IBJNews

WellPoint to adhere to new rescission rules early

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

WellPoint Inc., after being painted by the Obama administration as the bad boy of a bad industry, now is trying to win gold stars for good behavior.

The Indianapolis-based health insurer announced Tuesday afternoon it will be the first company to adopt stricter standards on canceling policies, as called for in the health reform bill passed in March.

The new law says health insurers can cancel a customer’s policy only in cases of fraud or intentional lying. Currently, health insurers sometimes cancel policies if a customer omits or misconstrues information, even unwittingly.

WellPoint will adopt the stricter standard on May 1—nearly five months ahead of schedule.

The move comes after Obama’s health secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, chastised WellPoint for doing targeted investigations and cancellations on breast cancer patients following such allegations in a Reuters story last week. WellPoint said the story was riddled with errors and was “grossly misleading.”

“There have been a lot of misrepresentations and inaccuracies in recent days that have caused confusion among our members and among the public generally about our policies in this area" WellPoint CEO Angela Braly said in Tuesday’s statement. "We think today’s announcement will go a long way toward bringing greater clarity.”

Last week, WellPoint and its rival UnitedHealthcare said they would immediately start covering children of policyholders until age 26. That provision was scheduled by the new law to take effect at the end of September.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Senator Feinstein acuses Wellpoint's Braly of greed
    The only reason Wellpoint is making these concessions this afternoon is because this morning Congress demanded that Wellpoint cease and desist its recission practices. California Senator Dianne Feinstein expressed outrage. "If a CEO thinks it is okay to deprive women of their health coverage when they become seriously ill with breast cancer, we can't trust them to do the right thing, period. Left to their own devices, companies like WellPoint will throw paying customers to the sharks for the sake of profit." Feinstein called for strong enforcement of the new law so that companies won't find creative ways to continue this unconscionable practice. "We must clearly be vigilant in order to assure that the law has teeth and is heavily enforced," she said. "We can't turn our backs for one minute."WellPoint and two of the nation's other largest insurance companies -- UnitedHealth Group Inc and Assurant Health, part of Assurant Inc -- made at least $300 million by improperly rescinding more than 19,000 policyholders over one five-year period. WellPoint earned a $4.7 billion profit in 2009. Angela Braly, the CEO of WellPoint, received $13.1 million in total compensation in 2009. This was a 51-percent increase in her salary over the prior year.
    The California Senator also called for Congress to take urgent action to close the Rate Hike Loophole that will allow health insurance corporations to dramatically hike premium rates between now and 2014, when health insurance exchanges go online. Wellpoint has frozen rate increases in Indiana, but has jacked them up 39% in California and Colorado. "If there was any doubt about whether corporate greed has anything to do with WellPoint's plans to jack up premium rates on its customers, I think today's Reuters story answers the question definitively," said Feinstein. "It's time for Congress to step in and fix the rate hike loophole in the health insurance reform law. We must put patients before profits, and protect the American people from this kind of unchecked greed."
     

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. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing

ADVERTISEMENT