WH Reaction: New AHIP Report On Health Care Bill Costs 'Self-Serving'

[kpete]

Source: Talking Points Memo

WH Reaction: New AHIP Report On Health Care Bill Costs 'Self-Serving'
Christina Bellantoni | October 12, 2009, 9:02AM

The White House is pushing back on the new study commissioned by America's Health Insurance Plans suggesting health care costs would increase under the bill the Senate Finance Committee is voting on this week. http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/ahip-releases-reportphp.php

White House spokeswoman Linda Douglass called the report a "self-serving analysis" from an opponent of any kind of health insurance reform.

"It comes on the eve of a vote that will reduce the industry's profits," Douglass told TPMDC. "It is hard to take it seriously. The analysis completely ignores critical policies will lower costs for those who have insurance, expand coverage and provide affordable health insurance options to millions of Americans who are priced out of today's health insurance market or are locked out by unfair insurance company practices."

AHIP is a D.C.-based association representing more than 1,000 insurance companies and has been fighting the administration's efforts all year.

Read more: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/wh-reaction-new-ahip-report-on-health-care-bill-costs-self-serving.php?ref=fpa

[Ruby the Liberal]

1. It isn't analysis, it is the admission of future plans

None of these bills cap premiums, and if anyone thinks the Insurance Industrial Complex won't take every dime they can between now and 2013, they haven't been paying attention.

[Igel]

14. You're right.

It isn't analysis.

The problem is the assumptions that you make. We're not allowed to discuss assumptions. We must all look just at the bottom line and trust the CBO and Congress and the WH staff to make not just reasonable assumptions, but the assumptions that match reality.

It's the complaint I had with lots of "analyses" of early voting polls and predictions. You make the assumptions necessary to get to the proper end point. In the case of health care, CBO has to make "moderate" assumptions: A lot of them are almost certainly wrong, simply because they're mostly guesses. CBO can't make assumptions that point at the worst case or the best case, per se. They usually don't make their own assumptions, either. Given the political nature of the entire business, they're stuck--Bauckus managed to find a way of stipulating cost cuts and tax/fee increases to cover all the revenue needed to keep the final bill revenue neutral wrt budget assumptions calling for a large increase, under the CBO's assumptions about (a) tax revenue, (b) cost savings, (c) increase in health care expenses, (d) increase in health demand, (e) shifts in health-care insurance patterns, (f) employer behavior and attitudes, and many, many other factors. If you don't think that Medicare costs will be reined in, if you think tax revenues won't be as high, if you think that the program will alter employee and employer behavior more than assumed, if you misgauge increase in health demand, etc., then your "analysis" is different from the CBO's. This is evil because, again, we're not allowed to think critically about the final number that the CBO has issued.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

2. In other breaking news, API study finds that oil companies should regulate themselves.

In yet another study, Boo Boo Bear suggests that Ranger Smith appoint Yogi Bear to guard picnic baskets.

[joeycola]

3. The WH needs to seriously look at single payer plans!!

[Delphinus]

12. Amen.

HR 676 - Medicare for All.

[IndianaGreen]

4. This was so predictable months ago! Let's push for Medicare for all

and frak them all.

[villager]

5. "Insurers mount attack against health reform"

Insurers mount attack against health reform


WASHINGTON – The health insurance industry is warning that a comprehensive Senate bill would increase the cost of a typical policy by hundreds, or even thousands, of dollars a year after lawmakers eased up on the requirement that all Americans get coverage.

The stinging attack came on the eve of a pivotal Senate vote and was a clear message to President Barack Obama and congressional Democratic leaders who have been making headway on overhauling the nation's health care system. The industry fears that a weakening of the penalties for failing to get insurance would let Americans postpone getting coverage until they get sick.

The industry has worked for months behind the scenes to help shape health care reform. Unlike the 1990s, when it contributed to the failure of President Bill Clinton's health overhaul, the insurance industry has been attracted by the promise of millions of more people getting coverage. Translation: millions of new consumers buying policies.

The industry wants lawmakers to expand coverage, not lessen the penalties that would reduce the number of people. The Senate Finance Committee is slated to vote on its 10-year, $829 billion bill on Tuesday, but more important to the industry are the steps beyond the panel's decision.

<snip>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091012/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul_insurers

[jtrockville]

6. Insurance companies are going to raise premiums. Period.

They aren't EVER going to lower premiums. EVER!
What's so hard to understand about this concept?

[liberal N proud]

7. What did the expect?

GREED!

[Vinca]

8. The time has come to tell big insurance to shove their policies

up their collective asses. Bring HR 676 to the floor for a vote this week. Insurance companies have zero to do with delivering health care. All they do is move money around, usually in their direction.

[mvd]

9. Agreed!

If this doesn't prove to the White House that we need a strong public option or single payer, nothing will.

[BlueIdaho]

10. Best news in weeks

So the insurance industry pays to have Price Waterhouse - and investment firm write a report saying health care reform will end up costing Americans loads of cash. What a surprise... So how can anyone in good conscience be an insurance industry advocate and supporter? They can't. There is plenty of time to write meaningful safeguards into the final legislation. This insurance industry stunt puts the vast majority of Americans on the side of reform. Does anyone really think the insurance industry will NOT raise rates if the legislation fails? Not bloody likely.

There is just a chance they will be undone by their greed. The tide is turning and stunts like this make a viable public option more likely not less likely. All of America can now see very clearly that the government must provide competition or these jackals will feast on our bones.

Its no longer if - its when and its no longer how but how much competition the government needs to provide to safeguard the pocketbooks of our citizens.

[Iowa]

11. "It comes on the eve of a vote that will reduce the industry's profits," Douglass told TPMDC.

Bullshit. This damned bill was designed by the insurance companies to increase their profits. They are simply recognizing the pathetic weakness of their opponents and trying to increase profits even more.

This is what you get when you try to appease the enemy... they exploit your weakness and expose you as the Caspar Milquetoast that you are. Health care reform has been bungled by weak-kneed, short-sighted, incrementalist politicians who don't have the guts to stand up and fight for single-payer or Medicare for all.

[humbled_opinion]

13. The smart move would be to use their own analysis against them.

Since insurance companies plan on screwing over the public by raising rates, then the only real option is for a govt single payer plan where everyone is covered and the insurance comanpaies will have to fight to get people off of that plan...

LOL...

[watrwefitinfor]

15. So, what is the next step,

if this bill isn't voted out of committee (finance)? Does the full senate then run with the bills that have come out of other committees? Does each committee bill get a full senate vote? Are the various bills reconciled within the Senate, somehow, then voted on?

The reports, and discussions on DU, make it sound as though HCR is dead in the water if the Finance Committee bill doesn't make it out of committee? I thought there were better Senate bills from other committees. What happens to those?

A very confusing way to make laws.

Wat