National Health Care gov't mandates now have actual price tags attached
(snip)"The current round of price requests launches a clash between insurers who say the increases are justified and consumer advocates and government officials who say the numbers are wildly inflated.
Aetna asked earlier this summer for an average 24.7 percent increase over last year for small-group HMO plans. State regulators approved an average increase of 18 percent for all of Aetna's small-group plans and 14.2 percent for large-group and middle-market plans, according to Aetna and an initial review of documents provided to The Courant by the state Insurance Department.
A complete tally of average price requests is not available, as the Insurance Department must decide on hundreds of health plans and variations of plans for the five major companies offering medical coverage in Connecticut. But an examination of the documents suggests that the requests might be even larger than those of recent years at a time when health insurance has become a political hot potato leading into the midterm elections.
In what might appear to be an oddity, companies are citing a huge range of effects that the health care reform mandates will have on plan prices — from near zero to well over 20 percent. The reason is that among all the plans, some already deliver the provisions required by health reform, while others do not.
ConnectiCare is seeking an average 22.2 percent hike for its individual-market HMO plans, according to a filing with state regulators. The insurer's plans would result in an average annual increase of about 13 percent for the overall individual market, including HMO and other plans; 12 percent for small-group plans; and 11 percent to 12 percent for large-group plans, said vice president of actuarial services Kevin Grozio.
Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield in Connecticut, by far the largest insurer of Connecticut residents, said in a letter that it expects the federal health reform law to increase rates by as much as 22.9 percent for just a single provision — removing annual spending caps. The mandate to provide benefits to children regardless of pre-existing conditions will raise premiums by 4.8 percent, Anthem said in the letter. Mandated preventive care with no deductibles would raise rates by as much as 8.5 percent, Anthem said.
It was unclear how those separate factors would add up for Anthem's plans, but those potential increases were all on top of rising medical costs."(snip)
from
Re: National Health Care gov't mandates now have actual price tags attached
Gotta love it... single handedly making the cost to manufacture goods in the US (our former source of being an economic powerhouse) cost far more than what it used to. Unfortunately, I don't see the tide turning back for a long time.
Re: National Health Care gov't mandates now have actual price tags attached
^^^ agreed that, short of a huge reversal in gov't policy that would make possible the outright repeal of National Health Care, SOMEBODY is going to get stuck with the higher bill associated with providing health care services to an additional 10%-15% or whatever segment of the US population that will become beneficiaries of national health care without contributing any money to defer the costs of the additional health care. 'There is no free lunch' still applies.
Arguably, the main difference between US national health care and Canadian / UK / European national health care will be that the bulk of these additional costs will be foisted onto US businesses instead of being foisted on US taxpayers. Indeed this will make US businesses that participate in global markets less economically competitive than, say, their Canadian / UK / European counterparts ... because the additional health care costs will ( partially ) come from increasing US 'costs of doing business', as opposed to coming out of workers' paychecks ( in the form of higher income tax rates )
Re: National Health Care gov't mandates now have actual price tags attached
With corporate taxes already as exorbitant as they are in the US (federal corporate tax is 35 percent, and states vary from 0 to 10 percent), it's no wonder that more and more companies are shifting manufacturing jobs overseas (and others, as well). Even with Worker's Party having an increase in power in China, it's still vastly cheaper to build a new facility than to make anything here. This healthcare plan through onto the backs of US businessowners and corporations will literally be a breaking point.
Rather than making a federalized healthcare system, I think the US would benefit more from a single payor type system.
Re: National Health Care gov't mandates now have actual price tags attached
I'd have to agree (on the single payer system).
Call me cynical, but deep in my heart of hearts I believe that as soon as the insurance companies saw this coming down the pipeline they started threatening huge rate hikes for two reasons: 1) It's a good excuse for the huge jumps they've always wanted to make, and 2) They can pin it on the Democratic Party, and attempt to change the balance in Congress before the Dems start talking about forcing them to curb their rate hikes. They'll groan but in the end this was a win/win for them.
Re: National Health Care gov't mandates now have actual price tags attached
Big corporations almost always win in the USA, and US consumers always get it in the end. No matter which political party is in "power."