Archive for the ‘michigan health insurance’ Category

« Older Entries

States Resisting Health Insurance Overhaul

Wednesday, April 20th, 2011

ARIZONA:

A bill that would require Arizona health insurance carriers to provide written claim reports to plan sponsors up to twice a year, upon request, has been favorably amended in the House to make compliance less onerous. Modeled after a Texas law enacted in 2007, the bill originally required the reports to be provided within 30 days of a request. The type of information that can be requested includes aggregate claims and premium by month, the number of employees covered and pending claims.

Republican-sponsored legislation that would permit cross-border sales of individual health insurance remains in play despite strong opposition by the business community and consumer advocates. The bill would require that out-of-state insurers be subject to the jurisdiction of another state’s department of insurance; maintain reserves not less than the amount required in Arizona; register with the Arizona Department of Insurance (DOI); and that the coverage offered meet, at a minimum, the benefit requirements of the state where the company holds a certificate. The DOI would have authority to revoke the foreign insurer’s registration for reasons that include: inadequate reserves; failure to comply with the unfair practices and fraud statute; and violation of the prompt-pay law. The bill was amended in the House and now goes back to the Senate.

COLORADO:

As the deadline for filing legislation approaches, the Division of Colorado health Insurance released drafts of two bills aimed at bringing the state’s preventive coverage and adverse determination appeal requirements into conformity with the federal health reform law. Health insurers will have a small window of opportunity to provide comments before the bills are formally introduced. Also, a bill was filed to reclassify any product containing pseudoephedrine or ephedrine as a prescription drug to help prevent access to the drug by people illegally manufacturing methamphetamines. The bill has raised strong concerns because it would require a prescription for frequently used allergy medicines and drastically increase medical costs. The sponsor has introduced a joint memorial to Congress requesting the federal government address the issue.

CONNECTICUT:

The fiscal note for the Connecticut health insurance Healthcare Partnership bill, which would allow voluntary municipal and small employer pooling with the state employees’ health plan, has been released and indicates the legislation would be costly to the State. Known costs (those concerning the administration of the program) would be hundreds of thousands of dollars. Other costs that could not be precisely determined include those associated with the public option (similar to the SustiNet legislation but on a much smaller scale) and lost tax revenue from the premium tax.

In other action, the Judiciary Committee passed the Cooperative Health Care Agreements bill out of committee. The legislation would permit health care providers to enter into cooperative arrangements that would not be subject to certain antitrust laws, after approval by the Attorney General. In past years, health insurance plans have successfully argued against action on the bill despite support from the committee’s membership, including both Democrats and Republicans. However, this year the new Chairs have brought the bill forward for a vote. It will now go to the House floor where it will assessed for a fiscal note. The bill still has a long road to travel, including through the Insurance Committee.

FLORIDA and GEORGIA:

The Florida Office of Insurance Regulation and Georgia Department of Insurance have both asked health plans for additional information to help support their requests to HHS for a waiver from MLR regulations under ACA. The requests were prompted by an initial response from HHS asking for the additional information.

GEORGIA:

A bill that includes a prompt-pay provision that would
require third-party administrators to pay for service claims in the same timely fashion as primary insurers, or face penalties, has been passed by both chambers. The bill is opposed by the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, as it would erode current employer protections under the federal Employee Retirement Security Income Act (ERISA). The Georgia Chamber will ask Governor Deal to veto this legislation.

MARYLAND:

Governor Martin O’Malley signed several bills into law last week that will impact Aetna insurance and its customers. The Health Benefit Exchange Act of 2011 establishes the Maryland Health Benefit Exchange as a public corporation and an independent unit of state government. The law sets the purposes, powers and duties of the insurance exchange, establishing the Board of Trustees and providing for the qualifications, appointments, terms, and removal of members of the Board. It requires the board to appoint an executive director of the Maryland health insurance exchange, with the approval of the Governor, and determine the executive director’s compensation. The effective date is June 1, 2011. Another law alters the circumstances under which a person has the right to a hearing and to an appeal from an action of the Maryland Insurance Commissioner. The law provides that provisions of federal law apply to specified health insurance coverage issued or delivered by insurers, non-profit health service plans, and HMOs; authorizing the Commissioner to enforce specified provisions of law. The effective date is July 1, 2011.

MICHIGAN:

Newly elected Governor Rick Snyder continues to push for a 1 percent tax on all Michigan health insurance claims, which would require insurers and third-party administrators to pay $400 million in order to generate $1.2 billion in revenue for Medicaid. The tax would replace the existing 6 percent tax on all products among the 14 Medicaid HMOs. The $400 million tax would trigger $800 million in matching funds from the federal government, thereby generating $1.2 billion in total. Should the tax be passed, the Governor promised no cuts to Medicaid reimbursement rates, services or eligibility. The claims tax is the same type being phased out in Maine that was used to fund the Dirigo Health Plan.

MISSOURI:

The attorney general, a Democrat, broke with his party last week and urged a federal judge to invalidate the central provision of the new Missouri health insurance law. The filing of the brief by Attorney General Chris Koster, a onetime Republican state legislator who switched parties in 2007, underscores ACA’s political tenuousness in a critical Midwestern swing state. Koster’s action followed months of pressure from state Republicans that he join attorneys general from other states who are challenging the constitutionality of the law. Instead, Mr. Koster chose to file a “friend of the court” brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. In Missouri, a ballot referendum aimed at nullifying the law was approved by nearly three to one last year, and the legislature recently passed resolutions urging Koster to join the legal challenges. In a letter to the Republican leaders of the legislature announcing his decision to oppose the law, Koster acknowledged that the legislative resolutions, though nonbinding, were impactful as they give voice to the political will of state residents. His central argument echoed those made by plaintiffs in a number of the lawsuits.

NORTH CAROLINA:

Legislation was introduced last week prohibiting most favored nation clauses in North Carolina health insurance contracts. The Insurance Committee in the House has already held one hearing on the bill.

OKLAHOMA:

Governor Mary Fallin last week joined other state leaders in announcing that Oklahoma will establish an Oklahoma Health Insurance Private Enterprise Network to prevent the establishment of a federal health care exchange in Oklahoma. To address concerns expressed by some, state leaders added specific safeguards into legislation to prevent the implementation of a federal health care exchange, while creating an Oklahoma-based health insurance network.  The Health Insurance Private Enterprise Network, based on a concept by the conservative Heritage Foundation and legislation passed by the legislature in 2009, would increase access to portable, private, affordable health insurance plans through a market-based network featuring competition and offering choice to consumers. The network would be governed by a board made up mostly of private sector members and chaired by the Insurance Commissioner.  The network would be funded through state or private resources. The state will not accept the federal $54 million Early Innovator Grant. The legislation is expected to be amended onto a pending bill and make its way through the legislative process. which is scheduled to end May 27, 2011.

TEXAS:

A bill designed to squeeze savings out of social programs won unanimous approval from a Senate budget subpanel last week. The bill includes about 10 ideas for greater economies – primarily in Medicaid but some in food stamps and the Children’s Texas Health Insurance Program. The biggest single savings — $290 million over the next two years — would come from eliminating a South Texas “island” of fee-for-service payments under Medicaid. Since 2003, Cameron, Hidalgo and Maverick counties have been exempt from the managed care trend at work elsewhere in Texas. The bill also would save $51 million by carving prescription drugs into Texas Medicaid managed care programs and requiring most Medicaid patients to use medicines on a state preferred drug list; save $15.9 million by moving children from the State Kids Insurance Program to the Children’s Health Insurance Program; and save $28 million by requiring Texans with disabilities who receive in-home attendant care services to use a Medicaid state program first at a lower cost to the state. The measure now heads to the full Senate Finance Committee, which is crafting its version of the much-reduced budget for 2012-13.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in HHS, MLR, aetna health insurance, affordable health insurance, arizona health insurance, colorado health insurance, connecticut health insurance, florida health insurance, georgia health insurance, health care overhaul, health insurance exchange, health insurance plans, individual health insurance, maryland health insurance, michigan health insurance, missouri health insurance, north carolina health insurance, oklahoma health insurance, texas health insurance | No Comments »

Very Busy Week In Individual Health Insurance Reform

Tuesday, March 1st, 2011

If you’re keeping score, three federal judges have now ruled in favor of the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) while two have ruled against it. The latest to weigh in was a federal judge in the District of Columbia who last week upheld the constitutionality of the health reform law. The decision reinforces the divided opinion the lower courts have toward the law, which is expected to wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court for a final decision sometime in the next year or two. Predicting an outcome, many analysts agree, will not be easy.

Federal
Group customers offering Medicare Advantage and prescription drug coverage got some good news from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services last week. Last November, CMS announced that group customers would no longer be allowed to offer a Medicare Advantage-only plan alongside a stand-alone prescription drug plan and that as of January 2012 the customer would have to offer an integrated Medicare Advantage-Prescription Drug Plan (MA-PDP). This set off a scramble to get ready for 2012, which would have been a very difficult, if not impossible, timeframe. Aetna health insurance began working with employers and trade groups to reverse or delay the CMS rule. Last week, CMS issued a favorable ruling to suspend indefinitely its November 2010 decision and not require an MA-PDP as the employer’s only option.

There were two important court developments last week related to health care reform and the constitutionality of the PPACA’s individual health insurance mandate, with more to come in the next week or two. First, a federal judge in Florida two weeks ago invalidated the mandate, striking down the whole statute with a declaratory judgment but stopping short of issuing an injunction directing the conduct of the parties. At the same time he said the declaratory judgment was the “functional equivalent” of an injunction.  The plaintiffs (many of the states) have publicly stated that the law no longer applies to them while the defendant (the federal government) has stated that nothing changes until appellate review is complete.  Last week, the Florida judge ordered legal briefs on this issue and is expected to rule shortly on the impact of his prior ruling on the parties involved.  Second, early last week, as expected, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia upheld the constitutionality of the PPACA’s individual mandate, making it the third court to so rule. But the score is 3-2, and this is a best of seven series that won’t be settled before at least one Circuit Court decision and an essential Supreme Court opinion are rendered. Both could be well down the jurisprudential road.

States
A California health insurance bill that would bring state tax law into conformity with new federal tax rules governing the health coverage of adult children passed the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee by a unanimous vote last week. This conformity is important to employers, plans, and families because it exempts employee contributions toward covering certain adult children from state personal income taxes. It would also reduce a potential administrative burden for employers. Aetna insurance worked with its trade associations and joined a diverse group of interested parties, including labor, to help achieve a bipartisan outcome. The bill is expected to be fast-tracked and may be heard in Assembly Appropriations in the coming weeks.

In Colorado health insurance the newly released 2010 Annual Health Insurance Report of the Commissioner of Insurance contains a wealth of information — much of it collected from the insurance industry for 2009 — about the cost of health insurance and the factors that drive individual and group premiums in the state. The report notes that an estimated 15.7 percent of Coloradans had no health insurance in 2010, which is a slight improvement over 2009. More than 61 percent of Coloradans were covered by either commercial health insurance or a self-insured employer plan, compared to 54 percent in other states nationwide. Roughly 84 percent of premiums collected in 2009 by carriers went directly to the cost of providing health care services; 13.87 percent of premiums was used for administrative expenses and producer commissions. Not all coverage is regulated by the state — just over 40 percent of Coloradans had coverage regulated by the division of Insurance.

The Colorado Trust, a private grant making foundation, has issued a brief called The Economic Impact of Health Reform in Colorado that projects, as a result of national health care reform, insurance premiums will be nearly $2,000 less per year for individuals and nearly $4,000 less for family coverage by 2019. The projections are in part due to slower health care cost growth. Indeed, costs are expected to grow 5.5 percent to 17 percent less in Colorado by 2019 than without reform. Even after accounting for the costs of financing health care reform, this research projects that the state’s economic output will be nearly 1 percent more in 2019 than without reform, and 19,000 new jobs would be added as a result of coverage expansion.

The Connecticut Health Insurance Exchange Planning Committee held its first meeting under the new Administration of Governor Malloy last week.  Jeannette DeJesus, Department of Public Health Deputy Commissioner and the Governor’s Special Advisor on Health Care Reform led the meeting and stated that Senator Crisco’s insurance exchange legislation is the Administration’s proposal, based largely on the NAIC model act. Speaker Chris Donovan also has introduced an exchange bill in the House. Both proposals call for the establishment of a quasi public governing structure but differ on some timelines and board representation. DeJesus said the Administration would work with the House and solicit input form residents and stakeholders around the state to resolve the differences. Passage of a consensus bill is critical to the state’s ability to access Level II federal funding by June 30th. If legislation is not passed, DeJesus said that Connecticut will fall behind in its planning process. The state recently was awarded a $35.6 million federal grant aimed at helping New England states develop a state-of-the-art, online gateway to health insurance options. While Connecticut and other New England states are directly participating, the project is centered at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center in Worcester and the Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services, supported by the non-profit New England States Consortium Systems Organization. The first meeting of that group will be in March.

Illinois health insurance advocate Governor Pat Quinn signed into law an Aetna-sponsored piece of legislation relating to insurer payments to certain non-participating providers. The bill applies to individual or group accident and health insurance carriers. Effective on June 1, 2011, when an enrollee utilizes a network hospital or ambulatory surgery center and an in-network provider is unavailable for radiology, anesthesiology, pathology, neonatology or emergency department services, the carrier is to ensure that the enrollee shall not incur greater out-of-pocket costs than for participating providers. The enrollee cannot be balance billed by the provider past the insurers’ in-network rate for these non-participating provider services. In addition, the insurer may pay the billed amount or attempt to negotiate the reimbursement with the out-of-network provider. In the event that the insurer and physician cannot agree on a reimbursement amount, either party can initiate binding arbitration within 30 days of receipt of an explanation of medical benefit. The bill is a major victory for consumers.

Kansas health insurance as a result of budget shortfalls, greater political attention is being paid to the significant cost of state Medicaid programs, and Gov. Sam Brownback has said he wants to get rid of the fee-for-service model. The governor has made redesigning Medicaid a priority in his proposed budget, Dispensing with the fee-for-service model would mean using marketplace tools, such as pharmacy benefit managers, to negotiate lower dispensing rates at pharmacies and communicate with physicians about generics. The Kansas Medicaid program could save $62 million in the next decade by using pharmacy benefit managers and other market-based tools, according to a recent study by The Lewin Group. Missouri could save $282 million. Bryan O’Neal, the assistant director of pharmacy at The Kansas Hospital, recently testified that the real opportunity for savings is getting clinical data and cost of medications in front of doctors at the time of prescribing. He recommended using electronic prescription systems, which allow doctors to see patients’ current medications and drug allergies as well as cost and clinical data. More than 500 pharmacies and 2,400 clinicians in Kansas use e-prescribing systems. But some have said legislation working its way through the Kansas and Missouri Senates could undermine the states’ e-prescribing systems by limiting information and discouraging physicians from using them. The bills would establish a separate set of standards for Medicaid and prohibit the use of “intervening parties” or pharmacy benefit managers. The Kansas bill came under fire during a Feb. 10 committee hearing. The lone proponent of the bill at the hearing was a pharmacy representative.

Michigan health insurance In his first budget, Governor Rick Snyder has proposed that the state’s current HMO-use tax on Medicaid plans be replaced by a 1 percent assessment on paid health claims to raise approximately $400 million. The paid claims would be an obligation on insured and self-insured entities. Details regarding this budget proposal, including operational issues and effective date, are unclear at this time. But the  Michigan budget is predicated on the implementation of this provision. If it fails, then the remaining options will be reductions in Medicaid, largely in provider rates and health plan premiums.

A Missouri health insurance bill that would create a health insurance exchange has been introduced by Representative Chris Molendorp, a Republican and chair of the House Insurance Committee. Despite input from a wide range of stakeholders, the complex bill is not likely to sail through the legislative process quickly or easily. It would 1) establish a health benefit exchange to facilitate the purchase and sale of qualified health plans and qualified dental plans in the individual market, and 2) provide for the establishment of a small business health options program to assist qualified small employers in facilitating the enrollment of their employees in qualified health and dental plans.  The bill would still allow for sales of plans outside the exchange. The exchange would be funded by assessments or user fees charged to health carriers and health benefit plans. The bill would establish the exchange as a quasi-governmental agency within the Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registration (DIFP) and under the direction of a 13-member board of trustees. The governor would appoint five members of the board, including a member from a licensed health insurance carrier. The exchange would also require each health carrier seeking certification as a qualified health plan to submit a justification for any premium increase before implementing that increase. Premium rates and contract language would have to be approved by the director of DIFP. The bill would exempt individuals from the federal PPACA mandate if there is no affordable qualified health plan available through the exchange or the individual’s employer. We expect the bill will be heard in Committee this week, after which drafting and negotiations will continue.

Two North Carolina health insurance exchange bills were filed last week. The bill that will likely move closely mirrors the National Association of Insurance Commissioner model legislation and is expected to be passed as a placeholder for legislation to come in 2012.

The Tennessee health insurance Department of Commerce and Insurance announced its legislative package last week, and it included a rate review bill. The bill is broadly written and gives the Commissioner authority to deny any rebates when the solvency of the company is in question.

The Department of Texas Health Insurance announced last week that it is in the process of reviewing and preparing for implementation of the PPACA MLR and rate review rules. They have invited stakeholders to participate in an informal work session on March 2 to obtain input on these topics. Additionally, since insurance carriers are not required to file rates for small group coverage in Texas, Department staff members are seeking input regarding the best and most efficient method of obtaining premium rate information for the small group market.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in aetna health insurance, california health insurance, colorado health insurance, connecticut health insurance, health insurance exchange, hmo, illinois health insurance, individual health insurance mandate, kansas health insurance, michigan health insurance, missouri health insurance, north carolina health insurance, qualified health insurance plans, tennessee health insurance, texas health insurance | No Comments »

Health Insurance Updates July

Friday, July 16th, 2010

Florida health insurance: Attorney General Bill McCollum and Secretary Tom Arnold of the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration have submitted a formal request for a waiver from the federal government that, if granted, would launch a Florida pilot program for enhanced Medicaid fraud enforcement.

Illinois health insurance: Last week Governor Pat Quinn signed the package of budget proposals passed by lawmakers in May, leaving Illinois with one of the largest budget deficits in the country.

Michigan health insurance: Priority Health and the Physicians Health Plan of Mid-Michigan, both non-profit insurers and subsidiaries of large hospital systems, have applied to sell coverage to new Patient Protection and Affordable Choices Act (PPACA) high-risk pool enrollees.

Missouri health insurance: Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder has filed a legal challenge against the recently enacted federal health care reform law.

Pennsylvania health insurance: The Insurance Department is planning to file an application with HHS for a $1 million grant to buttress its rate review efforts.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in florida health insurance, health insurance, illinois health insurance, michigan health insurance, missouri health insurance, pennsylvania health insurance | No Comments »

Health Insurance Reform State High Risk Pools

Friday, May 7th, 2010

In the new health insurance reform law the states are permitted to create their own high risk pools, expand existing pools, or allow the federal government to create and administer the pools for them.

The following states will operate their own pools:
Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and District of Columbia.

The following states will allow the federal government to create and manage the pools:
Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wyoming.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in alabama health insurance, arizona health insurance, arkansas health insurance, california health insurance, colorado health insurance, connecticut health insurance, delaware health insurance, florida health insurance, georgia health insurance, health care overhaul, health care reform, health insurance reform, high risk pool, illinois health insurance, indiana health insurance, iowa health insurance, kansas health insurance, kentucky health insurance, louisiana health insurance, maryland health insurance, michigan health insurance, mississippi health insurance, missouri health insurance, nebraska health insurance, nevada health insurance, new mexico health insurance, north carolina health insurance, ohio health insurance, oklahoma health insurance, pennsylvania health insurance, south carolina health insurance, tennessee health insurance, texas health insurance, virginia health insurance, wisconsin health insurance | No Comments »

This Week In Health Care Reform

Friday, April 16th, 2010

As lawmakers returned to Washington this week, Republicans affirmed their commitment to repealing the health care reform legislation, while Democrats continued to campaign on the health care reform law’s merits. Meanwhile, President Obama stepped up his efforts to energize his core supporters by capitalizing on health care reform.

Health Care Reform

New Health Care Reform Law Means Tax Increase for Middle Class: According to a report recently received by congressional staffers, the new health care reform law will result in higher taxes for approximately 14.7 million middle class Americans. Taxpayers can currently deduct medical expenses in excess of 7.5 percent of their adjusted gross income (AGI). Starting in 2013, most taxpayers will only be able to deduct expenses greater than 10 percent of AGI. By limiting the medical expense deduction – a provision widely used by taxpayers who either have a serious illness or are older – the new law is expected to save billions of dollars. However, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, those taxpayers earning less than $200,000 a year will pay roughly $3.9 billion more in taxes in 2019 alone because of the new limits for this deduction.

Members of Congress Baffled by Health Care Reform Provisions: According to the Congressional Research Service, the new health care reform law may have serious unintended consequences for members of Congress and their employees. Due to ambiguous and confusing language, members of Congress and their staff members may lose access to the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, effective immediately. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said lawmakers were in the same boat as many Americans, trying to figure out what the new law meant for them. Congressman Chaffetz asked, “If members of Congress cannot explain how it’s going to work for them and their staff, how will they explain it to the rest of America?”

Additional Activities
Massachusetts Court Rejects Bid to Increase Premiums: Last month, insurance executives in Massachusetts attempted to increase their companies’ premiums by as much as 32 percent, citing the expected rise in medical costs associated with insuring individuals and small group customers in Massachusetts. Insurance Commissioner Joseph Murphy rejected the proposals, citing the increases as “excessive.” As a result, representatives from six of the insurance companies sued, claiming the state does not have the authority to cap premiums. On Monday, a Superior Court Judge in Suffolk County ruled against the insurance providers on procedural grounds for not exhausting all administrative remedies within the Department of Insurance before seeking legal intervention.

Unemployment Benefits Extended Again: On Monday, Senate Democrats advanced a measure temporarily extending the unemployment benefits that expired during the recent two-week congressional recess. Democrats achieved cloture (the only formal procedure that Senate rules provide for breaking a filibuster) with 4 key Republican votes in the Senate. The $9.2 billion bill would extend long-term unemployment benefits along with COBRA health care subsidies for unemployed Americans. It would also extend an annual increase in payments to doctors who treat Medicare patients. The unemployment benefits and health care subsidies will continue until May 5, while the other changes will expire on April 30.

The Senate’s action late Monday set the stage for a final vote on the legislation. On Thursday evening, the bill passed 59-38 , and the measure was sent back to the House, which was expected to vote and send it to President Obama for his signature.

Another State Joins Lawsuit Against Health Care Reform Bill: This week, Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue appointed a special assistant attorney general to lead the state’s challenge against the health care reform law. Georgia joins 18 other states in alleging that the new law infringes on Americans’ Constitutional rights by mandating that individuals  purchase health care coverage or pay a penalty. Frank Jones, the state’s pro bono special assistant attorney general, will represent the State of Georgia and join the multiparty lawsuit filed on March 23 in a federal court in Florida. Other states in the suit include Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington.

Insurance Commissioner Won’t Comply with Law: Also in Georgia, Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine refused a request from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to create a pool for high risk insurance plans. His decision to opt out of creating a high risk pool will not affect the cost of insurance for any patients. However, the federal government, instead of the state, will oversee the distribution of certain federal health care funds in Georgia health insurance to ensure that high risk patients receive subsidized premiums on health insurance.

Chairman Waxman Cancels Hearing: House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) issued a statement on Wednesday cancelling a hearing called to listen to concerns from major corporations about how they will be impacted by the health care reform bill. Over the past few weeks, several company executives contacted Chairman Waxman and expressed their feelings that the new law may ease their costs if it is implemented properly. Companies like AT&T, Verizon and Caterpillar made news last month when they informed investors they would need to take billions of dollars in write-downs because of changes in how health care subsidies will be taxed.

Public Opinion
Polls this week show that the number of Americans favoring repeal of the health care reform law continues to rise following the law’s enactment. At the same time, President Obama’s job approval ratings have slipped since passage of health care reform.

More Americans Strongly Favor Repeal: In a recent Rasmussen report, 58 percent of Americans – up 4 points from last week – support repealing the new health care reform law. Further, 52 percent of likely voters continue to feel the legislation is bad for the country.

Similar results were found in a new study conducted by Indiana University. Researchers at the Center for Health Policy and Professionalism Research found that 58 percent of Americans are in favor of repealing the health care legislation.

Obama’s Approval Ratings Slip: In a recent AP/Gfk poll, 52 percent of Americans said they disapprove of the way President Obama is handling health care reform, up 6 points since last month. At the same time, 50 percent disapprove of his performance overall, which is up from 46 percent just a month ago.

Looking Ahead
As lawmakers shift their attention to debating financial reform and climate change legislation, President Obama continues to travel the country to discuss with Americans the details of the new health care reform legislation.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in alabama health insurance, arizona health insurance, cobra, colorado health insurance, florida health insurance, georgia health insurance, health care overhaul, health care reform, indiana health insurance, individual health insurance mandate, louisiana health insurance, michigan health insurance, mississippi health insurance, nebraska health insurance, nevada health insurance, obama care, pennsylvania health insurance, south carolina health insurance, texas health insurance, unemployment | No Comments »

This Week In Health Care Reform

Friday, April 2nd, 2010

President Obama finalized his health care reform package this week, signing into law the package of fixes approved by the House late last week. While some of the new provisions won’t take effect until 2014, some will be phased in beginning this year.

Health Care Reform
President Obama Signs Final Health Care Bill into Law:  On Tuesday, President Obama signed into law the package of changes to the newly enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Approved over unanimous Republican opposition in both chambers of Congress, this reconciliation bill increases the overall cost of the health care reform legislation by $65 billion, bringing the new total to $940 billion over the next 10 years.

What Does This Health Care Reform Legislation Mean: The biggest changes to the nation’s health insurance system will not take effect until 2014. Some of the changes include: the creation of insurance marketplaces called “exchanges” where people can shop for insurance; rules requiring insurers to accept all applicants, including those with pre-existing conditions; and an expansion of state Medicaid programs. Some additional provisions will become effective immediately while others will kick in later this year.

These are some of the features of the new health care overhaul bill passed through the reconciliation process and slated to begin to take effect in 2010:

  • For new sales and subscribers who change policies after March 23, 2010, insurance companies will be required to make additional changes beginning in approximately 6 months, such as removing any member cost sharing for “preventive” benefits (as defined by the legislation). The renewal product requirements beginning for plan years 6 months after enactment include:
  • Coverage for dependents up to age 26;
  • Removal of limits on lifetime maximum benefits;
  • Temporary federal high-risk pools; and
  • Tax credits for small group employers.

Health Care Reform Impacts on Premiums: There are concerns that the new taxes on health insurance will likely increase premiums. Members of the news media report that under the health care overhaul , young adults who buy their own individual health insurance will carry a heavier burden of the medical costs of older Americans. This is expected to raise insurance premiums for young people when the plan takes full effect in 2014.

Additional Activities
Several Companies Push to Repeal Provision of Health Care Law: The American Benefits Council, an association representing hundreds of large corporations, urged President Obama and Congressional Democrats to repeal a provision in the health care bill that reduces the tax deductions allowed to companies that provide drug coverage for their retired employees. As a result of this impending provision, companies like AT&T, Caterpillar, Prudential, Deere Co. and 3M have all announced substantial charges against their first-quarter earnings in order to comply with federal accounting rules.

Insurers Will Comply With Law Regarding Children’s Coverage: This past week, despite vague language in the new health care law regarding coverage of children with pre-existing conditions, insurance companies assured HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius that they await clarification and will comply with the law, effective later this year.

Indiana health insurance Joins States’ Lawsuit Against Health Care Bill: In response to the new health care reform legislation, the Attorneys General of several states across the country filed lawsuits arguing against the constitutionality of requiring Americans to purchase health insurance. This week, the state of Indiana joined 13 others in a lawsuit filed last week in a Florida federal court. The 14 states – Indiana, Florida, Alabama, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington – will become joint plaintiffs in the suit and split the costs of the legal challenge.

Doctors Group Files Lawsuit to Repeal Health Care Legislation: The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Social Security Administration Commissioner Michael Astrue. Attorneys for the group argue that the insurance mandate is unconstitutional. They also argued against the constitutionality of other provisions saying, “If the bill goes unchallenged, then it spells the end of freedom in medicine as we know it.”

Public Opinion
More Americans Disapprove of President’s Handling of Health Care: In a recent CNN poll, 54 percent of Americans said they disapprove of the way President Obama is handling health care reform, while 45 percent approve. In addition, 56 percent of respondents feel the Democrats’ health care legislation creates too much government involvement in the nation’s health care system.

Americans Unhappy over Health Care Reform Passage: In a recent USA Today/Gallup poll, 50 percent of Americans said the recent passage of health care reform legislation is a bad thing. Further, 55 percent say health care costs in the U.S. will rise as a result of the bill.

Two Polls Offer Different Results:  In a newly released Rasmussen report, 54 percent of Americans favor repealing the recently enacted health care legislation. Further, 49 percent believe the new law will reduce the quality of care, while 60 percent think it will increase the federal budget deficit. In contrast, supporters of reform are touting the recent CNN poll that shows 50 percent of Americans are either fine with the new legislation or would favor seeing more government involvement in health care. In this poll, only 47 percent of Americans favor repealing the bill.

Looking Ahead
Late this week , President Obama traveled to the swing states of Maine and North Carolina to discuss details of the new health care reform law and its effects on unemployment and small business. At the same time, Republicans continue to debate how best to leverage growing discontent over the bill and its implications in the months leading up to the November elections. In the meantime, it’s within federal agencies such as HHS that much of the detail, timing and how-to questions will be worked out going forward.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in alabama health insurance, children, colorado health insurance, florida health insurance, health care overhaul, health care reform, indiana health insurance, individual health insurance mandate, louisiana health insurance, michigan health insurance, nebraska health insurance, north carolina health insurance, obama care, pennsylvania health insurance, pre existing condition, south carolina health insurance, texas health insurance | No Comments »

Health Insurance Overhaul Sued

Thursday, April 1st, 2010

On March 23,  thirteen states (Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and Washington) filed one lawsuit in the U.S. Court system for the Northern District of Florida challenging the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This came minutes after President Barack Obama signed the comprehensive health insurance reform legislation into law. The attorneys general’s argument is centered on two elements:

1) the Act’s individual health insurance mandate is an unconstitutional expansion of Congress’ ability to regulate interstate commerce;

2) the penalties for being non compliant within the individual health insurance mandate violates the taxation powers provided to Congress under the Constitution.

In addition, U.S. states are challenging provisions of the new law that will create dramatic Medicaid spending increases for the financial burden of the states.

Governor Jan Brewer also announced her support for a legal challenge to the federal reform law in an initiative to amend the constitution to prohibit mandatory coverage requirements. The attorney general will not contest the federal law. He also suggested to Brewer that she use any additional funds to reinstate the Arizona health insurance KidsCare program, which was cut due to the budget deficit and eliminated coverage for over 35,000 children.

Senator Tom George and Representative Marc Corriveau have introduced four bills that would completely change the individual Michigan health insurance market. The bills amend Blue Cross Blue Shield from being the insurer of last resort. Therefore, it would require all plans to be guarantee issue and will include a reinsurance pool to reimburse carriers for eligible claims.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in alabama health insurance, arizona health insurance, blue cross blue shield michigan, colorado health insurance, florida health insurance, health care overhaul, health care reform, health insurance reform, individual health insurance mandate, kids care, louisiana health insurance, michigan health insurance, nebraska health insurance, obama care, pennsylvania health insurance, pre existing condition, south carolina health insurance, texas health insurance | No Comments »

Michigan Health Insurance Wants Freedom

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010

A petition drive after the health care reform, started on Monday in Michigan. On the next ballot voters will be asked to vote if the state should be exempt from the Michigan health insurance mandate.

Michigan Republican Mike Cox has announced that he will join other states in lawsuits challenging the health care reform bill and its constitutionality. Expectations are that these lawsuits will end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Tags:
Posted in michigan health insurance | No Comments »

Michigan health insurance lawmakers split on reform

Thursday, March 11th, 2010

Michigan health insurance lawmakers are split on health care reform for America and their state. Republican Bart Stupak explained that he cannot support the current reform bills being proposed. In previous bill’s, Stupak was against the abortion rights. Now he sees other problems in the reform proposals.

There is an excise tax on high priced Michigan health insurance plans. Effective dates of the legislation will take place as late as 2018. In addition, many other democrats have realized problems in the bill and will not be voting for it. Other legislators have said that the bill lacks malpractice reform, which is one of the biggest driving costs in the health care industry today.

When one lawmaker was asked if he could support the bill he said “compared with the November bill, I think this version sucks even more.”

Tags: ,
Posted in health care reform, michigan health insurance | No Comments »

« Older Entries