The term "neener-neener!" comes to mind:
"Another big California health insurer has stunned individual policyholders ... this time it's Blue Shield of California seeking cumulative hikes of as much as 59%."
But, but, but:
"HHS will require that health insurance companies “disclose and justify any rate increases of 10 percent or more.”
What to do, what to do.
Well, as Mike pointed out in his post, "rate hearings will also remind people in every state what a fraud the government has perpetrated in claiming to have "reformed" health care." And hearings there will be:
"[Newly elected CA Insurance Commissioner Dave] Jones said the Blue Shield move underscored the need for the Legislature to give the insurance commissioner legal authority to regulate insurance rates the same way he does automobile coverage.
At present, the commissioner can block increases only if insurers spend less than 70% of premium income on claims. Jones' office said Blue Shield's March 1 increase was under review."
There we go again, comparing health insurance and auto insurance. They are not the same, and their rate structures are based on very different methodologies. Not to mention the fact that auto policies aren't (currently) required to cover oil changes and tune-ups. What do you think would happen to auto rates if (when?) they do?
The bigger issue, of course, is "why?" The Blues claim that "the increases were the result of fast-rising healthcare costs and other expenses resulting from new healthcare laws." But of course that can't be true: after all, the folks who passed the bill so that we could see what's in it promised us that it would result in lower, not higher, insurance costs.
The wheels on the bus go thump-thump-thump.
"Another big California health insurer has stunned individual policyholders ... this time it's Blue Shield of California seeking cumulative hikes of as much as 59%."
But, but, but:
"HHS will require that health insurance companies “disclose and justify any rate increases of 10 percent or more.”
What to do, what to do.
Well, as Mike pointed out in his post, "rate hearings will also remind people in every state what a fraud the government has perpetrated in claiming to have "reformed" health care." And hearings there will be:
"[Newly elected CA Insurance Commissioner Dave] Jones said the Blue Shield move underscored the need for the Legislature to give the insurance commissioner legal authority to regulate insurance rates the same way he does automobile coverage.
At present, the commissioner can block increases only if insurers spend less than 70% of premium income on claims. Jones' office said Blue Shield's March 1 increase was under review."
There we go again, comparing health insurance and auto insurance. They are not the same, and their rate structures are based on very different methodologies. Not to mention the fact that auto policies aren't (currently) required to cover oil changes and tune-ups. What do you think would happen to auto rates if (when?) they do?
The bigger issue, of course, is "why?" The Blues claim that "the increases were the result of fast-rising healthcare costs and other expenses resulting from new healthcare laws." But of course that can't be true: after all, the folks who passed the bill so that we could see what's in it promised us that it would result in lower, not higher, insurance costs.
The wheels on the bus go thump-thump-thump.
Posts
