WellPoint, insurance commissioner get earful from lawmakers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Executives from WellPoint Inc. and the Indiana Department of Insurance both received a grilling Wednesday morning before the Committee on Insurance of the state House of Representatives.

The hearing was called by Committee Chair Rep. Craig Fry, D-Mishawaka, because WellPoint customers buying health coverage on their own will face on average price hike of 21 percent come March 1. Some will see rates spike as much as 34 percent, or, if they have entered a higher age bracket, even higher rates.

Fry and other lawmakers on the committee fired numerous questions at Doug Webber, Indiana's acting insurance commissioner, and at Rob Hillman, president of WellPoint’s Indiana subsidiary, Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield. The tiny committee room in the basement of the Indiana Statehouse was filled to standing-room capacity during the nearly two-hour hearing.

With TV news cameras rolling, Fry forced Hillman to defend those increases in light of WellPoint’s 2010 profits that topped $2.5 billion, not including the sale of a pharmacy business, as well as multimillion-dollar lobbying expenses and what Fry called “enormous salaries” for executives.

“I don’t know how you defend that kind of increase,” Fry said. “I understand you guys are in business to make money. … But people can’t afford your product.”

Hillman did defend the increases, blaming medical innovations for constantly driving up costs. On top of that, he said, increasing numbers of healthy people are dropping health insurance, leaving fewer dollars to cover the medical bills of unhealthy people who must keep coverage. That has forced WellPoint to raise rates even faster, he said.

Hillman downplayed the health insurance industry’s profits and executive pay, saying they represent little more than 2 percent of the premiums. But he agreed with Fry that continuing to raise premiums to keep ahead of rising medical costs puts WellPoint’s business in jeopardy.

“The affordability of health care is the biggest risk for our business,” he said, adding, “I firmly believe we are at a tipping point. We may be back here in six months because this problem is not going away. We are on a very bad path right now.”

Before sparring with Hillman, Fry zeroed in on Webber, particularly when the acting commissioner said the Indiana insurance department does not inquire what percentage of premiums Anthem takes as profit.

“Profits aren’t brought into consideration? How do you set rates if you don’t take everything into consideration?” Fry asked.

Webber said the insurance department verifies that Anthem spends at least 55 percent of premiums on medical care, but does not require an accounting of the other 45 percent.

Webber and his chief deputy, Robyn Crosson, emphasized that the Indiana insurance department hires an independent actuary to review each premium increase requested by Anthem—something that the state of California is only now doing to investigate WellPoint’s 25-percent increase in that state.

But Fry objected that the review is done by only one person—and any pushback against Anthem happens behind closed doors. He would prefer an open hearing.

“Wouldn’t that be appropriate when you’re dealing with people’s money?” Fry asked.

After the hearing, Fry said he plans to insert language that would require an open rate-review hearing into Senate Bill 357, which makes various changes to insurance regulations. He said his committee could consider that amendment as early as Thursday.

Fry said he wants “a process that’s more open, not done in the backroom.”


  • state employee
    I have Anthem as offered through the state. Might this be a conflict of interest to have approving increase while the state has mutiple employees required to accept Athem if they want insurance?
  • Wow, just wow.
    As someone whose individual premium went up 46% for my January renewal, I have been surprisingly calm. Maybe because I am entering a new age bracket (26 years old) and because they just made certain chemotherapies less expensive lowering the co-pay from 20% down to 0%.

    When $10K a month drugs require a $2K co pay, that's pretty hard to come up with when you're sick. So I can understand why the premium increase could be justified.

    BUT, when I read that Anthem is only required to spend 55% of premiums on actual healthcare, my jaw dropped.

    I thought it was supposed to be much, much higher.

Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Looking at the two companies - in spite of their relative size to one another -- Ricker's image is (by all accounts) pretty solid and reputable. Their locations are clean, employees are friendly and the products they offer are reasonably priced. By contrast, BP locations are all over the place and their reputation is poor, especially when you consider this is the same "company" whose disastrous oil spill and their response was nothing short of irresponsible should tell you a lot. The fact you also have people who are experienced in franchising saying their system/strategy is flawed is a good indication that another "spill" has occurred and it's the AM-PM/Ricker's customers/company that are having to deal with it.

  2. Daniel Lilly - Glad to hear about your points and miles. Enjoy Wisconsin and Illinois. You don't care one whit about financial discipline, which is why you will blast the "GOP". Classic liberalism.

  3. Isn't the real reason the terrain? The planners under-estimated the undulating terrain, sink holes, karst features, etc. This portion of the route was flawed from the beginning.

  4. You thought no Indy was bad, how's no fans working out for you? THe IRl No direct competition and still no fans. Hey George Family, spend another billion dollars, that will fix it.

  5. I live downtown Indy and had to be in downtown Chicago for a meeting. In other words, I am the target demographic for this train. It leaves at 6:00-- early but doable. Then I saw it takes 5+ hours. No way. I drove. I'm sure I paid 3 to 5 times as much once you factor in gas, parking, and tolls, but it was reimbursed so not a factor for me. Any business traveler is going to take the option that gets there quickly and reliably... and leisure travelers are going to take the option that has a good schedule and promotional prices (i.e., Megabus). Indy to Chicago is the right distance (too short to fly but takes several hours to drive) that this train could be extremely successful even without subsidies, if they could figure out how to have several frequencies (at least 3x/day) and make the trip in a reasonable amount of time. For those who have never lived on the east coast-- Amtrak is the #1 choice for NY-DC and NY-Boston. They have the Acela service, it runs almost every hour, and it takes you from downtown to downtown. It beats driving and flying hands down. It is too bad that we cannot build something like this in the midwest, at least to connect the bigger cities.