On Insurance Company Premium Rate Hikes
Posted on Thu Nov 05, 2009 at 05:11:40 PM EST
Tags: health care reform (all tags)
Back in May, before any health care reform legislation was introduced, I wrote about Anthem/Blue Cross's employer rate hike in Colorado based on a law passed in 2007 preventing companies from charging unhealthy groups more than healthy groups. My premium (as a member of an employer healthy group)went up $240. a month.
Today, the Denver Post reports the same. What's more, Anthem is planning on raising employer rates an average of 12.5% next year.
Critics also question why insurance companies still are drawing attention to the 2-year-old law, especially since national reform proposals would ban medical underwriting — the practice of increasing premiums based on claim history.
"The trend at the national level is away from medical underwriting," said Denise de Percin, executive director of the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative. "So you really have to question the reason why they would continue to harp on this at the state level. Maybe the goal is politics, not policy."
[More...]
Colorado's insurance commissioner agrees:
The major reason for rate increases is not HB 1355, but the skyrocketing cost of medical care, said Colorado Insurance Commissioner Marcy Morrison. Critics of the law are using it as "a hammer on the governor" and others responsible for passing it, she said.
From Anthem's letter;
"In June 2007, Governor Bill Ritter signed Colorado House Bill 1355 into law. Simply stated, this bill prevents health care insurers from considering risks such as claims history and health status among employees in determining your premium rates. As a result, at its most basic level, the law shifts a portion of the costs of insuring the relatively unhealthy groups onto the relatively healthy groups."
Does the House bill prevent insurance companies from getting away with this? The Dingell "Manager's Amendment" addresses premium increases.
Such process shall require health insurance issuers to submit a justification for any premium increase prior to implementation of the increase. Such issuers shall prominently post such information on their websites. The Secretary shall ensure the public disclosure of information on such increases and justifications for all health insurance issuers.
The penalty seems to be they could get kicked out of the new insurance exchange. There's also a section on maintaining anti-trust laws on health insurance companies but allowing certain data to be compiled. The remainder of the amendment deals with credits for biofuels. What's that doing in a health care bill amendment? Is Dingell's amendment helpful or sufficient?
| < MTV Denies Building Wall Around Berlin Wall Concert Site | From The Pols Are Pols File > |
