Why all of a sudden are insurance companies so willing....?
Okay, first of all, I do not support 0bama Care or anything this man is proposing. However, I am not one of those right wingers who thinks our health care system is perfect, either. I don't understand, though, why all of a sudden insurance companies seem so willing to stop the practise of cancelling policies for sick people and stopping the practise of denying people coverage for pre-epreexistingitions.
It makes me very angry that they are all of a sudden so willing to work with people. Granted, I have never been denied coverage for a pre-epreexistingth condition and I do have a serious one, but it doesn't make it right. If these companies were so scared of being put out of business they should have tried to fix the problem long before 0bama decided to step in. Now, because of them, those of us who do have insurance are going to suffer.
What would my plan be? I would support subsisubsidizingrance premiums for low income people, but many people who don't have insurance CAN afford it, they just choose not to make it a priority. I would require everyone to be covered, just not under a government plan. I would much rather an insurance company make life and death decisions for me then the democrats, or even the Republicans for that matter.
- BobbiLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
In a nutshell. Obamacare if passed will not be implemented till around 2013. Next, the poor have access to care through SCHIP and Medicaid. Many states offer a low-cost plan based on income for those not covered by medicaid or SCHIP. There is the gap. Those over-income for these plans, many cannot afford the next level of premiums. Will Obamacare cover these individuals? No one knows yet. Also, many of these plans are run solely by Blue Cross or Anthem. Blue Cross has over 50% of the market share nationally, so there isn't much competition. We need some reform, but not the kind offered by a socialist and his buddies.
- i_was_myselfLv 71 decade ago
You should like the Health Care reform as it implements your requests.
To answer your first and second paragraph and part of your third:
The insurance companies #1 don't want the reform.
But if they have to have these new rules on them, they get something in exchange. All people will be forced to buy insurance or pay a portion of their income to a general subsidy fund to help people buy insurance.
So insurance companies will get millions of new customers. Those who can afford insurance but don't have it soon will. Those who can't afford it will get help buying insurance via the subsidy fund.
Insurance companies will make money either way.
As I said all democrat plan are requiring everyone to buy insurance. Or to pay into a fund that will help them out when they need it.
The government policy is only one option. You can buy any of the others it will just cost more. That is what the insurance exchange is for, to show you what the options are.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
The reason is because their lobbyists have put language in the health care bill that would require everyone to be insured. In exchange for this they have agreed to stop these practices (although I have my doubts). The insurance companies figure with all of the potential new customers they will still make large profits (like they need more money).
- Anonymous1 decade ago
There is no proposal for a total government plan (which is what "single-payer plan" means). There are 1300 for-profit insurance companies in the U.S., according to news reports, Dick Armey (FreedomWorks), and C-SPAN discussions. Does anyone honestly believe that these billionaire greed-driven, ruthless "pitbull" companies are going to be put out of business by a small "chihuahua pup"-sized government/public option designed to help the poorest Americans (people the insurance companies reject anyway)?? The proposed public option is supposed to be one of many options available with competitive pricing, the same system currently available at taxpayer expense for our elected representatives---a pool of resources (insurers) available to lower-income people and their families to cover medical expenses. You want everyone to be required to have coverage, and this is also what President Obama has requested. No one but your doctor is going to make life and death decisions under any of the four bills currently in existence (3 still in Committee in the Senate). Insurance companies that are profit driven would be against having expensive prolonged care for injured/ill patients or costly measures used to prolong life; however, a non-profit (public) plan would have no reason to butt in unless the hospital or doctor is discovered to be double-billing or overbilling (like $40 for an aspirin tablet or $50 for a box of tissue, as is currently being done). The insurance industry has a vested interest in NOT paying for procedures in order to have a greater profit margin, and remember, the insurance industry spends on average between $20 billion and $60 billion EACH YEAR to come up with ways to deny claims, but a public plan does not do any of this because it is not profit-driven.
Small business owners are currently at a disadvantage because individually they lack bargaining power; however, under the Obama proposal, these business owners would be able to pool with other small business owners who have twenty-five workers or less (similar to a union or cooperative) in order to have more clout when negotiating rates. If the rates are still too high based on the volume of business, then the public option would be available for, say, $750 per year per employee for total coverage and they would get a tax credit for insuring their workers. There are also cost-controls being proposed for the pharmaceutical industry (allowed to run out of control under the Bush/Cheney regime---perhaps because the Bush family has large investments in Pfiser and Eli Lilly) which should reduce consumer costs. You ought to express your concerns on whitehouse.gov website...they do respond.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
You're not going to be affected negatively by a public option. I don't understand where all the fear is coming from. Obviously you don't know about the insurance industry so let me explain:
In some states there are drivers with DUIs, accidents, tickets, etc (high risk drivers) who basically have no market. Insurance companies won't touch them with a 100 foot pole. So what do we do with these people?
California has a high risk plan which is may be likened to the public option.
A person doing business with State Farm or AAA will not be affected. So stop your worrying and let Obama do his thing
Oh yeah, a public option will put the heat on these insurance companies LOWERING PREMIUMS.Source(s): Free market logic and Property & Casualty Insurance Agent.
- Linda JLv 71 decade ago
these companies have been regulated for many years already. The reputable ones are and have been recognized for serving their clientele with integrity and fairness.
Even so, I don't think most Americans see any harm in the government doing what it can to "insure" the costs of health care is reduced or at the very least brought under control.
We just do not want or need the government to become our insurer.
- 1 decade ago
Because just like the Wall Street bailouts these capitalists who have no morals see a chance to steal from society. They want their bailout to make them even richer and secure their future from global competition which they supported. They don't want to actually be a victim to their free trade capitalism.
My suggestion is to give the capitalists exactly what they want. Deregulate the medical industry. Allow anyone who desires to practice medicine, get the gubernment out of the way as it only causes problems. Change the legal code to allow anyone and everyone to do whatever they want in the free market. It will sort itself out eventually. And of course globalize it. Allow foreign labor to come and go as they please. That is true capitalism, so let's get it moving folks!
- PfoLv 71 decade ago
I'm not so sure that they are accepting more people, or denying less for pre-existing conditions. Proof?
- Brown9500v1Lv 61 decade ago
See...It hasn't even passed and is working already.