Prescription For Disaster

More on the ObamaCare Waivers

Thursday, January 27, 2011

The Washington Times has a great follow-up piece on the Obama Administration's waivers to protect its friends (especially union friends) from the full effects of ObamaCare. So far, 733 waivers have been granted, and as noted elsewhere in this blog, a significant portion of these waivers have been granted to unions. According to The Washington Times, HHS and the Obama White House strategically waited until the day after the State of the Union Address to announce that more waivers would be necessary. Ahh, transparency.

But the Times piece also raises an excellent point: if the law is so great, why exempt your friends from the intended consequences of the law? If these provisions that are driving costs up for everyone are supposedly beneficial for everyone, why would the Obama Administration have issued three separate sets of waivers - mostly to its friends?

ObamaCare Exchanges: Reducing Consumer Choices, Undermining State Flexibility

Thursday, January 20, 2011

The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Moffitt has written a very insightful analysis of how ObamaCare’s health insurance exchanges will serve to undermine state authority and flexibility.

Among the points that Moffitt makes are that the exchanges will:

(1) Undermine state regulatory authority;

(2) Impose unknown costs on consumers, insurers and states;

(3) Impose a on-size-fits-all approach for each state while ignoring that each state may have different issues affecting the cost and access to healthcare;

(4) Undermines consumer choices; and

(5) Undermines competition which would surely increase costs.

Senate Republican Communications Center Posts Healthcare Law's Consequences

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

According to a recent release by the Senate Republican Communications Center, the consequences of ObamaCare include: “Huge” Premium Hikes, “Mountain Of New Mandates” For Employers, Loss Of Insurance Plans, “Cuts In Medicare".

Health Law Consequences

“Huge” Premium Hikes, “Mountain Of New Mandates” For Employers, Loss Of Insurance Plans, “Cuts In Medicare”

“Huge” Premium Hikes For “Tens Of Thousands Of Customers”

“Another Big California Health Insurer Has Stunned Individual Policyholders With Huge Rate Increases — This Time It's Blue Shield Of California Seeking Cumulative Hikes Of As Much As 59% For Tens Of Thousands Of Customers March 1.” (“Blue Shield Of California Seeks Rate Hikes Of As Much As 59% For Individuals,” Los Angeles Times, 1/6/11)

· “San Francisco-Based Blue Shield Said The Increases Were The Result Of Fast-Rising Healthcare Costs And Other Expenses Resulting From New Healthcare Laws.” (“Blue Shield Of California Seeks Rate Hikes Of As Much As 59% For Individuals,” Los Angeles Times, 1/6/11)

“California Was A Focal Point Of Debate Over Insurance Premiums Last Year, Too, When Mr. Jones's Predecessor Drew Attention To A 39% Increase By WellPoint.” (“Health Insurers Feel Heat In California,” The Wall Street Journal, 1/14/11)

“Mountain Of New Mandates” For Employers, “Doubling Co-Pays” For Employees

“Big Employers Faced With Incorporating The First Round Of Health-Care Changes Next Month Are Grappling With How To Comply With The Long List Of New Rules.” (“Firms Feel Pain From Health Law,” The Wall Street Journal, 12/13/10)

· “Many Companies Are Hiring Consultants To Help Sort Though The Mountain Of New Mandates… As A Result Of The Reform, SAS Is Doubling Its Legal And Consultant Expenses For 2011, Says Ms. Mann. She Declined To Provide A Dollar Amount, And SAS Wouldn't Say What It Currently Spends On Health-Care Overall.” (“Firms Feel Pain From Health Law,” The Wall Street Journal, 12/13/10)

· “To Help Get Under The Threshold Level, In January SAS Is Eliminating Its Higher-Cost Indemnity Plan And Is Also Doubling Co-Pays To $20 From $10, She Says. The company may still have to shift more costs to employees to avoid the tax, she says.” (“Firms Feel Pain From Health Law,” The Wall Street Journal, 12/13/10)

Loss Of Health Insurance Plans For Hundreds Of Thousands

“The Principal Financial Group Announced On Thursday That It Planned To Stop Selling Health Insurance, Another Sign Of Upheaval Emerging Among Insurers As The New Federal Health Law Starts To Take Effect. The Company, Based In Iowa, Provides Coverage To About 840,000 People Who Receive Their Insurance Through An Employer.” (“Insurer Cuts Health Plans As New Law Takes Hold,” The New York Times, 10/1/10)

· “At The Principal Financial Group, The Company’s Decision Reflected Its Assessment Of Its Ability To Compete In The Environment Created By The New Law. ‘Now scale really matters,’ said Daniel J. Houston, a senior executive at Principal, which is headquartered in Des Moines. ‘We don’t have a significant concentration in any one market.’” (“Insurer Cuts Health Plans As New Law Takes Hold,” The New York Times, 10/1/10)

“Cuts In Medicare”

“Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Has Notified Customers That It Will Drop Its Medicare Advantage Health Insurance Program At The End Of The Year, Forcing 22,000 Senior Citizens In Massachusetts, New Hampshire, And Maine To Seek Alternative Supplemental Coverage. The decision by Wellesley-based Harvard Pilgrim, the state’s second-largest health insurer, was prompted by a freeze in federal reimbursements and a new requirement that insurers offering the kind of product sold by Harvard Pilgrim — a Medicare Advantage private fee for service plan — form a contracted network of doctors who agree to participate for a negotiated amount of money.” (“Harvard Pilgrim Cancels Medicare Advantage Plan,” The Boston Globe, 9/28/10)

· Lynn Bowman, Vice President Of Customer Service At Harvard Pilgrim’s Office In Quincy: “We Know That Cuts In Medicare Are Being Used To Fund National Health Care Reform.’’ (“Harvard Pilgrim Cancels Medicare Advantage Plan,” The Boston Globe, 9/28/10)

###
SENATE REPUBLICAN COMMUNICATIONS CENTER

202.228.NEWS

Contact:

John Ashbrook 202.228.NEWS

ObamaCare's Unsavory Effects

Wednesday, January 05, 2011

Michael Tanner has an excellent article up today about how well the American public understands the damaging effects of ObamaCare. He singles out the fact that Americans are already losing their health insurance policies, the anticipated cost of ObamaCare is continuing to skyrocket, and health insurance providers in Colorado, Ohio, and Missouri have canceled their child-only policies.

Sure, there are some consumer reforms in the bill that are at least superficially popular. But even those come with fine print. For example: Starting today, parents will be able to keep their children on their insurance plans until age 26. Democrats imply that that extended coverage is free. But, in reality, the Department of Health and Human Services estimates that it will cost an estimated $3,380 a year per child. And since employers are balking at picking up the added cost, the parents themselves will have to pay more if they want to continue their children's coverage. Democrats will also point out that insurers can no longer refuse coverage to children with preexisting conditions. True: And in response, insurers in Colorado, Ohio, and Missouri, among others, have stopped offering child-only insurance plans, depriving thousands of Americans of an inexpensive coverage option. Insurers are also prohibited from imposing annual or lifetime coverage limits. But this provision has proved so onerous that the administration has been forced to issue more than 100 waivers to prevent companies from dropping their employees' coverage altogether.

HHS Hypocrisy

Monday, December 20, 2010

AHEC's Executive Director, Shonda Werry, writes today in A Line of Sight about how ObamaCare eliminates mini-med health insurance plans, which currently cover more than 1 million Americans. HHS Secretary Sebelius has issued hundreds of waivers to companies across the country to avoid a political disaster.

The article is available here: ObamaCare Waivers and HHS Hypocrisy

30,000 New Yorkers Lose Health Coverage, Thanks to ObamaCare

Monday, November 29, 2010

The House Ways and Means Committee today reports that 30,000 New Yorkers who work for an SEIU-affiliate are losing their coverage. 6,000 children will be completely without health insurance as a result of this dropped coverage. Mitra Behroozi,the Executive Director of benefit and pension funds for the plan for 1199SEIU explained the change, noting that: "[N]ew federal health-care reform legislation requires plans with dependent coverage to expand that coverage up to age 26. Our limited resources are already stretched as far as possible, and meeting this new requirement would be financially impossible." In other words, the new requirement under ObamaCare that health insurance providers extend coverage to adult children of beneficiaries up to age 26 is the reason that 6,000 children in New York are without health insurance coverage. Expect more of these types of unintended (but not unforeseen!) consequences of ObamaCare in the coming months.

ObamaCare's Impact on Seniors

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Here is an interesting article on A Line of Sight about ObamaCare's impact on seniors and the ensuing Medicare cuts.

2 Minnesota Insurance Companies Drop Individual Plans

Friday, September 24, 2010

After only 6 months of its existence, ObamaCare has already caused two Minnesota-based insurance companies to stop offering individual plans.

According to Pioneer Press, cited here, reports that Health Partners (based in Bloomington, MN) is temporarily suspending its individual plans because of the uncertainty due to ObamaCare.