They also drive the cost of health care up because they tell doctors what they are going to pay on your bill and doctors are left with no choice but to accept whatever payment the insurance company sees as reasonable. Insurance companies are not saintly like most here want to believe, it's a very dirty business. This coming from a staunch Republican. I'm in line with the party on almost everything but this.

 

It can get ugly when people are mad about having to spend money and someone is profiting. Especially when it comes to health care.

HT has a point but there is so many other things wrong with the industry that could help. It is a shame she isn't covered for the preexisting conditions but typically that is only for the first 12 months. They have to do that or people will just wait till they are sick or till they have a broken leg to get coverage then get treatment and cancel the policy. Leaving everyday carriers to foot the bill for the insurance companies to make up the difference.

$400 for a couple? That's pretty cheap unless your employer is paying part of the premium. Figure on your premiums heading skyward.

 

Agreed you could be in A LOT worse shape than $400 a month.

Agreed you could be in A LOT worse shape than $400 a month.

 

Oh ya beyond my wife's thyroid we are idea candidates to insure healty weight, exercise, don't smoke, barely ever drink alcohol, come from families with little health problems. My wife's job does also cover part of the premiums. And Hammer makes a good point about people waiting to get sick to get insurance that's why for Obama's plan to work people have to be forced to buy it. I don't like but it's the only way insurance companies can cover all the preconditions and be sured they aren't bankrupt. I think it's a fair trade off that ensures everyone can receive health care at an affordable rate.

Oh ya beyond my wife's thyroid we are idea candidates to insure healty weight, exercise, don't smoke, barely ever drink alcohol, come from families with little health problems. My wife's job does also cover part of the premiums. And Hammer makes a good point about people waiting to get sick to get insurance that's why for Obama's plan to work people have to be forced to buy it. I don't like but it's the only way insurance companies can cover all the preconditions and be sured they aren't bankrupt. I think it's a fair trade off that ensures everyone can receive health care at an affordable rate.

Up until 2 years ago we had Humana though my work. They had a pre-exsiting condition clause but it said there was a time period you had to wait before they would cover treatment. It was 6 months in most cases but could be 12-18 months depending on when you enrolled. After the waiting period it would be covered. Also, I don't know how big your wifes company is but if you are getting by with $400 month in premiums your lucky. We moved away from Humana because they were going up. I currenlty pay $227 every other week for our new insurance. Humana was higher then that. Maybe her company just chose a crappy plan.

Here is a problem that comes with intense regulation that cause more strict enforcement of pre-existing conditions and caps. They are needed to avoid what auditors would call unlimited liability. If you have unlimited liability you have audit troubles. And if you have audit troubles, you have Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) troubles and if you have SOX troubles - according to the law you can go to jail. So some of these things are strictly accounting and audit limitations that companies HAVE to have to pass an audit. A private insurance company can not not have these limits. Basically, it is the law.

 

Now government can do what private companies can not - it can ignore basic accounting principles, legally, and it can take on the risks that companies can not. It can be the insurer of last resort. Florida has to do this with property insurance after the insurance companies forced it into its own high risk pool after 4 hurricanes ravaged the state in one year. So there is a unique role government can play in this insurance issue.

 

Also I suspect rates are going up for company provided insurance at a higher than normal rate because I believe companies that provide insurance, especially those that are self-insured, are letting the employees pickup more and more of the burden each year. There is less and less 'benefit' from the company other than doing group negotiation for a large pool. Just a theory on why rates have gone up so much for company provided plans.

For all it's flaws it does a lot to put insurance companies in check. Complete repeal would be a terrible thing. I pay our insurance company 400 bucks a month right now for our coverage and they won't cover a once a year hundred dollar blood test for my wife's thyroid medicine because it's a precondition.

 

My wife is covered for her TSH and it was a precondition. Might be your insurance, maybe?

 

The Health Care Reform Act does nothing to put insurance companies in check. In fact, it's very passage is driving up costs. Having said that, I doubt its repeal will reverse the increases. We're dealing with politicians here.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/nov/01/summary-box-humanas-3q-profit-rises-30-percent/

 

Humana's profits were close to a BILLION dollars last year. That's profits after the lavish amoutns of money they pay all their high level employees. How is it they should profit that much while constantly taking advantage of people and denying good claims. If it weren't for the political football game on this subject what Health Insurance companies do would be seen as extortion.

 

The problem is that the HRA does not address any of these issues. There is no limit on the what insurance companies can make in the bill. If there is, please show it to me.

 

:sssh:

 

Earlier that same month he had this to say:

 

OBAMA: Let’s break down what she really means by a mandate. What’s meant by a mandate is that the government is forcing people to buy health insurance and so she’s suggesting a parent is not going to buy health insurance for themselves if they can afford it. Now, my belief is that most parents will choose to get health care for themselves and we make it affordable.

 

Here’s the concern. If you haven’t made it affordable, how are you going to enforce a mandate. I mean, if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house. The reason they don’t buy a house is they don’t have the money. And so, our focus has been on reducing costs, making it available. I am confident if people have a chance to buy high-quality health care that is affordable, they will do so. That’s what our plan does and nobody disputes that.

Grassley on Fox News on individual mandates:

 

But when it comes to states requiring it for automobile insurance, the principle then ought to lie the same way for health insurance. Because everybody has some health insurance costs, and if you aren’t insured, there’s no free lunch. Somebody else is paying for it….I believe that there is a bipartisan consensus to have individual mandates.

 

So much for personal responsibility.