Health insurance industry poised to reap benefits from healthcare overhaul

[Better Believe It]

Insurers poised to reap benefits from healthcare overhaul
The final bill may well reflect an industry group's strategy of shaping universal coverage to benefit companies
By Noam N. Levey and Lisa Girion
October 26, 2009

Reporting from Los Angeles and Washington - As President Obama's push for a healthcare overhaul moves toward its final act, the oft-vilified health insurance industry is on the verge of seeing a plan enacted that largely protects its financial interests.

That achievement, should it stand up in the final legislation, would be the capstone of a sophisticated lobbying and strategic campaign that began even before Obama was elected president.

The specifics of the healthcare legislation are still being hashed out on Capitol Hill, and key details will evolve in the days ahead. Even so, there is broad agreement that the final plan will, for the first time, require Americans to buy health coverage, with taxpayer subsidies for millions who cannot afford it.

For the health insurance industry, that means millions of new paying customers. What's more, there are likely to be no limits on what insurers can charge, while at the same time the plan is expected to limit competition from any new national government insurance plan that lawmakers create.

These anticipated wins -- from an initiative that has at times been portrayed as doomsday for health insurers -- is the result of a strategy developed by one of Washington's savviest lobbyists, Karen Ignagni. Under Ignagni's leadership, the industry group America's Health Insurance Plans adopted the goal of universal coverage while setting out to shape it in a way that benefited insurers -- a crucial move that aligned their interests with those of other groups, including consumers and hospitals.

"While so many in this town have been playing checkers, Karen has been playing chess," said Mark Merritt, a veteran lobbyist who heads the Pharmaceutical Care Management Assn.

Read the full article at:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-health-insure26-2009oct26,0,11741,full.story

[joeycola]

1. (Health) Bill Likely to Cut Employer Mandate.......but not individuals....

Forum Name Latest Breaking News
Topic subject AP Sources: (Health) Bill Likely to Cut Employer Mandate
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4118850#4118850
4118850, AP Sources: (Health) Bill Likely to Cut Employer Mandate
Posted by kpete on Sun Oct-25-09 11:00 PM

Source: Associated Press

AP Sources: Bill Likely to Cut Employer Mandate
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 25, 2009

Filed at 5:47 p.m. ET


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Businesses would not be required to provide health insurance under legislation being readied for Senate debate, but large firms would owe significant penalties if any worker needed government subsidies to buy coverage on their own, according to Democratic officials familiar with talks on the bill.

For firms with more than 50 employees, the fee could be as high as $750 multiplied by the total size of the work force if only a few workers needed federal aid, these officials said. That is a more stringent penalty than in a bill that recently cleared the Senate Finance Committee, which said companies should face penalties on a per-employee basis.

These officials also said individuals would generally be required to purchase affordable insurance if it were available, and face penalties if they defied the requirement.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss the private negotiations involving key Senate Democrats and the White House. They also stressed that no final decisions have been made on the details of the measure, expected to reach the Senate floor in about two weeks.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/10/25/us/politics/AP-US-Health-Care-Overhaul.html?_r=1

[Better Believe It]

2. That might prove to be an incentive for employers to drop health care insurance

Which would cost far less money for a large employer?

Pay at least $5,000 average per employee for minimum health insurance premiums or a $750 penalty per employee?

[inna]

10. OMG! this is just HORRIBLE!

Of course, businesses would rather pay a "heavy" (???) "penalty" of "as high as $750" (??) per employee than paying many thousands of dollars a year for their health coverage!

We are being absolutely sold out!! This is not a "reform", this is a health care DEFORM!!


:grr:

[Armstead]

3. We're being played for suckers. Alas the Democratic leadership are the biggest suckers of all.

Why, after screwing the public for decades are thesenow being rewarded by having the government pick our pockets and giving it to them?

[earthboundmisfit]

4. I don't like to wish for bad things to happen to anyone - BUT

Karma needs to hit Karen Ignagni in a very big way.

[Armstead]

5. I disagree -- She's just dfoing her job well.....It';s those who are going along with it .

It's the enablers among our politicians -- and those who support this misguided version of "reform" who are to blame.

[BonnieJW]

6. I second that curse on her.

She is evil. I don't buy that she's "doing her job." The trials in Nuremburg swept that excuse away. When you are harming millions of people, even causing some of their preventable deaths, the job becomes evil.

[earthboundmisfit]

7. Let's temper it a bit: may she become enlightened, as Wendell Potter did.

n/t

[Armstead]

8. You forgot your sarcasm thingie....I hope

I doubt she is going to have an attack of conscience anytime soon.

[earthboundmisfit]

12. Heh ;)

I really, truly wish she WOULD - have a conscience, that is - applies not just to her, but to all the insurance co. monsters - and their enablers...

[OneBlueSky]

9. precisely, exactly what we absolutely do NOT need . . .

is an "overhaul" that actually increases the power of the insurance companies . . . if this plays out to their advantage, the absurd costs of healthcare will do nothing but increase year after year after year . . .

power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely . . .

[Vinca]

11. This is a nightmare scenario that can only make matters worse.

[slipslidingaway]

13. Great article - since 2006 the insurance companies have been working on a plan...

Private insurance companies stand to lose many customers as the baby boom generation begins to enroll in Medicare. Over the next two decades Medicare enrollment will grow from 46 million to 79 million beginning in 2011...they need customers and they also know a national, not for profit system would relegate them to offering supplemental policies.

Naturally they are on board with health care reform, but need to keep the PO weak.

more snips from the article>>

"....The first public sign of the industry's shifting stance came in November of 2006 when the trade group came out in favor of universal coverage with its reform plan.

That built on the breakthrough idea, propelled early on by Blue Shield of California Chief Executive Bruce Bodaken and Kaiser Permanente CEO George Halvorson, that universal coverage was key to the future of the industry.

...The strategy paid dividends, as insurance executives were invited to the table when senior Democrats began developing healthcare legislation this year. Ignagni and insurance executives became familiar figures in the committee rooms on Capitol Hill, testifying in favor of an overhaul as lawmakers gathered information to write their bills.

Ignagni also went to the White House to consult with senior Obama administration officials. She publicly offered the industry's help in reining in the nation's growing healthcare tab, providing the president with a public relations coup this spring when the White House wanted to show momentum behind its healthcare campaign.

...More recently, insurance companies pushed Democrats to toughen the requirement that all Americans get insurance, going to Capitol Hill with internal industry studies that purported to show that premiums would skyrocket if more people did not get coverage..."

[motorcity]

14. Then why are they fighting against it so hard?

I don't get it.

[slipslidingaway]

15. They are only fighting certain aspects - "Illness" - AHIP Reform Ad

"If everyone is covered..." equals mandate.

They have been running commercials for reform and fighting what they do not like, mostly behind the scenes. And they have been at the table from the beginning, as the article points out, they set the table back in 2006.

[slipslidingaway]

16. Good show with Bill Moyers...

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07242009/transcript1.html

"BILL MOYERS: But this time they're in favor of reform...

LOUISE: Coverage people can afford. Coverage they can get...

BILL MOYERS: Could it be that Harry and Louise are happier because this time, they're in on the deal?

What to make of all this? I've asked two expert analysts of health care to help me out.

...TRUDY LIEBERMAN: What's happened now is that the industries have gotten pretty much what they want out of the bills that are going forward.

And so, they need to build public support. They need to make everybody in the public realize that they actually are wearing white hats in this one. But behind the scenes, they are lobbying ferociously against the public plan, against cuts in doctors fees, against all kinds of things that they don't want. And for that they're using a different sort of lobbying tactic. All of these are communications or lobbying strategies that they know how to do and they are very excellent at doing them..."