IBJNews

Baucus health reform bill draws fire in Indiana, too

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
On The Beat Industry News In Brief

The health insurance industry’s sudden counterpunch to the Senate version of health reform echoed in Indiana and opened a key issue for the rest of the debate: Will covering half of the country’s uninsured mean raising premiums for the 85 percent of Americans who already have insurance?

The answer is yes, according to a controversial study released Oct. 12 by America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group in which Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc. is a leading member. But the study was blasted by the Obama administration and congressional Democrats as being both flawed and self-serving.

Hillman

In Indianapolis, however, Rob Hillman, president of WellPoint’s Indiana subsidiary, Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, e-mailed the study right away to dozens of Indiana insurance brokers.

 

Also, Susan Rider, an Indianapolis insurance broker and president-elect of the Indianapolis chapter of the National Association of Health Underwriters, distributed an e-mail with concerns about the so-called Baucus bill, authored by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont.

Health insurers’ main beef with recent amendments to the Baucus bill is that the amendments back away from a deal the insurers thought they had—in exchange for health insurers’ agreeing to cover anyone regardless of how sick they are, Congress would require all Americans to buy health insurance.

That mandate would have been enforced through salty fees charged to anyone who didn’t comply. But the fees were heavily criticized, so Baucus’ Senate Finance Committee rolled them back from an original amount of $3,800 to $1,500 for families. And in the first year the amended bill would take effect, Americans would face no penalty at all for going without insurance.

“The penalty for not having insurance coverage is too low, and it will result in many people choosing to just pay the fine rather than purchasing insurance coverage,” Carl McDonald, a health insurance analyst at Oppenheimer & Co., wrote in a recent blog post. He added, “This is a recipe for adverse selection, which will raise premium costs across the entire health care system.”

The AHIP study tried to calculate exactly how much premiums would rise, saying the average family policy would more than double in price in the next decade, to nearly $26,000.

But the study, conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers, analyzed only four aspects of the Baucus bill. It failed to examine, for example, the $452 billion in subsidies Congress would spend to help uninsured Americans buy health insurance—a potential boon to the industry. Also, since most of the 29 million new customers would be young, healthy and therefore low-spending customers, their presence in insurance risk pools likely would reduce costs for everyone.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • see
    With the mandate we must have the public option and we can't afford to keep giving away all these subsidies. My Lord, what do we not subsidize?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Kent's done a good job of putting together some good guests, intelligence and irreverence without the inane chatter of the other two shows. JMV is unlistenable, mostly because he doesn't do his homework and depends on non-sports stuff to keep HIM interested. Query and Shultz is a bit better, but lack of prep in their show certainly is evident. Sterling obviously workes harder than the other shows. We shall see if there is any way for a third signal with very little successful recent history to make it. I always say you have to give a show two years to grow into what it will become...

  2. Lafayette Square, Washington Square should be turned into office parks with office buildings, conversion, no access to the public at all. They should not be shopping malls and should be under tight security and used for professional offices instead of havens for crime. Their only useage is to do this or tear them down and replace them with high rise office parks with secured parking lots so that the crime in the areas is not allowed in. These are prime properties, but must be reused for other uses, professional office conversions with no loitering and no shopping makes sense, otherwise they have become hangouts long ago for gangs, groups of people who have no intent of spending money, and are only there for trouble and possibly crime, shoplifting, etc. I worked summers at SuperX Drugs in Lafayette Square in the 1970s and even then the shrinkage from shoplifting was 10-15 percent. No sense having shopping malls in these areas, they earn no revenue, attract crime, and are a blight on the city. All malls that are not of use should be repurposed or torn down by the city, condemned. One possibility would be to repourpose them as inside college campuses or as community centers, but then again, if the community is high crime, why bother.

  3. Straight No Chaser

  4. Seems the biggest use of TIF is for pet projects that improve Quality Of Life, allegedly, but they ignore other QOL issues that are of a more important and urgent nature. Keep it transparent and try not to get in ready, fire, Aim! mode. You do realize that business the Mayor said might be interested is probably going to want TIF too?

  5. Gary, I'm in complete agreement. The private entity should be required to pay IPL, and, if City parking meters are involved, the parking meter company. I was just pointing out how the poorly-structured parking meter deal affected the car share deal.

ADVERTISEMENT