This Is Why We Need The Public Option
In a third-quarter earnings conference call in late October, officials at Aetna announced that in an effort to improve on a less-than-anticipated profit margin in 2009, they would be raising prices on their consumers in 2010. The insurance giant predicted that the company would subsequently lose between 300,000 and 350,000 members next year from its national account as well as another 300,000 from smaller group accounts.
So… up to 650,000 people will lose their coverage because Aetna didn’t make a big enough profit. And I have to wonder how many of those 650,000 will now join the ranks of the uninsured, because for all the talk of competition, it simply doesn’t exist in the health insurance industry. These guys don’t compete with each other… except to see who can outdo the other in dropping and denying members.
And if Aetna is so ready to lose 650,000 people in the name of profit, then why wouldn’t they support the public option? Could it be they know they are offering a crap product and exorbitant prices? They like to pretend they’re Neiman Marcus arguing that a Target positioned next to their store would lower the quality of the neighborhood, when the truth is they know they can’t compete… because they won’t compete. They have never had to compete.
If a public option existed Aetna, and other insurance companies, could cherry-pick to their heart’s content – guilt free. Hell, you’d think they’d love this idea, and they probably would if they were offering a superior product. But they’re not, which is the real reason they’re against the public option.
Tags: Health Care Reform
Thanks for the assist, Aetna! These insurance companies are seriously arrogant, don’t you think? Blue Cross/Blue Shield sent postcards to their customers to oppose the public option after sending them a letter about rate increases.
I just get the feeling that D.C. is taking the opposition to the public option as a higher proportion of the population than it actually is. The last poll (just last week) showed support at >60%.
Arrogance is correct. Geez, you’d think they’d implement policies designed to show how we don’t need a public option, that they’d do things that undercut the complaints. But they won’t because 1) they’re counting on their paid congressmen/women and 2) they have no idea how to compete… because they’re basically a monopoly and have never had to.
There’s some new compromise in the works – and this time Carper’s not in the middle of it:
Yeah, we can’t have for profit companies worrying about making a profit for their investors! Make ’em operate in the red, just like the federal government will operate the “public option”. Of course, they won’t be allowed to tax the rest of the public to make up for those losses, so they will quickly go out of business, putting that many more people into the no-longer-optional “public option”.
UA, you’re about as uninformed troll as we have around here.
The public option is paid for by premiums.
I don’t think health insurance companies add anything to my overall health so I don’t think they need to make a profit off of me. You’ve got it right though, the insurance companies only goal is to make money, it has nothing to do with serving customers. They make money by screwing customers. That’s why we need a public option.
Uniformed is a kind word for, UA. The problem with private insurance is that there is no competition. Just a lot of price fixing. I’d be thrilled if a private insurance company took it upon themselves to compete with their comrades. If that actually happened there’d be no need for a public option.
Wouldn’t it be funny if UA got dropped by Aetna. I’d laugh so hard.
Yes, UA, I agree. It’s much more important to have corporate profits than for people to be alive.
I assume you are in favor of —
—abolishing the Food and Drug Administration; after all, why bother testing drugs when it cuts into profits? Just put ’em on the market and let the buyer beware!
— dismantling all illegal drug laws; after all, the local drug dealer’s gotta make a profit, too. Small business rules! And legal street drugs means that Rite Aid, et al will do much, much better.
— eliminating all minimum wage jobs, job protection laws and OSHA regulations. They just stand in the way of more profits!
— and finally, allow abortion on demand, anywhere, anytime. According to conservatives, it’s a large industry, so the docs can join up with United Health Care, go corporate, get listed on the stock exchange and make (I can’t resist) a killing!
The possibilities of profit over personhood are limitless, once you start thinking about it.
Wa-hoo!!
maybe we shouldnt let insurance companies BE for profit companies. I think that is the point the left is trying to make here. That profiting off of people’s health is moral wrong unless you are the caregiver. not the racketeering scam that decides who lives a who dies. Which is exactly what insurance companies are. How anyone who claims to want the bes for this county defends them is beyond me. It isnt an attack on business, it is an attack on extortion.
This from a company whose CEO is expected to earn 23 million this year. Never mind the Government, the insurance companies are the entities that stand between you and your doctor. Ask yourself, what do insurance companies really do for anyone but pool your money with others on the odds that more people will stay healthy than get sick. Think of how much cheaper insurance would be if everyone was on Medicare and we eliminated the profit motivated middle man.
There already are non-profit insurance cos and some are real models for the future. But it was not enough for aetnato alreadt keep 25-35% ofpremiums paid for medical services to pay their CEO mad money. It is a massive lie that these cos can’t compete. Wingnuts and conservative dems are working hard gto make sure that these cos end up with a massive new entitlement instead of ensuring real competion. That’s the party of business for you.
All the Blues used to be not for profit. Other major corporate carriers didn’t get heavily invested in health insurance coverage until 1) many states changed insurance laws making it easier for the large corps to play; 2) the hospital industry became heavily for-profit (thank you Sen. Frist and family); 3) the Medicare program began urging its seniors to get into “managed care” run by insurance companies instead of staying with Medicare only, thus bringing a huge pool of insured people — their premiums completely guaranteed every month by the government — into the mix.
Suddenly, health insurance became a profitable business. First the California Blues and then others hurriedly dumped their not for profit status; raised corporate salaries up to Wall Street levels; and began using the same shennanigans that the corporations use to keep risk out of the pool. Meanwhile, companies like Humana and United experimented with running the insurance end and the delivery end: owning the health policy and the hospital is like having the golden-egg laying goose.
The game is now rigged so that eliminating the profit motive for insurers — but not hospitals, home health care agencies, nursing homes, rehab centers, etc. — wouldn’t really do enough.
These people who have all this concern for the profitability of the insurance companies – why don’t they worry about the profitability of hospitals? Taking care of uninsured patients is killing a lot of hospitals.
UI, because it’s not killing hospitals in their neighborhoods. Suburban hospitals are doing just fine; it’s charity, county, urban and rural hospitals that are suffering.
(And it’s not only from taking uninsured patients; it’s also from the squeeze that insurance companies put on the hospitals when paying the bills of insured patients — negotiating for less payment and expecting more; and it’s from the rising costs of medical technology and scarcity of medical personnel. Again, when you get into the “profit” side of the health care totality, it’s a pretty messy situation.)
The public option will be paid by premiums only until those premiums are deemed “too high” by the Left, which will then argue that all taxpayers have an obligation to keep those premiums low — at which point we will see a surtax on all private insurance, meaning that those with private insurance will be paying for their own insurance and for the folks under the public option. At that point, the insurance companies will be forced out of business by the extra costs imposed on them but not their government competitor, which they will be subsidizing.
And for those who argue that there should not be for-profit insurance companies, consider that people have to eat. Why should we let farmers, food processors, grocers and restaurants make any profit at all? Is it more important that they be allowed to profit or that people be allowed to eat?
I just wanted to point out something that should be obvious but is maybe being overlooked in the Aetna story. In the calculation that Aetna is using to estimate how many fewer insureds they will have at the new, higher rates, while actually increasing their profit…..will be a substantial number of newly-unemployed Aetna customer service reps and claims processors. Fewer insured means less employees needed to do the actual work the company is supposed to be engaged in. This will only add to the ranks of the uninsured.
UA is ignorant. There are plenty of non-profit insurance companies out there. UA, go post your own uninformed comments elsewhere.
UA is still an idiot.
No one is arguing that profits are bad.
We are arguing that terminating coverage for paying customers just because you need more money is pretty much immoral.
No surprise that you are here arguing for the immoral and for your insurance premiums to pay outrageous salaries.
Thats the holy free market doing it’s job. All hail it’s awesome power. Just remember, when you hear conservatives ask “why are you demonizing business?” they are defending these abhorrent practices. In an economic philosophy that teaches to gain off of other peoples failures, applying the otion to let someone die, or make a dollar has an obvious outcome. Dnt like care rationing? it is already happening. Afraid of death panels? Well, usually its just one claims adjuster that seals you fate… for the good of the company. Understanding that somethings are too important for capitalism doesnt make you a godless commie.
Personally I don’t think basic health insurance should be a for-profit industry. You start running into these moral issues – which is dropping and denying coverage for the sick to prop up your bottom line. I don’t see a problem with supplemental for-profit health insurance but I believe everyone is entitled to basic health care. Unlike this have/have not system we have now – the most expensive health care system in the world which covers the fewest people.
“And for those who argue that there should not be for-profit insurance companies, consider that people have to eat. ”
No one here has enough interest in you to school you on the difference between profit, not-for-profit, salary, sole proprietorship (the farmer in your example), and investor-owned.
When you’ve got that figured out, then come and play.
Exactly, PM. UA is uninformed, you can’t even have a decent argument with him/her.
Hey, why didn’t I get an email alert that we were bashing a Moron Pinata?
“And for those who argue that there should not be for-profit insurance companies, consider that people have to eat. Why should we let farmers, food processors, grocers and restaurants make any profit at all? Is it more important that they be allowed to profit or that people be allowed to eat?”
To pick just one of a score of differences, because those in the food stream produce something. Those in health insurance produce nothing.
There, I’ve started you off. You should be able to compile another 19 differences by lunchtime.
UI: “I don’t see a problem with supplemental for-profit health insurance but I believe everyone is entitled to basic health care.”
You are describing the Swiss system, so yours is no pipe dream.
Perry,
Canada’s system and the U.K.’s system is like that as well. Many companies offer supplemental insurance. Even Medicare has supplements. It’s a system that works.
It simply is a mystery to me how so many people havent a clue as to what is going on in DC. Would someone please list those “not for profit” insurance companies! The only ones I know of are Medicare, Medicaid and the VA. Those are single payer systems.
It is carpetbagger Carper who is destroying the public option. He is bringing his “exchanges”, and Opt in/Opt out” garbage to Reid behind closed doors with Lincoln, Leiberman, Nelson and Landrieu.
It will be Delaware who will be credited with loosing the Public Option, because it is Tom Carper who continues to fight against the citizens and on behalf of the insurance companies. How fast can you spell traitor, treasonist, prostitute? Even Howard Dean had the courage to call Carper out. He is a “silly man”, and an obstructionist. I thought all you libs supported Howard Dean. Is it because you don’t want to lash out at the person responsible for the Public Option destruction because he is a demorat? What hypocrisy.
jk, you are preaching to the choir. Also, you obviously didn’t follow UI,s link to where at least these liberals have called tom carpet out. Have you called his office? have you tried to write to the news urinal? Posting an angry rant here is cathartic, but it doesn’t do much to get things done.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield is still non-profit in some states.
Kaiser Permenente is a non-profit, as is Mayo and Geisinger.
Here’s the link to DL posts on Tom Carper, for those who come to accuse without doing any research first.
JK — There are many not for profit health insurance companies in this country, including many Blue Cross Plans, a good handful of regional HMOs left over from HMO Glory Days in the 1980’s, and the granddaddy of HMO, Kaiser Permanente, still a major player on the Left Coast. Until very recently, not for profit plans were the dominant providers of health coverage in the nation — not counting the public plans (and that’s what your examples are: public plans. They are largely/exclusively funded with taxpayer dollars and not premiums from the people they support. A single-payer system is not funded the same way, although government dollars are involved.)
As for DL and Carper — come by more often and continue reading!
It is naive for anyone to think the non-profit health insurance companies is a crown for the health care industry. At best it’s a misnomer for those companies who still make a ton of money, pay incredible salaries, but fall under a different, more veiled IRS category. Beware.
Kaiser is an old whore (and yes I am using that word). I have navigated organ transplant surgery thru that system, and was HORRIFIED at the bureacratic web one has to detangle, and the warehousing of CRITICAL patients they keep warehoused in local hospitals awaiting to be “called up”. I have NEVER seen that back East here–our critical patients are kept in house at our larger university hospital etc., and continually monitored and managed preparing for a hopeful transplant. My sense was KP just kept them hospitalized in a KP facility, no interventions etc., in hopes of…I’m not going to say. I literally had to dictate orders on a 35 yo pt. awaiting a liver/kidney transplant to a hepatologist–whose current orders read like the person was in a nursing home w/ routine needs. My on-site visit to this local hospital was the kick in the #@* for transfer to UCSF…and the story goes on from there.
The only non-profit I know w/ any heart in the matter, who manages financially well, and gives excellent distribution of care, up to and including, sending out a patient from their system when needed is Intermountain Health Care (IHC).
I hope Mayo does well and wish them well–Scripps too–but the thing w/ lending your name to these “ventures” in healthcare, really can diminish one’s credibility ( Penn’s gone through it, and Hopkins has scrambled too) These hospitals really need to re-evaluate the whole insurance alignment thing, because it is coming back to bite ’em.
Progressives around the country are well aware today who the fly in the public option ointment is, Senator Tom Carper. Carper made a complete ass of himself slurring his words with Chris Matthews. Since the State Democratic Party is permitting this shill for corporations to continue to destroy any chance of a real public option, without calling the fink out it just goes to show how powerful the little state of Delaware is nationally.
Blue Cross Blue Shield started out non profit, but soon found out how much they could steal by going for profit. Hospitals are throwing patients out before they are ready to make a profit for the insurance companies. Hospitals and insurance companies work hand in hand. How many millions does Christiana Care have in the bank profit wise? Yet they push folk out the door constantly who have medicare and other insurance and force employees to do double work.
Hey Progressive Mom. You totally lack in facts. Can you prove anything you are saying?
Hey JK — the fact free is usually you. Take a few breaths to actually read what people say before raging away. The google is your friend — finding a few remaining BCBS is not too far from your fingertips.
Like what?
“Hospitals are throwing patients out before they are ready to make a profit for the insurance companies. ”
What does this mean?
“Hospitals and insurance companies work hand in hand”.
Only where they have the same ownership (please see my previous posts). Otherwise, it’s not in the hospitals’ interests to do that; the two parties negotiate every 2-3 years over every inpatient day, every procedure, every ancillary, etc. That’s hardly hand-in-hand, unless by that you mean “combat.” But, when the patient runs out of insurance money, the hospital will look to dump elsewhere him as quickly as legally possible. Because not for profit doesn’t mean “we don’t want to charge you.”
“How many millions does Christiana Care have in the bank profit wise?”
I don’t know; I don’t live in Delaware. And everything in the bank isn’t “profit.” Take an accounting lesson: what’s in the bank must include IBNR, the required state reserve, funds for capital improvement (unless you don’t want real technology in your hospital next year), etc.
“Yet they push folk out the door constantly who have medicare and other insurance and force employees to do double work.”
Ah, now we get to your real point: you’ve had a personal experience that you’re pissed about. Point taken. Everyone has. But that doesn’t have anything to do with my discussion.
Do you have data to prove “double work.” or “push folk out the door constantly”? Constantly is pretty damned hard to prove, friend.
Just because there’s no not for profit insurer in your area, doesn’t mean there aren’t any. The major carrier in my area (75% of the market) is not for profit. Go over the border to Pa and you’ll find several NFPs. As Cassandra said, teh Google is your friend.
And every hospital in NY state is not for profit. And not one of them is owned by an insurance carrier.
So what’s your problem, specifically with my “facts?” I got that you don’t like Carper — he isn’t particularly beloved around these boards, either — but what the hell’s your problem with me?