IBJNews

Health insurers lose push to ease rate review

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

U.S. insurers led by WellPoint Inc. and UnitedHealth Group Inc. failed to get federal regulators to change a rule in the 2010 health-care overhaul that triggers a review of any premium increases exceeding 10 percent.

The ruling takes effect this year and adds pressure on insurers to justify price increases. The health insurance industry’s Washington lobbying group, America’s Health Insurance Plan, had asked the government to do away with the 10 percent rate review threshold, calling it flawed.

The rules were prompted partly by a proposal from the California subsidiary of Indianapolis-based WellPoint to raise rates as much as 39 percent in 2010. After a review by California’s insurance commissioner, the underlying calculations were found to be incorrect and WellPoint cut the increase in half, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Effective rate review works,” said Kathleen Sebelius, the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, in a statement announcing the rules. “It does so by protecting consumers from unreasonable rate increases and bringing needed transparency to the marketplace.”

Insurance exchanges set up by the health-care overhaul will offer tax credits for Americans to buy private coverage by 2019. Starting this year, insurers are to provide state and federal regulators with justification for any premium increases of 10 percent or more.

Insurers are subject to the reviews starting on Sept. 1, the government said in announcing the process. In September 2012, the U.S. will set up new price thresholds for state-by- state review to replace the 10 percent benchmark.

Karen Ignagni, the America’s Health Insurance Plan chief executive officer, said policymakers should focus on lowering underlying medical costs such as hospitals, doctors, technology, and drug prices.

“Health plans are doing their part to restrain health-care cost growth by partnering with providers across the country to change payment models to promote and reward safe, high-quality, cost-effective care,” Ignagni said in a statement.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Tell Me Again?
    I don't care how much you don't like the mandate, this bill is GOOD for Americans and Obama should be commended for getting it done.
  • cant wait
    I can not wait to see justifications such as "your rate went up because your obese" or "your rate went up because you smoke". Lets force people to pay their own personal cost of insurance.
    As a very low risk insured I am tired of paying increased premium because people are fat, lazy and dont take care of themselves. Its not always easy for me to go the gym every day, but I do it. I would love to eat fast food every day, but I dont.
    People need to live with the consequences of their choices.

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. Can your dog sign a marriage license or personally state that he wishes to join you in a legal union? If not then no, you cannot marry him. When you teach him to read, write, and speak a discernible language, then maybe you'll have a reasonable argument. Thanks for playing!

  2. Look no further than Mike Rowe, the former host of dirty jobs, who was also a classically trained singer.

  3. Current law states income taxes are paid to the county of residence not county of income source. The most likely scenario would be some alteration of the income tax distribution formula so money earned in Marion co. would go to Marion Co by residents of other counties would partially be distributed to Marion co. as opposed to now where the entirety is held by the resident's county.

  4. This is more same-old, same-old from a new generation of non-progressive 'progressives and fear mongers. One only needs to look at the economic havoc being experienced in California to understand the effect of drought on economies and people's lives. The same mindset in California turned a blind eye to the growth of population and water needs in California, defeating proposal after proposal to build reservoirs, improve water storage and delivery infrastructure...and the price now being paid for putting the demands of a raucous minority ahead of the needs of many. Some people never, never learn..

  5. I wonder if I can marry him too? Considering we are both males, wouldn't that be a same sex marriage as well? If they don't honor it, I'll scream discrimination just like all these people have....

ADVERTISEMENT