminate.
29Its the Health Insurance Industry that wants the Mandate. I hope Obama (or Congress) doesn't go for that, that's one of the reason I voted for him in the primaries, no mandates. Hilliary's plan included a mandate, which I just can not get behind. If people can't afford Health insurance, I'm pretty sure they can't afford to be penalized for not buying some either. But this seems like its just to appease the Insurance Company and their bottom lines.
30well i think that from the other side there's a reason that companies are a bit apprehensive about accepting anyone and that's on their own insurance end. they are in the business to provide coverage and still make money and if they have to pay out disproportionate amounts, then i get why they don't want to do it. the challenge is though that everyone should be able to get coverage if they want it.
i don't think that we're ever going to find the happy solution when it comes to health insurance and medical attention. there are just too many sides to this one with too many debates going on at all times.
31Personally, I like the idea (from a business sense) that if the government is going force the Insurance companies to accept everyone, then the government should also make everyone buy insurance.
What I really think the government should be doing is cracking down on the causes of the higher health insurance prices, and not the symptom.
32Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.