Feds To Take Unconstitutional Actions On Health Insurers.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

More unconstitutional actions on health insurers....... Why does this not surprise me.

------------

http://pagingdrgupta.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/21/feds-fire-warning-shot-to-health-insurers/?hpt=Sbin

Health insurance companies trying to bump up rates by more than 10 percent will have to answer to federal regulators, according to a new plan announced by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius Tuesday. The proposed rule explains how the government will oversee insurers as required by the massive health care bill – the Affordable Care Act – that was signed into law this spring.

After 2011, regulators will decide on a state-by-state basis which rates will be reviewed.

The process will determine which rate hikes are “unreasonable,” a tricky definition since “a 10 percent increase by a company that’s not had a rate increase in five years and is looking at a narrow profit margin, is not necessarily the same as a company that’s raised rates three years in a row and is looking at fat profits,” Sebelius said. “We decided we would start somewhere and we went with 10 percent, not as a definition of unreasonable, but as a figure that would bring scrutiny.”

As part of the scrutiny, proposals for large rate hikes will be posted online, along with each company’s justification for the increase. A significant number of plans are likely to be affected; according to HHS, hikes greater than 10 percent make up the majority of rate increases in the individual market over the past three years.

The new federal requirement does not replace but adds a layer to various state laws regulating insurers. According to HHS, 43 of 50 states currently review health insurance rates. In states without “an effective process,” HHS will conduct the review, said spokeswoman Jessica Santillo.

While federal regulators won’t have the power to block rate increases, insurers whose rate hikes are deemed “unreasonable” could be barred from insurance “exchanges” – the planned marketplaces where many companies and consumers will purchase coverage plans, starting in 2014.

The online postings will also discourage sharp hikes by making consumers better informed, Sebelius said.

Insurance companies and the public have 60 days to comment on the rules, before the new regulations take effect.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Oh boo hoo.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Oh boo hoo.

Yes, the constitution is something to scoff at...... Screwing over small providers is something to scoff at... oh yes.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Yes, the constitution is something to scoff at...... Screwing over small providers is something to scoff at... oh yes.

Oh you just go right ahead and show me where profit margins are constitutionally protected.

[james&olya 1,121]

Oh boo hoo.

:rofl:

Oh you just go right ahead and show me where profit margins are constitutionally protected.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Oh you just go right ahead and show me where profit margins are constitutionally protected.

It's an issue for the states as has been ruled on time after time by the courts.

Do your research on price controls and you might learn something.

you'd do well to do the same.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It's an issue for the states as has been ruled on time after time by the courts.

Yes, and that isn't about to change. It would behoove you to read every now and then what you post.

...federal regulators won’t have the power to block rate increases...

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Yes, and that isn't about to change. It would behoove you to read every now and then what you post.

The whole idea is erroneous on the part of the FEDS though. They don't have a right to said information to begin with, nor do they have the right (despite what the joke of Obamacare is) to make them cover the things they want them to cover...

It's an amusing issue that the FEDS have created. As long as insurance companies cannot trade across state lines, the FEDS cannot touch them.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Paul, don't you find it worse that after handing them a monopoly, mandating more customers for them, what do the insurance companies do? They revisit rate hikes. Nice. The only reason I'm hoping that this bill dies is so we can do what they should have done, and use either the Canadian or Swiss model for healthcare. Private health insurance companies are the problem. Period.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Paul, don't you find it worse that after handing them a monopoly, mandating more customers for them, what do the insurance companies do? They revisit rate hikes. Nice. The only reason I'm hoping that this bill dies is so we can do what they should have done, and use either the Canadian or Swiss model for healthcare. Private health insurance companies are the problem. Period.

The problem with health care is not insurance. It never has been and it never will be.

Health care and insurance are two very different entities.

Insurance is a product to help you pay for another product. It has nothing to do with the actual product it helps you pay for though.

[The_Dude 1,142]

The problem with health care is not insurance. It never has been and it never will be.

Health care and insurance are two very different entities.

Insurance is a product to help you pay for another product. It has nothing to do with the actual product it helps you pay for though.

Really, how is healthcare insurance a viable contributor to the health and wellbeing of Americans? Healthcare, and the cost of it are a major problem in this country.Profits should not be a mitigating factor to your health.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The whole idea is erroneous on the part of the FEDS though. They don't have a right to said information to begin with, nor do they have the right (despite what the joke of Obamacare is) to make them cover the things they want them to cover...

It's an amusing issue that the FEDS have created. As long as insurance companies cannot trade across state lines, the FEDS cannot touch them.

But the feds can establish a marketplace for health insurance products and set certain requirements for insurance companies to transact in that marketplace. And that's what this is really all about.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Insurance is a product to help you pay for another product. It has nothing to do with the actual product it helps you pay for though.

So claiming that going to a single payer system is socializing health care is a flat-out lie, yes?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Really, how is healthcare insurance a viable contributor to the health and wellbeing of Americans? Healthcare, and the cost of it are a major problem in this country.Profits should not be a mitigating factor to your health.

I didn't say it was. I only said that Insurance is not health care and has nothing to do with it. The problem is cost of health care itself, NOT insurance.

In your opinion profits should not be a factor in your health care. If you believe that, you are allowed to go to school to become a doctor and open up your own clinic. That's the beautiful part about the country we live in. You have that choice and that option to run a clinic and charge what you want or not charge at all if you can get donors.

But the feds can establish a marketplace for health insurance products and set certain requirements for insurance companies to transact in that marketplace. And that's what this is really all about.

The feds can't establish a marketplace. They can regulate interstate commerce, but they cannot actually create an industry.

What Obamacare should have done is take down the barrier that allows trading of insurance across state lines, and then they'd have full blown access to any company that takes advantage of that. I still don't even begin to know why they didn't do this actually.....

So claiming that going to a single payer system is socializing health care is a flat-out lie, yes?

Single payer is socializing medecine if you force everyone to participate. If people have an option to participate, then it's not.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Single payer is socializing medecine if you force everyone to participate. If people have an option to participate, then it's not.

OMG.

For a product or service to be "socialized", everything about the product or service has to be administered or owned by the government, including the physical plant.