Healthcare & Government Threats
As most know, late last week, smaller health insurance companies sent out press releases detailing a simple fact – when mandates increase, so will premiums (via WSJ here):
…Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1% and 9% to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators….
To most, this might seem an obvious consequence of the legislation. The economics and logic of these required rate increases are undeniable. If someone, in this case the government through force of law, tells a private business that they must increase their spending, under force of law, some, if not all, of those new expenditures will be passed on to consumers (WSJ continues):
…Weeks before the election, insurance companies began telling state regulators it is those very provisions that are forcing them to increase their rates….
…Aetna, one of the nation’s largest health insurers, said the extra benefits forced it to seek rate increases for new individual plans of 5.4% to 7.4% in California and 5.5% to 6.8% in Nevada…
…Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Oregon said the cost of providing additional benefits under the health law will account on average for 3.4 percentage points of a 17.1% premium rise for a small-employer health plan…
…In Wisconsin and North Carolina, Celtic Insurance Co. says half of the 18% increase it is seeking comes from complying with health-law mandates….
Not only should this seem obvious, but in a free country, any company should be able to set their rates for their services.
This of course assumes you don’t work for the government – then the news is shocking (WSJ continues):
…The White House says insurers are using the law as an excuse to raise rates and predicts that state regulators will block some of the large increases.
“I would have real deep concerns that the kinds of rate increases that you’re quoting… are justified,” said Nancy-Ann DeParle, the White House’s top health official. She said that for insurers, raising rates was “already their modus operandi before the bill” passed. “We believe consumers will see through this,” she said….
Not only shocking – but so wrong that even more force is needed.
Enter the Department of Health and Human Services threatening private business, for making private decisions, solely because those decisions disagree with the government’s predictions (via HHS website – bold added):
It has come to my attention that several health insurer carriers are sending letters to their enrollees falsely blaming premium increases for 2011 on the patient protections in the Affordable Care Act. I urge you to inform your members that there will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases….
…We estimate that that the effect will be no more than one to two percent….
…Given the importance of the new protections and the facts about their impact on costs, I ask for your help in stopping misinformation and scare tactics about the Affordable Care Act. Moreover, I want AHIP’s members to be put on notice: the Administration, in partnership with states, will not tolerate unjustified rate hikes in the name of consumer protections….
Think carefully about some of these words/phrases used by government officials against private businesses in a free country: zero tolerance, misinformation, not tolerate, unjustified….all for raising theirs rates at a greater rate than the government assumed.
Maybe it’s just me, but when the government threatens people for fishy emails, then moves forward to threaten private business for deciding what to charge for their services…. well, it certainly doesn’t appear to be a free society.
As Thomas Jefferson stated so many years ago:
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
September 13, 2010
|
Posted by Michael S. Langston
Categories:
Tags:

