Democrats seek greater control over health insurance rates

[cal04]

Legislation would allow federal regulators to step in to stop premium increases when state agencies fall short.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-health-premiums-20100421,0,2986100,full.story

Congressional Democrats have begun pushing legislation giving government regulators greater authority to block big increases in health insurance premiums, kicking off what is expected to be a years-long process of revising and expanding their major healthcare overhaul.

The move, which comes less than a month after President Obama signed the healthcare legislation, is aimed at giving all states the power to stop premium hikes deemed excessive and allowing the federal government to step in if the states don't act.

"This is a gaping hole in our regulatory system, and it is unacceptable," Senate Health Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said Tuesday as he opened a hearing on the proposed change to the healthcare bill, the first since the legislation was enacted.

Responsibility for regulating insurers has traditionally fallen to the states, but insurance commissioners' ability to control rate hikes currently varies widely from state to state. Senior Democrats on Capitol Hill, backed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, are exploring ways to standardize that authority.

[BrklynLiberal]

1. What a great idea. How come no one thoughtof it before???

:crazy:

[eridani]

9. Sen. Feinstein did, but her amendment was shot down

Hope it fares better this time around.

[caty]

2. Finally.

That should have been done a long time ago.

[Dappleganger]

3. Somebody has to protect the people...

because the states and corporations certainly aren't gonna do it.

[RKP5637]

5. It would be a novel idea, anymore, protecting the people. I hope this sails

through. I'm sure the R's will fight it... can't count on R's if it benefits the majority of the people.

[RKP5637]

4. This is excellent, should have been part of the original, but getting this

in would be a big boost for health care fairness, I think.

[Oregone]

6. You can't control rates without controlling costs

They left the insurers in charge of the billing negotiations.

[exboyfil]

7. What happens when insurers start refusing to pay more than

the Medicare approved rate? I have been waiting for this to happen.

[Oregone]

8. Why would they? They skim off the top

The bigger the bucket, the more they get to skim. Insurers have no incentive to negotiate low rates for services.

As long as they can justify the increased in premiums based on finite data regarding medical loss, the government wont have a leg to stand on when it comes to regulating premium rates.

The reality is that the government (liberals included) want private industry involved in health insurance; the expense, unethical actions and inefficiencies are believed to be justified. Hence, the government will never attempt to regulate premiums such that they will barely cover medical loss. They will not devise a system to realistically do this, and therefore, they will never really control costs.

If they wanted to really fix this problem (and include private industry), the government would focus on controlling the actual costs of services (which isn't easy to do without single-payer). But they are trying to fix this by putting the cart in front of the horse, and its fundementally incompatible here.