Claiming the Insurance industry loves this bill is beyond dumb.

[ProSense]

• They spent more than $400 million trying to kill the bill.
  
  
• They will lose their anti-trust exemption.
  
  
• Beginning in 2010, it will be illegal for them to drop customers based on a pre-existing condition, that includes those among the new customers they will gain.
  
  
• They will have to direct a larger percentage of every dollar on care.

If getting more customers was the only thing that mattered, they would have taken up reform before the Democrats took over. They would have passed a bullshit bill when they had the chance. Afterall, people seem to think the Democrats would have accepted anything as reform.

The insurance industry is about to get screwed.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. Any such bill is many parts

Some they like. Some they don't like.

They will seek to expand the former and remove the later.

Insurers would love mandates and no public option. They would hate public option with no mandates.

In general, they are afraid of a public option that works so I agree that they'll fight that tooth and nail.


When Obama voted for the Cheney Energy bill he said it had enough good to outweigh the bad. That does not mean that big oil wasn't salivating over elements of the bill.

[phleshdef]

4. I'm sorry, but thinking that the mandates somehow balances out with the regulations...

...that are about to be imposed on them is nuts. What good does all those customers do you when you are restricted to using 15% of your intake for bonuses, salaries and all that and 85% of it has to be spent out on providing actual care for clients?

[ProSense]

10. Bogus claims.

They had eight years with control of the WH and Congress, and if they wanted to increase the pool of insured they could have done it. They knew health reform was in the pipeline.

Their butts got caught off guard.

[dionysus]

2. they gotta have some excuse to wail.

:shrug:

[tblue]

9. They're like the gun lobby. They oppose any regulation

even if new rules come with things they like. They are getting a cherry on top with the mandates, and I am sure they were behind the scenes heavily lobbying for this. The bill will be a net gain for them, no doubt, but they still will fight any gov't regulation that derails their gravy train.

[Peacetrain]

3. Try half a billion spent by the insurance companies in the last two years

http://www.campaignmoney.org/HMO_insurance_spend_to_kill_reform

People seem to be using their own version of the fact this afternoon, that the insurance companies did not fight this..

[dflprincess]

5. They spent more than $400 million trying to kill real reform and they succeeded.

They won't even have to worry about states developing their own single payer systems or coming up with other solutions to this mess that might cost the insurance companies money.

"They will lose their anti-trust exemption." - There is no guarantee that will be in the final bill.

"Beginning in 2010, it will be illegal for them to drop customers based on a pre-existing condition, that includes those among the new customers they will gain." They will also be gaining a large number of healthy customers who will be forced to buy the shoddy products offered at inflated prices. Please point me to the section of the bill that limits how much they can charge for the policies that cover people with preexisting conditions.

"They will have to direct a larger percentage of every dollar on care." - They'll get around it. Show me the section of the bill that lays out how this will be enforced and what the penalities will be if they don't spend more on care. If it's just fines, they'll see those as just the cost of doing busines like Walmart does with labor law violations.

[ProSense]

7. Nonsense. The best parts of the bill are still there

a public option, not the strongest, but it's there.

[derby378]

12. If it was "public," I'd be able to access it

There are some DUers who claim there is a way I could, and I appreciate their efforts, but if I can't access the current PO, I'm effectively enslaved to my insurance company. The Democratic Party is supposed to oppose slavery, not enable it.

[ProSense]

24. That's what the people who were originally excluded from Social Security said. n/t

[dflprincess]

15. The best part was the amendment allowing states to purse their own solutions, including single payer

That has been removed and with it any hope of trying real reform somewhere in the country.

[ProSense]

25. Really? Single payer trumps ensuring that millions of Americans aren't

denied coverage? Really?

[dflprincess]

31. When you can prove to me that these millions who will suddenly have insurance

will acutally be able to afford access to care then I might agree with you. But this bill, as written, merely reenforces the system we have now. The number of uninsured may decrease but the number of underinsured is going to continue to grow.

As was pointed out in "Sicko", having insurance and getting care are two different things. Single payer would allow everyone access to care and, at the very least, the states should have the right to go that way.

[dave29]

6. The best bit -- they are spending our money to kill our bill. n/t

n/t

[jenmito]

8. It sure is. They wouldn't be trying to kill the bill if they liked it. And Lieberman would be FOR

it instead of threatening to filibuster it.

[Dr Robert]

11. why is it that the Repukes and the Insurance industry can see where the Public Option leads,

but many Democrats have no clue? Are they willfully ignorant or truly incapable of comprehending the bigger picture?

HCR w/ PO is the first step towards a Single Payer system.
It spells Doom for Big Insurance.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

14. I'd love an answer to that question as well.

Any form of a public option sets the death clock for Big Insurance. Even a shitty one - it just sets the clock a little further back.

[uponit7771]

18. Great minds....:-)

[dflprincess]

19. The public option in this bill is being set up as a plan mainly for

high risk, high cost individuals. It is being set up for failure as it will cost too much to maintain.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

21. Just like how Medicare was set up to fail for largely the same reasons, right?

Oh wait... Medicare got expanded over time.

[dflprincess]

23. Insurance and medical costs were no where near what they are now

(even when adjusted between 1964 and 2009 dollars).

We are out of time when it comes to waiting for real reform. People are tired of being pawns of the insurance companies and they're tired of paying premiums and, thanks to big out of pockets, still not being able to afford care. This bill does nothing to change that.

Medicare took only 11 months to get up and running. We're being told that it will be 2013 before the "exhange" that's suppose to spur competition is running. We were told this exchange was needed to "keep them honest" (and if everybody admits they're crooks why are they so anxious to save them?). In the meantime, the insurance companies will continue to jack their rates up - not unlike the credit card compnaies have done since "reform" of that industry was passed.

[ProSense]

27. "Medicare took only 11 months to get up and running." Complete nonsense

1965--Medicare and Medicaid were enacted as Title XVIII and Title XIX of the Social Security Act, extending health coverage to almost all Americans age 65 or over (e.g., those receiving retirement benefits from Social Security or the Railroad Retirement Board), and providing health care services to low-income children deprived of parental support, their caretaker relatives, the elderly, the blind, and individuals with disabilities. Seniors were the population group most likely to be living in poverty; about one-half had health insurance coverage.

1966--Medicare was implemented on July 1, serving more than 19 million individuals. Medicaid funding was available to States starting January 1, 1966; the program was phased-in by States over a several year period.

1967--An Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment (EPSDT) comprehensive health services benefit for all Medicaid children under age 21 was established.

1972--Medicare eligibility was extended to 2 million individuals under age 65 with long-term disabilities and to individuals with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Medicare was given the authority to conduct demonstration programs.

Medicaid eligibility for elderly, blind, and disabled residents of a State could be linked to eligibility for the newly enacted Federal Supplemental Security Income Program (SSI). Eighteen million individuals were covered by Medicaid.

1977--The Health Care Financing Administration was established by Secretary Califano to administer the Medicare and Medicaid Programs.

1980--Coverage of Medicare home health services was broadened. Medicare supplemental insurance, also called Medigap, was brought under Federal oversight.

link

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

32. Facts are... inconvenient. (nt)

[dflprincess]

37. Johnson signed the Medicare act on July 30, 1965

it was implemented on July 1, 1966 serving more than 19 million individuals who were eligible to enroll that day. Yes, it has been modified and expanded through the years to cover more people and some states were slower than others to sign on - but it was running in a shorter period of time before any of the lame ideas in this bill will be. Some of the changes, like permitting the Medicare Advantage scams have not been positive modifications but just another sop to the private insurers.

Because Medicare is funded by taxes, the fact that it covered a more expensive population group did not affect its success the way a more expensive group will affect the "public option" being proposed in the House bill. The House bill sets up a plan that is supposed to compete with with private plans and "keep them honest" (why we should keep doing business with crooks who need to kept honest is another concept that escapes me). The public plan will not receive tax subsides in the way Medicare does. It will receive subsidies for individuals who meet the income requirements but most of those who participate it will be paying all or part of the premium themselves. It is not unreasonable to expect that the premiums for the public option will become unsustainable and then all you insurance company shills can point to it and announce that you were right and "government" health plans don't work.

[uponit7771]

16. Many want everything yesterday. Without price containment via the public obtion their demise

...will be slower but it's still assured that they aren't going to be operating the way they do today.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

22. Home run hitters often strike out the most.

It's the guys who hit a lot of singles and doubles that typically score the most runs.

[uponit7771]

26. GOOD analogy!!!

[uponit7771]

13. They OVERALL revenue will go DOWN or not grow much over 20 yrs

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

17. It's a true logical fallacy.

No one sinks a half a billion dollars and generates a lot of negative press to put on a ruse that you actually hate a bill that you love. It's a true testament to the need for tinfoil hats that some people actually believe this.

[ClarkUSA]

20. They'll have to get rid of coverage caps by Jan. 2010, too. nt

[Cha]

28. Yes, but once they

get a talking point..it's sticks in their craw.

Thanks for perspective on this, PS.

[girl gone mad]

29. No, they did not spend $400 million trying to kill this bill.

They spent $400 million to prevent genuine reform. Their goal was to influence the debate and shape the bill into something industry friendly, and they succeeded.

[ProSense]

30. BS. They spent money urging people to vote against the bill. Period. n/t

[brentspeak]

33. Pro-Shill n/t

[ProSense]

34. Considering where you get your facts, I wouldn't resort to name calling n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

35. Is your insurance employment based?

In what industry or field do you work?

[treestar]

36. +1

If they loved this bill, they could have gotten it through during the Bush Administration. Especially the part under the Repuke congress.

[mdmc]

38. they would love to have nothing change

they don't mind this thing

[ShortnFiery]

39. No, it's accurate. Anyone who favors human life over corporate greed wants this bill OUT!

Better NO bill than one that merely serves up A MANDATE to feed the already bloated Insurance Industry.

It doesn't mean a damn thing to have insurance if you can't afford the premiums.