42,000 Minnesotans lost small-groups health coverage in 2009 while HMO profits rose

[Minnesota Raindog]

This is shameful.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/04/20/health-insurance-shift/

St. Paul, Minn. — More than 42,000 Minnesotans lost their small-group health coverage last year, while enrollment in state-sponsored public health plans surged by a nearly equal amount.

The state's HMOs attribute the shifts in health coverage to the bad economy and the rising cost of health care. Despite those factors, managed care organizations recorded an increase in income in 2009, according to two separate reports issued this week.

About 10 percent of small companies with 50 or fewer employees dumped their health coverage last year, the Minnesota Council of Health plans said.

Michele and Marcus Bachmann said no one at the Bachmann & Associates clinic in Lake Elmo lost their health insurance last year because they don't provide any health insurance for their employees.

(ok, that last paragraph was mine)

[dflprincess]

1. Keeping in mind that HMOs are supposed to be non-profit in Minnesota

And they are suppose to put money into reserves (though those reserves have a cap).

I hope the AG's office is still keeping an eye on them and Medica hasn't gone back to giving its sales reps gold golf tees for sales reps or paying for an executive's condo.

[becxx]

2. Oh, but baggage fees are the hot top now

I am not sure why people keep bringing up health insurance and food and jobs when baggage fees are the hot topic now. Those who lost their insurance will be very, very happy to know Amy Klobuchar is looking out for them on baggage fees.

[dodger501]

3. Loving those Free Market solutions to the health crisis

The Free Market resolves everything . . . .

[dflprincess]

4. Funny you should mention that

http://www.startribune.com/business/91666114.html?elr=KArksUUUoDEy3LGDiO7aiU

Does big profit bode ill for UnitedHealth?

Investors worry strong quarter could attract regulators' attention.

By CHEN MAY YEE, Star Tribune

Last update: April 20, 2010 - 9:02 PM

UnitedHealth Group Inc. is living in two worlds. In one, profit is good. In the other, it's bad.

Those worlds collided Tuesday during a conference call with Wall Street analysts in which the nation's largest health insurer by revenue reported first-quarter earnings that surpassed market expectations.

Net income was up 21 percent to $1.19 billion, or $1.03 per share, for the three months ended March 31. Revenue was up 5 percent to $23.19 billion.

UnitedHealth also raised its guidance and now expects 2010 profit of $3.15 to $3.35 per share, up from the $2.90 to $3.10 per share earlier projected.

Among the reasons for the robust performance: UnitedHealth Group gained new members in its Medicare and Medicaid businesses, and overall medical costs turned out lower than expected (no doubt from all those claims they denied)....

..With unemployment still high, UnitedHealth's commercial enrollment fell 4 percent to 24.5 million members. But its public businesses did well, with Medicare and Medicaid enrollment up 11 percent to 7.8 million.

[becxx]

5. UHG's profits are wrong, wrong, wrong for the USA

Unitedhealth Group's profits are wrong, wrong, wrong. I despise that company and can't understand why someone would even taken a job there. I guess the employees must have the good German soldier mentality. I wonder how those people sleep at night.

I'm not a vengeful person but when I think of UHG, I hope there is a hell and that the fires are hot.

[dflprincess]

6. In this economy, if you're out of work, you take a job where you can get one

and you don't give up the one you have unless you have another job to go to.

I get daily alerts from Monster & about 70% of jobs listed are at UHG.

I used to work there and I imagine those on the 8th floor of the Taj Mahal (as the headquarters was called) would be shocked to find out how many of the employees dreamed of a single payer system - and that was 6 years ago.