You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #179: Fiction. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-03-11 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #130
179. Fiction.

The MLR was never enforced. Medicare has an MLR of about 97 percent. Private insurers were never any where as efficient as Medicare.

At the time, Wendell Potter was fighting for the passage of the legislation. He made some valid points, but some of these were pure hyperbole.

Wendell Potter Says Franken Bill Will Go Far to Control Medical Costs


When Wall Street isn't calling the shots, the outcome is decidedly better for health care consumers. Government-operated plans, such as Medicare, and some organizations that provide coordinated care, consistently maintain higher medical loss ratios. Kaiser had a 90.6 percent MLR in 2007. Between 1993 and 2007, Medicare's MLR hasn't dropped below 97 percent.


Potter: Consumers Win an Important Battle Against Insurers, Thanks to State Insurance Commissioners


Good News for Consumers

Today I can say that I am proud to have been one of 28 people selected by the NAIC to represent the interests of consumers this year. The NAIC's vote this morning is clear evidence that the commissioners listened to us. We didn't win all the arguments over the past six months -- the work the NAIC approved this morning represents a compromise between the interests of consumers and the insurance industry -- but we won many of the important ones. The recommendations that will go to HHS will make it easier for insurers to meet the MLR minimums, there's no doubt about that, but they will also help to ensure that most of what we pay in premiums for health coverage will actually go to pay for medical care, not insurance company shareholders and executives. That is a big victory for consumers.

P.S.: While all of the consumer representatives to the NAIC made important contributions to the debate and the final outcome on the NAIC's MLR work, I would like to thank one consumer rep in particular. Tim Jost, professor of law at William & Lee University, was our big gun. No one knows health-care law, and the Affordable Care Act of 2010 in particular, better than Tim. He devoted countless hours to making sure consumer interests were heard and heeded. Commissioners frequently asked for Tim's opinions on the often obscure matters being discussed during seemingly endless conference calls over many months. So before you send a thank-you note to your state insurance commissioner, send one to Tim. He is a true champion of the consumer.

P.P.S.: As expected, some critics of the MLR provision -- including, of course, America's Health Insurance Plans, one of the industry's big lobbying and fear-mongering groups -- were quick to condemn the NAIC's actions, claiming it would reduce consumer choice and health plans' incentive to improve quality. AHIP president Karen Ignagni warned of dire consequences. "Defining health care quality initiatives in a way that is too narrow or static will turn back the clock on progress and create new barriers to investment in the many activities that health plans have implemented to improve health care quality," Ignagni wrote in a statement after hearing of the NAIC's vote this morning. "More specifically, we want to highlight our recommendations for modifying the definition of health care quality initiatives to include fraud prevention and detection programs and the initial startup costs associated with implementing the new ICD-10 coding system."

Nonsense. These regulations will not take away the incentive for health plans to root out fraud and abuse. They already have installed amazingly sophisticated IT systems to detect fraud. I know because I used to write press releases about them. Health plans will not unplug those systems just because they can't categorize their fraud-busting efforts as activities that improve the quality of care. As for expenses related to implementing the new ICD-10 coding system, insurers are required by law to implement them, and not a minute too soon. Every other health-care system in the developed world has already put the ICD-10 system in place.

The new MLR regulations might indeed cause a few inefficient health plans to either improve the way they do business or close up shop, but why is that a bad thing? Because it will "reduce choice?" One of the main objectives of reform is to reduce waste and ensure Americans get the value they deserve when they send in their premium payments every month. If the health plans that take our money but give us lousy coverage in return are forced out of the marketplace, I say good riddance, even if their departure means that the bigger and more efficient plans that offer better value pick up the customers they leave behind.


The NAIC was trying to reduce the MLR: Insurance Commissioners Call For Another Look at Medical Loss Ratio

The current MLR is a big deal because it's part of comprehensive reform, which includes rate reviews, regulators and other enforcement mechanisms.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -The Bomb Buried In Obamacare Explodes Today-Hallelujah! kratos00  Dec-02-11 07:06 PM   #0 
  - More motivation for health care costs to go UP .  Edweird   Dec-02-11 07:08 PM   #1 
  - Yep. And the day that they roll out what they've been working on since the bill passed...  Luminous Animal   Dec-02-11 07:12 PM   #2 
  - This rule actually works in the insurance industry's favor  RevRN   Dec-03-11 08:39 AM   #170 
  - + ad infinitum  MrMickeysMom   Dec-03-11 10:21 AM   #182 
  - Did you read the whole article? The writer says that Obama care  pnwmom   Dec-03-11 02:35 PM   #206 
     - I read it... did you?  MrMickeysMom   Dec-04-11 01:09 AM   #238 
        - You are  kratos00   Dec-04-11 10:55 AM   #242 
           - Speaking of BS...  MrMickeysMom   Dec-04-11 11:02 PM   #247 
  - Big Brother Insurance  DallasNE   Dec-03-11 10:40 AM   #185 
  - I appreciate your skepticism  Anatos   Dec-03-11 11:29 AM   #189 
  - I think that many progressives have made up their mind  kratos00   Dec-03-11 12:37 PM   #195 
     - +1  wryter2000   Dec-03-11 05:28 PM   #219 
        - Thanks  kratos00   Dec-04-11 09:41 AM   #240 
  - Where are you finding this info..its interesting  INdemo   Dec-03-11 12:58 PM   #196 
  - No, it doesn't. They must spend 80% on patient care -- more than most are spending now.  pnwmom   Dec-03-11 02:33 PM   #205 
  - The bill specifically left most of the definitions and enforcement  ThomCat   Dec-03-11 10:15 PM   #235 
  - I don't agree. This gives a cost plus incentive for the company. Spend more make more  Exultant Democracy   Dec-03-11 04:10 PM   #214 
  - They will NOT have to insure everybody.  ThomCat   Dec-03-11 10:30 PM   #236 
     - 20% of chemo is more then 20% of Viagra. There is no profit incentive for dropping th sickest  Exultant Democracy   Dec-04-11 09:59 AM   #241 
  - They will redefine "education" expenses.  uberblonde   Dec-03-11 06:53 PM   #225 
  - Absolutely. I'm sure a whole lot of expenses will be re-classified  ThomCat   Dec-03-11 10:55 PM   #237 
  - That makes absolutely no sense. "more payment denied"  johnaries   Dec-03-11 08:38 PM   #226 
  - Read the article. The Obama administration defines what is classified as medical care.  pnwmom   Dec-03-11 01:05 PM   #197 
  - Off topic  guitar man   Dec-02-11 07:15 PM   #7 
  - Thanks.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 07:52 PM   #30 
     - It's been awhile since I've seen a lineman actually use a set of hooks to climb a pole.  Lasher   Dec-03-11 02:18 AM   #144 
     - That's just wrong!  Enthusiast   Dec-03-11 07:54 AM   #154 
     - Here's the work we are doing:  Edweird   Dec-03-11 08:46 PM   #228 
        - No lineman standing on a pole with a set of climbers like in the graphic though.  Lasher   Dec-04-11 11:58 AM   #243 
           - We are IBEW. IBEW climbs. We haven't had to yet on this job - but it's coming.  Edweird   Dec-04-11 12:28 PM   #244 
              - The highest pole I've climbed is a 90.  Lasher   Dec-04-11 05:44 PM   #245 
                 - HA, this just occured to me:  Edweird   Dec-04-11 07:38 PM   #246 
     - So was my Dad. Go IBEW!!! n/t  newfie11   Dec-03-11 06:30 AM   #150 
        - So Was My Husband... But With Verizon... Fiber Optic Went Underground!  ChiciB1   Dec-03-11 08:33 AM   #169 
        - Indeed!  Edweird   Dec-03-11 08:49 PM   #229 
  - And the Democratic party has inexorably handcuffed themselves to this...  Fumesucker   Dec-02-11 07:20 PM   # 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-02-11 08:01 PM   #35 
  - Welcome to DU..  Fumesucker   Dec-02-11 08:18 PM   #42 
  - Oh, look! In it's natural setting, a rare sight.  Gold Metal Flake   Dec-02-11 09:32 PM   #90 
     - That IS rare. nt  Poll_Blind   Dec-02-11 10:32 PM   #114 
     - im bookmarking this train wreck just so  SwampG8r   Dec-03-11 12:32 AM   #131 
  - Just send you to war to die for your country...  ellisonz   Dec-02-11 08:27 PM   #48 
  - The mandate was first proposed by republiclowns who ran from it when Dems supported it.  Snarkoleptic   Dec-02-11 08:44 PM   #57 
     - I think Obama said he didn't mind the designation  eridani   Dec-02-11 08:59 PM   #69 
        - I was trying to fish him in for a bashing but he was sadly tombstoned  Snarkoleptic   Dec-02-11 11:33 PM   #127 
           - "clubbed with reality"  Enthusiast   Dec-03-11 08:00 AM   #155 
  - What is the problem? The insurance companies will have cost limits,  pnwmom   Dec-03-11 02:30 PM   #204 
     - It's not insurance that's driving most of the cost of health care..  Fumesucker   Dec-03-11 05:47 PM   #221 
  - why?  FrenchieCat   Dec-02-11 07:21 PM   #11 
  - Simple math: 20% of 1$ = .20 ; 20% of 10$=2$ The higher the prices the bigger their profit.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 07:43 PM   #27 
  - That will actually force states to start adopting a public option.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 07:57 PM   #33 
  - Um, if out of control health care costs triggered a public option, it would have happened already.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 08:02 PM   #36 
  - There was no mandated health care for all.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 08:14 PM   #39 
  - There still is no 'mandated health care for all' only the FAR RW  Edweird   Dec-02-11 08:21 PM   #45 
  - The right wing was against the mandate, and as Krugman aptly points out...  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 08:34 PM   #51 
     - Here's your boy Newt:  Edweird   Dec-02-11 08:50 PM   #61 
        - So what? They tried to put in a trigger to destroy it. Actions speak louder than words.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 08:51 PM   #63 
        - So, my statement that the individual mandate is FAR RW policy stands. That's 'what', buddy.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 08:57 PM   #68 
        - Not if they tried to destroy it, it doesn't. It's made up nonsense.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:07 PM   #72 
           - What's 'made up nonsense'? That Romney instituted the individual mandate?  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:12 PM   #77 
           - That when it came to the vote they tried to obstruct it.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:17 PM   #82 
           - Yeah? Show me your 'majority'.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:26 PM   #88 
           - My mistake, health care overall is disliked. I confused the Democratic support for a mandate poll.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:37 PM   #92 
              - No, I'm definitely pro single payer - but Obama is against it. Actions speak louder than words.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:45 PM   #96 
                 - The mandate can go either way. It can destroy health care...  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:51 PM   #98 
                 - Without a mandate, the "health" insurance companies would collapse  dflprincess   Dec-02-11 10:43 PM   #117 
                 - "a mandate to buy the same old crap from the same old crooks." Exactly. (n/t)  bread_and_roses   Dec-03-11 07:26 AM   #152 
                 - You just undercut your own argument.  Exilednight   Dec-03-11 08:17 AM   #162 
                 - "Actions speak louder than words" if you know ALL of the actions and ALL of their syntax and grammar  patrice   Dec-02-11 10:11 PM   #107 
                 - Spare me. It's not at all 'unknowable'. It's only complicated if you're in denial.  Edweird   Dec-03-11 06:33 PM   #223 
                 - I was going to reply exactly this  a2liberal   Dec-02-11 10:40 PM   #116 
                 - Better hurry. Harper is going to start dismantling the Canadain Healthcare system soon.  Fokker Trip   Dec-03-11 06:09 AM   #149 
           - Do you have proof of the following claim:  Exilednight   Dec-03-11 08:10 AM   #160 
           - It has been a Right Wing scheme since 1993, actually in it's first incarnation  Dragonfli   Dec-03-11 01:26 PM   #198 
           - What pressure are you speaking of? The only ones asking for a public option are liberals and small  Exilednight   Dec-03-11 08:08 AM   #158 
        - Wait, you're claiming subsidies for the poor are impossible without a mandate? Seriously?  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:07 PM   #71 
           - Sure am. Are you really advocating an irresponsible unpaid medical system?  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:08 PM   #74 
              - Taxes: heard of them?  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:13 PM   #78 
              - So you propose taking taxes from somewhere else to pay for health care?  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:18 PM   #84 
                 - Yeah, uh, that's how those awful socialist European countries and Canada do it, junior.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:21 PM   #87 
                 - Those countries have fucking mandates. Not "you don't have to pay into it if you don't want to."  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:52 PM   #100 
                    - I'll just leave this here:  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:58 PM   #102 
                       - LOL, they paid into it.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 10:02 PM   #103 
                          - It's paid for through taxes, which is what I said.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 10:07 PM   #106 
                          - Yes, and their taxes are so high that they paid into it. Either way, responsibility.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 10:16 PM   #110 
                          - European taxes are not high relative to the services they get.  diane in sf   Dec-03-11 09:35 AM   #178 
                          - So far all of your posts, except one, have been untrue.  Edweird   Dec-03-11 06:30 PM   #222 
                          - They did not pay to have for-profit mass murderers stand between them and their providers n/t  eridani   Dec-03-11 01:36 AM   #141 
                 - The money we are now paying to insurance companies AND health care... think of them as TAXES  loudsue   Dec-03-11 07:30 AM   #153 
              - I am, sure thing.  sibelian   Dec-03-11 08:23 AM   #165 
        - Good old Newt: Gingrich Prepares Romney Critique, Says Mandate Leads To 'Socialized Medicine'  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 10:03 PM   #104 
        - If Newt is asked by MSM about this, he'll try to bully them down again...  SteveM   Dec-03-11 02:59 PM   #210 
  - Everyone who survives the next ten years.  truedelphi   Dec-03-11 03:11 PM   #211 
  - Re your Subject line: Logic = Because _________has not happened, _________ will not happen.  patrice   Dec-02-11 08:19 PM   #43 
  - LOL  Edweird   Dec-02-11 08:31 PM   #50 
     - The post to which I responded implied direct cause & effect AND within whatever time-frame that  patrice   Dec-02-11 08:47 PM   #58 
  - You're also assuming you know why Obama did that, i.e. to kill the public option, when other  patrice   Dec-02-11 08:26 PM   #47 
  - No, read the links I pointed out. Krugman predicted it. We all did. The mandate was necessary for...  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 08:36 PM   #52 
  - The individual mandate is FAR RW policy.  Edweird   Dec-02-11 08:39 PM   #53 
     - Bullfuckingshit. War is fucking Peace. Jesus Christ.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 08:42 PM   #55 
     - LOL. See post 61  Edweird   Dec-02-11 08:51 PM   #62 
     - See post #39. This is a very old debate. Krugman is and was on the correct side of this issue.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 08:53 PM   #64 
        - Deny facts all you wish. I'll enjoy mocking you much the way I mock scientologists.....  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:02 PM   #70 
           - Go for it, just don't pretend you've presented any 'facts' here.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:13 PM   #79 
              - So you deny that Romney instituted the individual mandate?  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:17 PM   #81 
                 - I deny that Romney was the only one who was behind it. DiMasi had a hand in it too.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 09:21 PM   #86 
     - or libertarians.  barbtries   Dec-03-11 08:59 AM   #175 
     - Not something they'd do on their own initiative because it drives high-overhead insureds into  patrice   Dec-02-11 09:09 PM   #75 
        - So Romney only 'pretended' to institute it?  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:18 PM   #83 
           - Romney? Why would you pick him as an example of consistency in anything? Sure he instituted it and  patrice   Dec-02-11 09:37 PM   #93 
              - P.S. He's not a far RW -er. He's an anything and therefore nothing.  patrice   Dec-02-11 09:39 PM   #95 
  - You are obviously discounting the effect of three dimensional chess.  Enthusiast   Dec-03-11 08:04 AM   #156 
  - Wrong. Insurers have used practices -- denying for preexisting conditions,  pnwmom   Dec-03-11 02:42 PM   #209 
  - I wish, but more than likely you will see the same thing that is going on in MA under RomneyCare.  RevRN   Dec-03-11 09:11 AM   #176 
  - But if the 80% doesn't cover the higher prices, the insureds will be left holding the bag, so they'l  patrice   Dec-02-11 09:19 PM   #85 
  - I guess we'll see, won't we?  Edweird   Dec-02-11 09:48 PM   #97 
  - What exchanges? Very few states have exchanges, and many are filing suit so they will never have to  Exilednight   Dec-03-11 08:22 AM   #164 
  - Republicans deny science, but Obamacare defenders go further and reject MATH  kenny blankenship   Dec-03-11 08:42 AM   #171 
  - Yes, it's like "Cost Plus"  thesquanderer   Dec-03-11 10:24 AM   #183 
  - Sure, except that no matter what they charge,  The Doctor.   Dec-03-11 02:11 PM   #199 
  - You're forgotten something. Insurers have to get increases approved.  pnwmom   Dec-03-11 02:36 PM   #207 
  - And overheard includes executive salaries  wryter2000   Dec-03-11 05:25 PM   #218 
  - Bomb? dropped on the Working Class.  bvar22   Dec-02-11 08:40 PM   #54 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-02-11 08:54 PM   #66 
  - During the debate over ACA, I heard as high as 30%, so we can guess 20-30% . . . ?  patrice   Dec-02-11 11:13 PM   #126 
  - that depends on their current average margin.  sibelian   Dec-03-11 08:28 AM   #168 
  - Yes, and there are no cost controls...  CoffeeCat   Dec-02-11 11:07 PM   #125 
  - +1 n/t  area51   Dec-03-11 11:26 AM   #188 
  - One word: MANDATE. As for those who can't afford insurance, that's  johnaries   Dec-03-11 08:49 PM   #230 
  - true, as that is exactly what has been happening . . .  DollyM   Dec-03-11 12:42 AM   #133 
  - I read through most of this thread and you seem  kratos00   Dec-03-11 08:26 AM   #167 
  - This bill does nothing to move us closer to a singel payer system, instead  Exilednight   Dec-03-11 11:59 AM   #192 
  - 100% incorrect. Lower MLR always leads to lower total costs.  grantcart   Dec-03-11 10:31 AM   #184 
  - What? Prices should go down, because there will be less  The Wielding Truth   Dec-03-11 02:21 PM   #201 
  - My first thought. "They" should have put caps on costs.  dotymed   Dec-03-11 03:40 PM   #212 
  - That is what most of them did in anticipation this.  liberal N proud   Dec-03-11 05:09 PM   #216 
  - Health care costs are ALREADY going up: Independently of insurance  johnaries   Dec-03-11 08:44 PM   #227 
  - More motivation for health care costs to go down, because . . .  patrice   Dec-02-11 07:13 PM   #3 
  - I so love that race to the bottom.  Luminous Animal   Dec-02-11 07:16 PM   #8 
  - LOTS of assumptions in that, most of them based on BIG BUSINESS machine-models.  patrice   Dec-02-11 07:25 PM   #14 
     - I'm pretty sure they'll take their pound of flesh out of staff. They'll squeeze the nurses...  Luminous Animal   Dec-02-11 07:37 PM   #23 
     - Which will lead to a HUGE debate about the Standards of Care. VERY revealing. Good!!! America NEEDS  patrice   Dec-02-11 07:41 PM   #25 
     - Yes. Just like it has already led to debates of Standards of Care. My sister has been a  Luminous Animal   Dec-02-11 07:52 PM   #29 
        - I have seen what she is concerned about up close and intimately, personal & family experiences, so  patrice   Dec-02-11 08:13 PM   #38 
        - your sister went to  SwampG8r   Dec-03-11 12:51 AM   #137 
        - Everyone wants single payer  wryter2000   Dec-03-11 05:30 PM   #220 
     - as the husband of  SwampG8r   Dec-03-11 12:49 AM   #136 
     - er ... insurance IS "big business." (n/t)  bread_and_roses   Dec-03-11 07:24 AM   #151 
  - Exactly, and constituants will demand state public options, so the insurers are really scared today.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 08:00 PM   #34 
  - Is that trickle up or down? I don't like pissing either way personally.  JanMichael   Dec-02-11 08:48 PM   #59 
  - Check out HR 676 Expanded & Improved Medicare for All here:  patrice   Dec-02-11 08:54 PM   #65 
  - Umm...  quakerboy   Dec-03-11 05:43 AM   #147 
  - Sounds like the end of for profit healthcare.  Swede   Dec-02-11 07:14 PM   #4 
  - Dream on, Swede. Dream on.  Luminous Animal   Dec-02-11 07:15 PM   #6 
  - Finally coming true,isn't it.  Swede   Dec-02-11 07:20 PM   #10 
     - There is no way the insurance companies are giving up their profit margin...  Luminous Animal   Dec-02-11 07:32 PM   #20 
        - isn't it HHS?  bigtree   Dec-02-11 07:43 PM   #26 
        - Have they a department set up to audit and enforce? Link? This is a big fucking deal  Luminous Animal   Dec-02-11 07:55 PM   #32 
        - This just moves the % margin back to where it was when Clinton proposed his reform  kenny blankenship   Dec-02-11 08:22 PM   #46 
        - Cripes people, start a co-op.  tcaudilllg   Dec-03-11 02:10 AM   #142 
  - For OBSCENE profits at least!  pnorman   Dec-02-11 07:20 PM   #9 
     - They have no incentive to raise rates if 80% HAS to go to  shraby   Dec-02-11 07:29 PM   #17 
  - i`m officially on medicare today!  madrchsod   Dec-02-11 07:15 PM   #5 
  - In addition, this nugget that I located, although not effective until 1/1/14...  FrenchieCat   Dec-02-11 07:23 PM   #12 
  - LOVE! that.  patrice   Dec-02-11 07:35 PM   #21 
  - I remember that, it was a big win, heheh.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 07:54 PM   #31 
  - Only if you consider sorting Americans into Real People (TM) and disposable human garbage--  eridani   Dec-02-11 09:07 PM   #73 
  - The "Exchange" will offer a caste system of plans.  bvar22   Dec-02-11 08:48 PM   #60 
  - why is every law not written this way?  SwampG8r   Dec-03-11 12:55 AM   #138 
  - I would love to have a single payer system  kratos00   Dec-02-11 07:25 PM   #13 
  - Cynicism? Because the public will become more aware of $$$$~ that does NOT go to QUALITY of CARE.  patrice   Dec-02-11 07:32 PM   #19 
  - And SOME people DON'T want that to happen, ergo, "cynicism". nt  patrice   Dec-02-11 07:37 PM   #22 
  - Particularly as states start to adopt their own state public option.  joshcryer   Dec-02-11 07:39 PM   #24 
  - Except in Brownbackistan. :- (((((  patrice   Dec-02-11 07:49 PM   #28 
  - Post More!  ellisonz   Dec-02-11 08:30 PM   #49 
  - There will be no benefits for actual sick people  eridani   Dec-02-11 09:11 PM   #76 
  - There ALREADY are actual benefits for actual sick people.  pnwmom   Dec-03-11 05:24 PM   #217 
     - And there are ZERO price controls on what they charge other young people  eridani   Dec-03-11 09:38 PM   #233 
  - We need more than that  SHRED   Dec-03-11 08:12 AM   #161 
  - One reason for the cynicism is because Obama didn't even TRY to get single payer  spooked911   Dec-03-11 08:24 AM   #166 
  - Here's to single payer! n/t  BlueToTheBone   Dec-02-11 07:26 PM   #15 
  - Nope sorry, I read here earlier that President Obama was a weak failure.  DFab420   Dec-02-11 07:27 PM   #16 
  - Change is...  silverweb   Dec-02-11 07:29 PM   #18 
  - Smooth move.  Pirate Smile   Dec-02-11 08:19 PM   #44 
     - I thought you might approve.  silverweb   Dec-03-11 12:38 AM   #132 
  - I'll be interested to see whether this provision  The Genealogist   Dec-02-11 08:02 PM   #37 
  - k&r n/t  RainDog   Dec-02-11 08:15 PM   #40 
  - Well then this must be the lead story on every news story  underpants   Dec-02-11 08:17 PM   #41 
  - Fuck yeah!  lonestarnot   Dec-02-11 08:43 PM   #56 
  - Given that regulation by MLR has been an utter failure at the state level--  eridani   Dec-02-11 08:57 PM   #67 
  - From the "for profit" companies? And the only reason we are discussing this ...  slipslidingaway   Dec-02-11 09:15 PM   #80 
     - Couldn't that trigger new business models? e.g. Profit-sharing?  patrice   Dec-02-11 09:28 PM   #89 
        - Not sure we should be looking at new business models in the HC industry...  slipslidingaway   Dec-02-11 09:34 PM   #91 
        - Huh? If that status-quo MLR was something about 70-75% and the ACA raised it to 80-85%, you don't  patrice   Dec-02-11 09:52 PM   #99 
           - Wendell Potter said the MLR was closer to 95% during the early Clinton years ...  slipslidingaway   Dec-02-11 10:12 PM   #108 
              - I think we agree about where this has to go, but maybe not about how to get there. I don't think  patrice   Dec-02-11 10:33 PM   #115 
        - Thom Hartmann: Big Pharma - Scalping Cancer Drugs?  slipslidingaway   Dec-02-11 09:38 PM   #94 
           - Big Pharma is the status quo business model. And you're AGAINST new business models?  patrice   Dec-02-11 09:58 PM   #101 
              - We need a not for profit system, did you listen to the interview? n/t  slipslidingaway   Dec-02-11 10:14 PM   #109 
                 - I already know everythig Thom Hartmann & WP have to say about this. Did you look at HR 676?  patrice   Dec-02-11 10:23 PM   #111 
                 - Look at my journal posts, I've supported HR 676 and did not support the distraction of a public ...  slipslidingaway   Dec-02-11 10:44 PM   #120 
                    - It's going up. I don't understand why that is meaningless. I see it as a step towards what will make  patrice   Dec-02-11 11:03 PM   #124 
                       - It was 95% in the early 90's and it may have taken a dip ...  slipslidingaway   Dec-03-11 12:06 AM   #128 
                       - Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are arguing that ObamaCare...  bvar22   Dec-03-11 11:10 AM   #187 
                 - Not-for-profits have business models too, just not ones designed to produce profits. nt  patrice   Dec-02-11 10:24 PM   #112 
  - Most of the large insurers such as Aetna, United Health Care, the Blues, etc. will meet this  FarCenter   Dec-02-11 10:05 PM   #105 
  - Why is it good to squeeze out small providers and create even more industry concentration?  WildNovember   Dec-02-11 10:28 PM   #113 
  - Small insurers are harder to regulate and cumulatively have more political power  FarCenter   Dec-02-11 10:43 PM   #119 
  - Cumulatively have more power? That doesn't sound right.  WildNovember   Dec-02-11 10:58 PM   #123 
  - WTF? Have you been asleep for the last 5 years?  progressoid   Dec-03-11 10:56 AM   #186 
  - Just like the concentration with banks ...  slipslidingaway   Dec-02-11 10:45 PM   #121 
  - LOL! Yeah, more consolidation and less competition, that'll fix it all!  JVS   Dec-03-11 02:43 AM   #145 
  - Wow, that is a great feature!  earcandle   Dec-02-11 10:43 PM   #118 
  - Of course, somebody has enforce this  dflprincess   Dec-02-11 10:53 PM   #122 
  - Medical Loss Ratio Cap, no pre-existing, and the Exchanges are powerful.  Hoyt   Dec-03-11 12:08 AM   #129 
  - Adequate subsidies and how we pay, or not pay, for those subsidies ...  slipslidingaway   Dec-03-11 12:43 AM   #134 
  - Wendell Potter - The Medical Loss Ratio was 95% in early Clinton years ...  slipslidingaway   Dec-03-11 12:16 AM   #130 
  - Yes, that's true.  silverweb   Dec-03-11 12:46 AM   #135 
  - If it is true then we're going backwards, minus the temporary blip ...  slipslidingaway   Dec-03-11 01:06 AM   #140 
  - Fiction.  ProSense   Dec-03-11 09:45 AM   #179 
  - As always...  silverweb   Dec-03-11 06:40 PM   #224 
  - Let's be glad some controls have been placed on it or we'd be looking at a MLR of 70% in future.  Hoyt   Dec-03-11 10:06 AM   #180 
  - "will, ultimately, lead to the death of large parts of the private,  barbtries   Dec-03-11 12:59 AM   #139 
  - Leaving only the big players to pick our bones. How is that good?  WildNovember   Dec-03-11 04:30 AM   #146 
  - i want the same thing you want.  barbtries   Dec-03-11 08:52 AM   #174 
  - Death by mandated customer and government subsidy to insure revenue???  TheKentuckian   Dec-03-11 08:20 AM   #163 
     - death by no more profit  barbtries   Dec-03-11 08:49 AM   #173 
        - That isn't a result of the plan because we were on the same course before.  TheKentuckian   Dec-03-11 02:24 PM   #202 
  - Oh, look! Health insurance companies doing what they've been paid to do all along. How about that?  judesedit   Dec-03-11 02:14 AM   #143 
  - With Medicare for All there would be no marketing expense, no profit...  Scuba   Dec-03-11 05:52 AM   #148 
  - Yup  Enthusiast   Dec-03-11 09:14 AM   #177 
  - I hadn't seen that provision, but I LOVE IT!  YellowRubberDuckie   Dec-03-11 08:06 AM   #157 
  - We need a public and/or non-profit health care system  SHRED   Dec-03-11 08:09 AM   #159 
  - is Rick Ungar back at Forbes now?  Enrique   Dec-03-11 08:42 AM   #172 
  - This assumes that SCOTUS doesn't kill the whole thing.  Kablooie   Dec-03-11 10:08 AM   #181 
  - After people start getting their refunds  The Doctor.   Dec-03-11 02:14 PM   #200 
  - Parasitic Insurance will only cook the books to reap the profit they think they deserve.  Fantastic Anarchist   Dec-03-11 11:34 AM   #190 
  - Your right. They will Betty Crockerize all their financial statements.  Kablooie   Dec-04-11 03:11 AM   #239 
  - ....ultimately, lead to the death of large parts of the private, for-profit health insurance industr  ladywnch   Dec-03-11 11:39 AM   #191 
  - Really just need single payer nt  abelenkpe   Dec-03-11 12:26 PM   #193 
  - The link is to an advertisement video.  Deep13   Dec-03-11 12:36 PM   #194 
  - Try clicking on Continue to Site.  johnaries   Dec-03-11 09:14 PM   #231 
     - Well, yeah, but I was looking for a source I could post somewhere.  Deep13   Dec-03-11 10:11 PM   #234 
  - It ought to be 95%. nt.  Warren Stupidity   Dec-03-11 02:24 PM   #203 
  - Boooommmm?  pam4water   Dec-03-11 02:40 PM   #208 
  - Rec #191  Number23   Dec-03-11 03:50 PM   #213 
  - Does anyone know?  bluestate10   Dec-03-11 04:22 PM   #215 
  - UnitedHealth Group says future looks bright  dflprincess   Dec-03-11 09:24 PM   #232 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC