We pay. They profit. - Richard Kirsch Responds to AHIP
Posted on December 3rd, 2008 by Levana Layendecker in Profits Before People
 |
It's the old venture capitalist axiom:
Step 1: Sell health insurance to healthy people.
Step 2: Deny them when they get sick.
Step 3: Profit!
Well, maybe it's a slightly different version of the same old story, but it is the same old story. And AHIP's release of their new health care plan is a just repackaging of the same old story.
The insurance industry has awoken to the fact that nobody likes them. It should come as no surprise when nearly every insured person in America experiences insurers as the people who denied care or services when they really needed it, including the president-elect of the United States. Now, they have decided to try to re-market themselves as the reformed good guy, who really wants you to get health care, with just a few *tiny* exceptions:
- When you get a chronic disease
- When you are a woman of child-bearing age
- When you are old
- When you are already sick
Richard Kirsch, HCAN National Campaign Director, summed it up saying, "AHIP’s plan still lets insurers charge higher premiums for older and sicker people and for women. Their proposal pushes high-deductible plans and still lets insurance companies decide whether or not to approve the care your doctor says you need. " Read Richard's full statement.
They plan to stick taxpayers with the bill of the people they don't want to pay for. For example, the health insurance industry’s solution to medical bankruptcy isn’t to give people good health coverage but to have the government bail-out families who go bankrupt because they have lousy health coverage. In his response the AHIP announcment, Richard asks, "How can the health insurance industry propose reform which still lets families go bankrupt and expect to be taken seriously?"
The truth is the health insurance industry tried this before, and it didn't work. They had their chance. We need reasonable regulation of the health insurers and a choice of a public plan that provides quality, affordable care to everyone. They will never reform until they compete on a level playing field that puts people's health first.
When it comes to the AHIP's health care plan, there is only one thing we have to remember:
“We will not sacrifice profitability for membership.”
- Angela Braly, WellPoint CEO in a conference with investment analysts, April 2008
I believe that the only way to get good health coverage that everyone can afford is to make it so that if you have a job no matter what you do that health(and dental)care should be covered by the government the only exceptions should be cosmetic surgeries(plastic surgery)and care for those who make in excess of $75,000.00 per year(they are the only ones that can conceivably afford to pay what health insurance refuses to)I personally have not been to a doctor in over 10 years while I work full time and have health care coverage(for emergency services)I can't afford to pay for regular doctor visits and needed dental care
I saw Richard Kirsch's interview on the Lehrer news report last evening (8/13). I am just a common citizen with no ties to the health care industry or any anti-reform group. What I do know is that my husband retired with a "guaranteed' medical plan from his former employer - a government entity. At age 65, he was informed that Medicare would be his primary insurance and his employer would henceforth provide supplemental insurance. The supplemental policy is a fraction of the cost his employer had formerly paid.
I was very dismayed to hear Mr. Kirsch reiterate the misinformation that there would be a two tiered system if Obamacare was enacted and individuals would retain choice. Of course, he and proponents of the health care reform bills KNOW that employers will opt for cheap policies, however limited they might be and this will be the (unintended?) end of private health care.
As it exists now, Medicare is insufficient which is why most Medicare members also carry supplemental coverage. Yet, legislators are seeking to pare down Medicare. It seems logical (to me at least) that our representatives would identify the specific deficiencies in our present health care systems and devise specific correctives. Perhaps the savings will allow Medicare to provide inclusive service without it's members having to pay for supplemental insurance.
Of course, it must be obvious to Mr. Kirsch and other hard nosed advocates of change that our president and Congressional representatives have performed badly over the past 8 months. They passed the gargantuan omnibus budget fraught with earmarks despite a pre-election promise by Mr. Obama to personally review and strike out frivilous expenditures. Then, with contrived urgency, they passed a $787 Billion Stimulus Package filled with spending that by no means warrants, in substance or return, the burden imposed by the debt created. 2009 national debt is currently $2 trillion and climbing while the economy continues to slump. The IRS reports corporate taxes down by 57%.
Despite the unprecedently bad news and, thus far, untrustworthy actions by our legislators, we are barraged by an angry mob who demand that we go along with the Jim Jones koolaid program for health care change with its conservative cost estimates in the trillions over the next 10 years. HELP!