Affordable Health Insurance

The prospects of a comprehensive healthcare reform bill passing are growing slimmer by the day. However, that does not mean that healthcare reform is dead altogether. After their bruising Senate loss in Massachusetts, Democrats are looking to scale back their proposals for reforming the health insurance industry. They are intent on ending this debate with something to show for a year of work. Previously, Democratic senators and representatives were mainly worried about satisfying the conservative, moderate, and liberal wings of the party. Most Republicans made a political calculation to oppose virtually any form of health care reform proposed by the Democrats. Meanwhile, the Democrats decided to go for broke and seek the most comprehensive reform their entire caucus could be convinced to vote for. As it turns out, Democrats clearly overreached. Now, they need to get at least a handful of Republicans on their side in order to pass legislation.

There were some brief flashes of bipartisanship shortly after Obama’s inaguration, but both parties quickly took sides. Republican Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine initially expressed some degree of support for healthcare reform. She was largely concerned with controlling costs, but so were centrist Democratic senators. In fact, she even supported the idea of a government-run health insurance public option under very limited circumstances–an idea that never gained traction among the entire Democratic caucus in the Senate. Snowe wanted to give the individual health insurance exchange markets, subsidies, and regulations time to work before resorting to further federal interventions. If the private health insurance companies were unable to cover a sufficient percentage of Americans, the public option would be “triggered”.

Over the past several months, increased partisan rancor appeared to have soured Snowe on the issue. Democrats shut her and fellow Republicans out of negotiations, while conservative “tea party” activists were running primary challenges against any legislator deemed insufficiently strong in their opposition to healthcare reform. Granted, there may have been concern that their involvement in committees reconciling the House of Representatives’ and Senate’s bills would not be in good faith–only one Republican in the entire Congress (Louisiana Rep. Joseph Cao) voted in favor. However, the process just managed to alienate potentially amenable legislators like Snowe.

With the election of Scott Brown changing the balance of the Senate, President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and other Democratic leaders are acknowledging the need to slow down and cut the bill back to its most important, easily understandable elements. For her part, Snowe is waiting for Democrats to make the first move, to amend the bridges burned by the closed-door negotiations. Brown has also expressed his willingness to play a constructive role in reforming America’s current health insurance system. Other moderate Republicans, including Maine’s Susan Collins, may follow suit in crafting a new, more limited bill.

2008 Republican presidential candidate and Arizona Senator John McCain is also open to starting over. He has suggested that some elements of his election year healthcare proposal–such as allowing people to buy individual health insurance across state lines, tax credits for those buying individual or self employed health insurance, and medical malpractice tort reform–be considered. Similar ideas have also been touted by Snowe, as those with the potential of receiving bipartisan support. More gradual changes may also garner greater popularity among the general public than a substantial overhaul. In general, many politicians believe that the current bill is most likely unsalvageable; there is too much bad blood associated with its process.

(Image: Olympia Snowe’s official Senate website)

Yamileth Medina is an up and coming expert on Health Insurance and Healthcare Reform. She aims to help people realize that they can find quality individual health insurance right now. Yamileth lives in Miami, FL.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/insurance-articles/some-republicans-show-willingness-to-compromise-on-healthcare-reform-1783675.html

Supporters of healthcare reform have claimed that increasing Americans’ access to health insurance plans will end up saving the nation money in the long run. Although they have acknowledged the need for nearly a trillion dollars in spending, most Democrats in Congress believe that it will result in savings due largely to an increase in preventative care that nips health problems in the bud, before they become more serious (and expensive). Initial estimates from the Congressional Budget Office appeared to bolster their surprising promises. However, those claims may have been too good to be true.

The Department of Health and Human Services recently released a report which states that when taking both public and private costs into account, the current healthcare reform proposals will cause spending on health insurance plans to rise over the next decade. Currently, medical spending makes up about 15% of the GDP: $2.5 trillion each year. Proponents of reform have promised that increased efficiency and the lack of a profit motive will drive health expenses down. HHS investigators compared that promise to Medicare, the government-sponsored health insurance coverage for those over the age of 65. Among this nation’s health insurance plans, Medicare is the closest parallel to the proposed (but now on the back burner) public option. Although part of the cost of reform is set to be paid for through $493 billion in cuts and modifications to Medicare, the HHS has found that whenever Congress significantly reduces the program’s funding in one year, at least a portion of it is usually restored in the next budget. Therefore, they advise that such cuts are unsustainable.

Actuaries working in the HSS further warned that as it currently stands, healthcare reform has the potential to endanger Medicare. According to their report, cuts in service are quite likely. Republicans have ran with the findings, stating that they bolster their claims of the Democrat-led reform of slashing Medicare funding, while raising the premiums of health insurance plans. An already politically risky plan has the potential to collapse for Democrats after the release of this report.

Another concern regarding governmental spending surrounds the proposed creation of the so-called Class Act. Such a program would provide long-term care health insurance plans for the disabled and others in need. The HSS found that the Class Act may be a financially ruinous “insurance death spiral” for the federal government: it will attract people in poorer health, and premiums will increase as the cycle repeats. This scenario may also be a concern for the guaranteed-issue health insurance plans mandated under reform, because the main legislation forbids health insurance companies from denying coverage to individuals with pre-existing conditions or over a certain age.

There is very little in the way of positive news for reform supporters in the report. It does fulfill the Democratic objective of reducing the uninsured population by 33 million. If the bill passes, 93% of the country’s residents would be covered under various health insurance plans. Moreover, prominent Democrats such as Chris Dodd claim that reports have shown that the programs will stay solvent for at least 75 years.

Yamileth Medina is an up and coming expert on Health Insurance and Healthcare Reform. She aims to help people realize that they can find quality health insurance plans right now while waiting for a public option, if it ever gets passed. Yamileth lives in Miami, FL.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/insurance-articles/health-insurance-plans-to-cost-more-after-reform-1584898.html

Regardless of how one feels about healthcare reform, people on both sides of the spectrum generally agree that it is a serious issue that requires careful consideration. It is also important for constituents to express their opinion to the politicians that represent them, whether or not they believe that the current bill is a step forward or worry about its impact on their existing health insurance plan. Therefore, it is unfortunate that some Internet marketers are running misleading advertisements that promise rewards–such as virtual currency for online games or real gift cards–while encouraging consumers to send Washington, D.C. an email opposing reform.

The firm responsible for these ads is Webclients Affilliate Network, and they have been working with a coalition of ten health insurance plan providers that includes Blue Cross Blue Shield. Admittedly, the banner ads for Get Health Reform Right do not explicitly require Web surfers to send a form letter in order to receive the reward. However, that disclaimer is buried in the fine print after pages of health-related survey questions that includes a question asking whether or not the survey taker wants to get health reform right. The user must answer “yes” in order for the anti-government-run insurance plan page to pop up, but the wording is vague. Different people have varying opinions of what ideal healthcare reform entails.

It isn’t just the public option opponents that have used this somewhat deceptive advertising. The American Medical Association had one that offered free gifts on a page that asked consumers to send a pre-written email to their congresspersons supporting the expansion of access to a health insurance plan. Such ads put a cloud over what should be genuine political speech. According to a representative of the Get Health Reform Right coalition, almost two million letters have been sent since the campaign began over the summer. While the vast majority of those letters were surely legitimate, this revelation casts doubt on their accuracy as a measure of general public sentiment. To their credit, the representative denies that such advertising was concocted by them: in fact, their advertising policy with Internet marketers specifically prohibits offering financial awards in exchange for such political action.

The phenomenon of reward advertising on the Internet is controversial. It has lured many unsuspecting users towards giving up personal information in exchange for gift cards or points that can be used to buy objects in popular Facebook games like Mafia Wars and FarmVille. Many consumers who click on these ads tend to be younger and lack the credit card information to buy things online outright. It is perfectly legal, but often preys on age groups that are impulsive and may falsely assume that sending the letter against healthcare reform is required to receive the offer. The practice of compensating people for their appearance of boosting support for a political cause, encouraged by lobbying groups such as America’s Health Insurance Plans, is known as astroturfing. Although it is legal, its ethicality is questionable. This instance has been likened to a new form of “virtual astroturfing”, which intends to deceive politicians into believing a government run health insurance plan has less public support than it may actually have. Such actions may have had a minor impact on the Senate choosing to drop the public option in the healthcare reform bill, due to their consideration of it as politically untenable.

In addition, if a significant percentage of those submitting the letters are teenagers, individuals who are not current voters may be steering senators and representatives in a way that is not truly representative of the population. There are unfortunately uninsured children, but most can acquire coverage; either through the health insurance plan with their parents’ job, or the state governments’ SCHIP programs. Most likely, the health insurers paid an amount for every letter submitted; the Web marketing firm then created the survey and campaign around it. Webclients denies that they never ran such ads, but media sources have confirmed proof. These campaigns appear to have stopped for now. Hopefully, debate and opinions about healthcare reform will come solely from the hearts and minds of the people, not advertisers and lobbyists on either side, in the future.

Yamileth Medina is an up and coming expert on Health Insurance and Healthcare Reform. She aims to help people realize that they can find a health insurance plan right now while waiting for a public option, if it ever gets passed. Yamileth lives in Miami, FL.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/insurance-articles/would-you-oppose-health-insurance-plan-reform-for-a-gift-card-1570614.html

Senate Democrats recently announced that they have reached a compromise on healthcare reform. The new proposal appears to eliminate the possibility of a government-run public option to compete with other health insurance plans. However, there are several alternatives moderate and liberal Democrats have agreed on. These involve allowing people to acquire private health insurance plans through the federal program that negotiates rates for federal employees, as well as allowing those as young as 55 to buy into Medicare. How will these proposals affect you?

Q: I’m under the age of 55, and don’t have employer-sponsored health insurance. Will premiums become cheaper?
A: Most likely, health insurance plans will be less expensive. This will be a result of increased competition in the market, including a health insurance exchange that offers subsidies to those below a certain income level. Existing coverage options will be joined by two nonprofit plans administered by the Office of Personnel Management but still run by private insurance companies. Buying power will presumably increase, making health insurance cheaper since the cost is spread among more people than it is with normal individual health insurance plans. Although each state is responsible for running the insurance marketplaces, the two national plans will be available to protect against the possibility that some states are not as well-regulated as others. The disadvantage is that under this scenario, rates will be slightly less competitive than they would be with a public option in the picture.

Q: I recently lost my job, and i’m between the ages of 55 and 64. Health insurance is hard to find, and i’m just waiting to become eligible for Medicare and hoping I don’t get sick before then. What should I do?
A: Good news! Unfortunately, this demographic has suffered severely during this recession. Some are finding it difficult to become employed again after being laid off. When it comes to health insurance plans, many have pre-existing conditions that prevent them from signing up for many private insurers’ plans. The ones that do accept them are often very expensive and offer fewer benefits. Now, the Senate allows middle-aged individuals to buy into the federal government’s Medicare program. They will be able to purchase coverage that would be otherwise available or out of reach. Medicare does have some solvency issues, but the possible negative impact of adding an estimated three million people to the rolls can be mitigated by the fact that they will be paying premiums into it. Their premiums will be lower–and they will be more likely to get coverage–when they are in a large group pool.

Q: What is the public reaction towards these ideas? What do health care providers, such as doctors, think about these strategies?
A: In general, the Senate committee’s proposals are receiving more support than previous versions of the healthcare reform bill. The public option was killed largely due to voiciferous opposition by portions of the public, several politicians of both parties, and industry lobbying groups. These proposals, which entail more government regulation and involvement but leave private health insurance plans mostly intact, have allowed some of that anger to cool. Some liberals are dissapointed at a bill they believe doesn’t go far enough to solve the health care crisis, but appear to be coming around to these plans. Most importantly, these changes increase the chances of passage; reform supporters consider an imperfect bill preferable to maintaining the status quo. Hospitals and physicians, on the other hand, are not as supportive: they are especially leery of the Medicare buy-in proposal, because Medicare has notoriously low reimbursement rates for services.

Q: How likely is it that this will actually work, in reducing the cost of health insurance plans while insuring more Americans?
A: The chances of the Senate compromise’s success are relatively bright, but opinions are mixed. According to proponents, the health care system will see savings through competitive pressure, negotiating lower rates, and lower profit margins with the national health insurance plans–which the private ones would have to match in order to compete in the marketplace. Medicare is less expensive largely due to its lower administrative costs and fewer margins. Despite those predictions, opponents are skeptical. They point out that the existing plans for federal employees managed by the Office of Personnel Management have seen their premiums rise by nearly 9% over the past year, and that the new national health insurance plans may end up adding costs through duplication of the health insurance already offered in individual states. It is also little-known that a large portion of private health insurance companies are non-profits; regardless, their costs are still high and are passed onto consumers.

Yamileth Medina is an up and coming expert on Health Insurance and Healthcare Reform. She aims to help people realize that they can find quality health insurance plans right now while waiting for a public option, if it ever gets passed. Yamileth lives in Miami, FL.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/insurance-articles/faq-how-senate-health-care-reform-impacts-health-insurance-plans-1566688.html

One of the primary questions about Congress’ moves towards healthcare reform is how they are planning to pay for it. A variety of budget cuts and tax increases have been proposed by the House of Representatives and the Senate in order to provide affordable health care. Many are especially worried about the impact of the Senate’s proposed decrease in Medicare health insurance plan spending. However, AARP (American Association for Retired Persons) recently announced that they support the Democratic bill, which includes approximately $460 billion in Medicare cuts. Why would they back legislation that may harm people over the age of 65, half of whom are card-carrying members?

Detractors would point to their history of supporting many laws proposed by Democrats, and say that the group is too cozy with that party. AARP takes a different view; CEO A. Barry Rand told its members that the proposal would not reduce any guaranteed benefits associated with the government-sponsored health insurance plan. Moreover, he pointed out that Medicare has recently been plagued by inefficiency, waste, and fraud–eliminating such expenses should cover most of the shortfall. Some believed that such wasteful spending is inevitable when the federal government is involved, making their support of a public option (effectively taking the form of “Medicare for all” health insurance plan) ludicrous.

Republicans such as Senator John McCain warn that the cuts will target some of the add-on benefits many seniors have come to expect from Medicare Advantage. These benefits often include gym memberships to maintain their fitness, in addition to higher quality vision and dental care. A Medicare Advantage health insurance plan is sold by private insurers as a supplement to standard Medicare. Proponents of the healthcare reform bill admit that Medicare Advantage programs will face the bulk of the cuts in federal funding, but accuse the health insurance plan providers of using the partially subsidized premiums primarily to finance corporate profit margins for their shareholders and exorbitant salaries of their executives.

There is definitely some opportunity for cost saving. Studies show that a senior citizen covered by a private health insurance plan (e.g. Medicare Advantage) costs the government 14% more than one on regular Medicare. It remains to be seen if the benefits to seniors outweigh the continuous additions to the budget deficit. McCain admonished the AARP for using Medicare funding as a “piggy bank” to pay for other health care programs, thereby driving it closer to bankruptcy. The organization has also been criticized for not recognizing the wishes of their own membership: there is no doubt some overlap between their membership roster and attendance at the town hall rallies earlier this year.

The Senate is expected to vote on the Medicare cuts today, prior to debate on the complete healthcare reform bill. Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet has proposed an alternative amendment that would result in all guaranteed Medicare benefits being spared–a move which he recognizes could cost him his seat. His proposal could see more support from Democrats wary of alienating the most consistent demographic of voters. Meanwhile, McCain has proposed his own amendment to change the language of the Medicare-related provisions and send the bill back to senatorial committees. They are accustomed to their health insurance plan and understandably resistant to change.

Is AARP likely to succeed in its goal? The likelihood is high. It is 40 million members strong, and has been a powerful lobbying group for decades. Even a fraction of them writing letters or making phone calls can have a significant effect on pending legislation. The impact such a move will have on AARP-branded health insurance plan offerings remains to be seen.

(Image: ChiBart under CC 2.0)

Yamileth Medina is an up and coming expert on Health Insurance and Healthcare Reform. She aims to help people realize that they can find a health insurance plan right now while waiting for a public option, if it ever gets passed. Yamileth lives in Miami, FL.

Article Source:http://www.articlesbase.com/insurance-articles/some-seniors-supporting-medicare-health-insurance-plan-cuts-1537519.html