Obamacare: Cozy Govt-Insurance Company Alliance, Expectation Of Govt Bailout
Jeffrey L. Anderson writes at The Weekly Standard:
Publicly, President Obama loves to demonize insurance companies. But behind the scenes, Big Government and Big Insurance maintain a cozy alliance that the Obama administration actively nourishes, often at taxpayer expense. Indeed, as emails recently obtained by the House Oversight Committee show, Big Government and Big Insurance have worked together to promote Obamacare. They've also worked together to make sure taxpayers will help bail out insurance companies who lose money selling insurance under Obamacare -- that is, unless Republicans stop this from happening....What's more, the bailout will be big. The Oversight Committee found that, while insurers expected that only one-sixth of their exchange enrollment would come from people over 55 years of age, fully one-quarter of their actual enrollees fit that category. Relatedly, the report finds that insurers and insurance co-ops now expect a third more money from the risk-corridor bailout than they did on October 1, 2013. That bailout, Oversight reports, is now likely to be in the ballpark of $1 billion. To put that into perspective, the year before Obama took office, the ten largest health insurers' total profits were only $8 billion -- combined.
The Oversight report adds, "It is impossible to know how much of the increase in the industries' expectation for the size of the bailouts is the result of a less healthy exchange population than originally anticipated and how much of the increase is from the Administration's rule changes to make the bailouts more generous; however, both factors are likely significant." Moreover, both relate to Obama's lawless suspension of the portion of the legislation that was causing him the most political fallout.
So, what do Americans think of bailing out insurance companies on their own dime? Recent polling by McLaughlin & Associates, commissioned by the 2017 Project, asked, "If private insurance companies lose money selling health insurance under Obamacare, should taxpayers help cover their losses?" By a tally of 81 to 10 percent, respondents rejected that notion.
Representatives Leonard Lance and Bill Cassidy have introduced a bill to repeal Obamacare's insurer bailout. Passing it would be a win for those opposed to Obamacare, cronyism, and corporate welfare. It would also be a win for those supportive of Main Street Americans, the rule of law, and repeal.
If the House does indeed pass such legislation, one thing seems certain -- senior White House officials will convene with their insurance allies to decide their next move.
via @instapundit
Ah, fun times. Everyone here who saw this coming raise your hands... that's what I thought. You can put your hands down now. When you give people incentives to slack, and disincentives to not slack, we all know what happens.
I'm noticing an interesting phenomenon. I first heard of this in the context of the ongoing impeachment chatter, but it's starting to happen in other areas: Democrats in Congress saying, "Republicans, save us from ourselves!" They want the Republicans to man up and be the adults in the room and clean up all these messes, and then they want to be able to go back and whine to their constitutients about same. Of course, the Republicans aren't going to do that because (1) they can't get themeslves organized well enough, and (2) on a lot of these matters, they aren't much more adult than the Democrats are.
Cousin Dave at July 30, 2014 7:31 AM
>
The W/H will call on Harry Reid not to bring the bill to the Senate for a vote so that it will not become law. Then the W/H will blame the Republicans for doing nothing. This is what the W/H has been doing for 2 years. Nothing new here, folks.
Nick at July 30, 2014 8:03 AM
The two main problems facing insurance companies are parts of the ObamaCare law itself -- price caps and the requirement that the companies insure anyone who asks, regardless of pre-existing conditions.
Under those circumstances it is entirely reasonable for the companies to expect that the politicians who created the problems will pay the resulting costs. It's just too bad that those politicians won't be doing so out of their own personal pockets.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm against the bailout. But if it's denied, then the rules which created the problems need to be repealed before they put the entire insurance industry out of business.
jdgalt at July 30, 2014 9:05 AM
Don't get me wrong -- I'm against the bailout. But if it's denied, then the rules which created the problems need to be repealed before they put the entire insurance industry out of business.
Posted by: jdgalt at July 30, 2014 9:05 AM
I don't see that happening. I believe the premiums and the deductibles are high enough for those with Obamacare policies,that there is little chance of the insurance companies suffering losses that would put them under.
Remember only 16 states have set up their own exchanges making their citizens eligible for the subsidized Obamacare policies. Everyone else, pays full fare.
The bigger threats are the new enrollees In Medicaid, and Medicare, as the funding for those programs were cut to providing funding for Obamacare.
Those programs will break those hospitals and doctors depending on them, which will mainly be the elder care industries.
People who are insured are already paying a great deal more, for a whole lot less coverage.
Half the medical industry will be concierge within ten years, and there wont be many new doctors in podiatry, and dermatology. The market will dry up, for many things that are nice to have, on someone else's dime, but unnecessary when you know it is coming out of your own pocket.
Isab at July 30, 2014 10:52 AM
Blue Cross, Blue Shield has over 6000 employees in just one building in Chicago. None of them have anything to do with actually treating you, but they'll get paid – and they will all vote for the system that guarantees that paycheck.
Radwaste at July 30, 2014 2:00 PM
Kaiser is hemorrhaging employees, at least in my region. They just laid off 95 employees in the billing department that does hospital payments today. They've laid off around 700 employees since last September because they are trying to cut their costs down to a bare minimum citing profit losses under the new insurance rules. I got caught up in the cuts months ago and because other area hospitals are also reducing and shuffling staff it's proving exceptionally difficult to find a new healthcare job. Fortunately, I'm lucky enough to be able to work for my husband's business to maintain my income while I continue to look for another job. Others I worked with that were cut have not been so lucky. They've run out of unemployment and have been forced into part-time low-wage retail and restaurant work in the meantime.
BunnyGirl at July 31, 2014 12:29 AM
"They've laid off around 700 employees since last September because they are trying to cut their costs down to a bare minimum citing profit losses under the new insurance rules. "
This cuts to the heart of what Obamacare really is: a rationing scheme. Why? Becuase the Left sincerely believes that you, the American middle class, do not deserve the standard of living that you enjoy, and they are determined to lower it. By any means necessary.
Cousin Dave at July 31, 2014 6:48 AM
Leave a comment