Health insurer not entitled to free political speech??
The Obama healthcare proposals are clearly a hot political issue so why should ANYONE be prevented from giving their opinion of what is proposed? It sounds to me like the insurer was warning of an attack on a program that IS under attack. Saying that the criticism is "misleading" is standard Democrat boilerplate at the moment. They call ALL criticism misleading. And if all misleading political speech were banned, a lot of Democrats would be struck dumb. It would not be worthwhile for Joe Biden even to get out of bed. Joe assured us that FDR went on TV to make his case -- even though there was no TV for him to go on in that early era! And who the heck is Joe Biden? He's only the Vice President of the United States.
"The government is investigating a major insurance company for allegedly trying to scare seniors with a mailer warning they could lose important benefits under health care legislation in Congress. The Health and Human Services Department launched its investigation of Humana after getting a complaint from Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., a senior lawmaker usually viewed as a reliable ally of the insurance industry.
"It is wholly unacceptable for insurance companies to mislead seniors regarding any subject — particularly on a subject as important to them, and to the nation, as health care reform," Baucus said Monday, disclosing the HHS investigation.
Humana Inc., headquartered in Louisville, Ky., is cooperating with the investigation and stopped the mailer earlier this month, company spokesman Tom Noland said Monday.
Humana is one of the largest private carriers serving seniors under a program called Medicare Advantage. About one-fourth of the elderly and disabled people covered under Medicare participate in the Advantage program, which offers a choice of private plans that usually deliver added benefits. Humana has about 1.4 million Medicare Advantage enrollees, and the program accounts for about half the company's revenue, Noland said.
Government experts say the private plans are being paid too much — about 14 percent more than it costs to care for seniors in traditional Medicare. The Baucus plan — and other proposals — would reduce payments to the plans, and the health insurance industry is fighting back. The Humana mailer focused squarely on the Medicare Advantage program.
Source
22 comments:
"Health insurer not entitled to free political speech??"
No.
What law or regulation are they supposed to have violated?
Humana is telling it's customers that there will be repercussions to the government's unilateral cuts in payments under the Medicare Advantage program.
The Government (Liberal Democrats) expects Humana to absorb those cuts and operate with a smaller profit (or even at a loss), and not complain.
Now they're trying to silence Humana - keeping them from telling the truth about what will happen as a result of the Government cuts.
Maybe the Government can operate in the red forever, but real businesses have to answer to their shareholders, and shareholders don't like unprofitable behavior!
Humana was acting responsibly.
They have to stop them, Truth is the enemy of all librals
The lowered spending will come about due to cutting waste, not reducing benefits.
I'm sure that, as a part of their program, they're subject to laws and regulations in order to handle medicare insurance, which means that they have control.
When I was checking into the Medicare Advantage program my agent said (as nearly as I can quote ) "I really don't care that insurance companies are making bundles of money on Medicare Advantage plans, I only care that my customers are taken care of."
The plan I was looking at covered nearly 100% of my medical costs for $15 / month with a copay on my part of $25 per visit to the doctor and minimal payments for hospitalisation. Blue Cross / Blue Shield wanted $1450/month for a whole lot less coverage than that.
I called Medicare and asked just how much insurance companies were paid by the government for Medicare Advantage plans. The answer was that such information was not available. You can bet it was a whole lot more than BC/BS wanted to charge me.
It's easy to see why Humana is upset. They're faced with losing a cash cow.
However, they're telling the truth. Regular Medicare with a Medigap policy will cost individuals more, and may have fewer / lower benefits. Humana has every right to advertise that without disclosing profits made from the present setup. If politicians can spin(lie about) things, why can't corporations?
I would have loved to see Humana instead massively escalate their campaign, also noting how the fascist Max Baucus was also trying to keep Humana's customers from knowing the whole truth about his plan - "What Max Baucus wants to hide from YOU". Oh well, maybe someone else has the balls to give one of these little fascists the public humiliation they so richly deserve for trying to intimidate the governed.
I am so sick of hearing about "greedy doctors and insurance companies". I work at a hospital where a large number of our customers are on Medical or have no insurance. We have to treat reguardless of ability to pay. The physicians often treat many patients and get little (Medicare) or nothing except increased exposure to lawsuits. Then the government comes out and says they are cutting reinbursement. What the government is doing is reducing the number of doctors to treat those patients. A groupe of doctors I have worked with for 15 years left the hospital because they were losing money working there. The hospital is strugling to replace them. The next word that comes to mind is rationing. I think the insurance companies should tell their customers that they may soon lose coverage if the legislation passes since it is the truth.
Anonymous 2:27:
Haven't you heard about the Tea Party Protests? The American People are standing up to the government and telling them enough is enough.
The problem is, you don't see these gatherings of tens of thousands of people because the media will either downplay it or not show it at all.
We are fighting back, but it is only recognized by certain UK media and FOX.
Don't count us out yet.
Ironicly most of todays librals are from the peace and love nut jobs of the 60's and 70's. Back then they wanted to "tear down the establishment" and fight the "man". Now they want to stregthen the establishment and be the man. What ever happened to "free love" and "sex, drugs, and rock 'n roll"?
Anon 2:27 you are right, at least about half our population.
Blogger Leigh said...
The lowered spending will come about due to cutting waste, not reducing benefits.
-------------------------------
That's right, Leigh, drink deep of the Kool-Aid. It won't add to the deficit, either!
Because we all know that private insurance companies LOVE to operate huge, wasteful bureaucracies that waste money and eat away at profits! They never engage in cost cutting, or cost analysis, or any of those normal capitalist tendencies that you would expect out of someone who did something as mundane as, say, make cars!
What a maroon.
The lowered spending will come about due to cutting waste, not reducing benefits.
The CBO says otherwise:
Source: http://tinyurl.com/n4atm7
Quote: WASHINGTON — Congress' chief budget officer on Tuesday contradicted President Barack Obama's oft-stated claim that seniors wouldn't see their Medicare benefits cut under a health care overhaul.
The head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf, told senators that seniors in Medicare's managed care plans could see reduced benefits under a bill in the Finance Committee.
The bill would cut payments to the Medicare Advantage plans by more than $100 billion over 10 years.
Elmendorf said the changes "would reduce the extra benefits that would be made available to beneficiaries through Medicare Advantage plans."
Anon 2:48, why don't you supply us with a list of all the poor doctors you know. Poor meaning, with only one Mercedes.
@Robert:
So, the valid response to 'stop lying' is 'lie some more'?
@Stan:
Right. And a hospital wouldn't dare authorize unnecessary treatments to collect money, nor would a doctor EVER misrepresent the care given in order to receive more compensation.
You act like health care is a tightly run ship, absolutely no waste or fraud anywhere.
@5:47
"Health insurance reform will strengthen Medicare for seniors, not diminish it," said White House spokesman Reid Cherlin. "Even under the competitive bidding proposal in the legislation, Medicare Advantage plans will still be paid more than traditional Medicare plans. Yes, they'll need to compete, and they'll need to be more efficient, but they'll still have more money to work with than traditional Medicare."
@Everyone:
"Kool-aid"
"Truth is the enemy of all librals[sic]"
"Control"
"Fascists"
Really? Come on now. You sound like the very nutjobs that I was criticizing who were saying that Bush wouldn't step down and would declare martial law before he would leave office, becoming a dictator.
Leigh,
said White House spokesman Reid Cherlin.
We all realize that is what the White House and Democrats are saying. The fact of the matter is that the CBO - the people who analyzed the proposal and do not have a dog in the fight - disagree.
So who do I believe? A spokesperson from a White House? Or an independent group on which the government (including the White House) relies?
You act like health care is a tightly run ship, absolutely no waste or fraud anywhere.
Well gee, welcome to reality. Of course there is waste and fraud in health care. The issue is who has the better track record of dealing with that waste and fraud? The government? Or private enterprises?
There is great waste in the Medicare and Medicaid systems now. What has Obama done about that? What has the government done about that?
Nothing.
Not one thing.
Since 1965, 50% of all increases in health care have come due to government regulations and interference. That alone should tell you something.
Finally, there is this tidbit to ponder. In 2005, a primary provider for a family of four cost $1250 to enroll in a private plan. For that same primary provider, the government cost of enrollment into Medicare with equal benefits was $1900. That is over a 50% difference between the private and governmental plans with the same benefits.
Sorry, but I am not buying that the government can do this cheaper, better and faster than private industry. They have never done so in the past and seem to have no inclination to do so today.
You can dismiss the CBO if you want, but the fact of the matter is that every plan Democrats and Obama have put forth have shown them to be absolute, unadulterated, complete liars.
I'm afraid you folks are making this whole issue far too complex. It's actually very simple. Just stop and ask yourself, what programs does the government run that are cost effective, efficient, and actually do what they say they'll do. Yes, the answer is NONE! See, that wasn't very difficult, was it.
Of course, the above only applies to those who are sane and rational. The rest of you will go on thinking that all the massive new "overhauls" coming our way will actually work.
@1:10:
Citation for the cause of health care cost increases?
I notice that the cost of prescriptions is ridiculous here, but much lower in other countries... where there is regulations on how much you can charge.
@Birch:
So, because you can't think of anything the government has done that is efficient, to hell with the people who don't have insurance?
Leigh,
The citation is from an article in JAMA which unless you are a subscriber, you cannot get to.
I notice that the cost of prescriptions is ridiculous here, but much lower in other countries... where there is regulations on how much you can charge.
No Leigh, they aren't higher or lower anywhere else. What you are confusing is the price paid at the checkout counter with the overall price. So if a drug costs $10 at the counter and the citizen customer pays all $10, that is no different than the customer paying $5 at the counter and his taxes paying the other $5. It is still the same amount.
One way to lower drug costs would be to extend the patent life of the drug, but this administration is against that. Consequently, drug companies have a very short time to recoup the massive amount of money it takes to develop a drug before putting it on the market.
So, because you can't think of anything the government has done that is efficient, to hell with the people who don't have insurance?
The two are not related and you know it. If the government has not demonstrated the ability to control costs and waste in any program - including Medicare and Medicaid - what makes you think that they can create a program that does not have waste and fraud?
There are roughly 8-10 million without health insurance due to cost in this country. They still have access to health care, but that doesn't seem to phase people who want this program.
So Leigh, why aren't you pushing for the 80 BILLION dollars in waste and fraud in Medicare right now to be fixed and then offered to the people who need the health insurance?
Why won't the government show the people that they can control waste and fraud in a comparatively small program before branching out into a monster health program that will add trillions to the debt and have billions more of waste and fraud?
There is a fundamental difference between people like yourself and me. You seem to think that the government can do things simply because they say they can. I believe that before the government pulls the rest of us into a quagmire, they need to prove they can live up to what they say they can do now.
And by the way, if you read this whole post in about a minute, that means another million dollars in waste and fraud in Medicare went down the tubes.
That thought scares the heck out of me.
We are witnessing the birth of the new Fascism, where the state controls all.
That's one case where I would be strongly in favor of an abortion!
Post a Comment