As head of human resources for a Minnesota company with 1,600 employees that manufactures equipment for the mining industry, Scott Arndt saw the writing on the wall five years ago: health insurance premiums were going to keep increasing by leaps and bounds unless his company, Superior Industries International Inc., did something.
Reported by Washington Post 5 hours ago.
Wonkblog: Health plan deductibles are growing seven times as fast as wages
↧
↧
Health Chief Expects Tough Obamacare Enrollment Season This Year
WASHINGTON -- The first two years of Obamacare enrollment brought health coverage to millions of people, overcoming political obstruction and a disastrous initial rollout of the sign-up system in the process. But the road could be even rougher ahead, Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell said Tuesday.** **
By the end of this year, President Barack Obama's administration expects that a little more than 9 million people will be enrolled into health insurance policies obtained via the exchange marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act. But the administration estimates another 10.5 million uninsured people are eligible -- and they're the most elusive customers in the market.
"As we reduce the rate of the uninsured, there are fewer potential marketplace customers out there," Burwell said during a speech at Howard University Hospital in Washington. "Overall, the open enrollment is going to be tougher than last year."
Nearly half of the remaining uninsured are between the ages of 18 and 34, the most coveted demographic for health insurers because of their relatively low medical costs -- but among the most difficult to enroll for the same reason, because the value of health coverage may be less apparent to consumers who need little medical care. And six out of 10 of those who could sign up for health insurance exchange plans earn too much to qualify for generous subsidies -- or, in some cases, any subsidies at all -- which for them puts the price of health insurance out of reach. The remaining 40 percent who earn less than that can be challenging to enroll despite the financial assistance because they may find even small premiums unaffordable. HHS released these estimates in a report Tuesday.
Burwell highlighted Obamacare's progress to date, citing a new departmental report finding that 15.3 million previously uninsured adults gained coverage between October 2013 -- when the first enrollment period began -- and this month, either from the exchanges or from Medicaid in states that expanded eligibility for that program under the Affordable Care Act. A separate provision allowing young adults to remain covered by their parents' insurance until age 26 accounted for an additional 2.3 million people who have health coverage they wouldn't have absent Obamacare, HHS reported. That puts the total at 17.6 million, up from 16 million as of March, according to the department's analysis.
These findings are consistent with numerous other studies and surveys. The U.S. Census Bureau announced last week that 9 million people had gained coverage through the end of 2014, and Gallup polls have shown steep declines in the uninsured rate through the first half of 2015.Through the first half of this year, 9.9 million people were enrolled into health plans from the exchange marketplaces, down from 11.7 million in February. The decline came as some consumers gave up that insurance, whether because they got coverage from another source, they could not afford their premiums or for other reasons. HHS expects 9.1 million people will still have this coverage by year-end, which is in line with the department's own goals prior to the last open enrollment period.** **
Nevertheless, the pace of new sign-ups slowed during the first two years of Obamacare enrollment, and remains far behind what the Congressional Budget Office projects. The CBO expected 11 million people to have exchange plans this year, and for that number to more than double next year -- an outcome that seems far-fetched at current enrollment levels, especially given Burwell's assessment of the current challenges.
In addition, health insurance companies in some cases will implement large price increases that could dissuade consumers, though prices for the health insurance polices used to set subsidy levels appear more stable, suggesting that affordable options will remain available, at least in many markets. Enrollment also could be bolstered because the tax penalty for not complying with the Affordable Care Act's "individual mandate" to get coverage will be at least $325 per adult and $162.50 per child, an increase from this year, for people who don't qualify for an exemption.
To maximize enrollments during the upcoming sign-up round, Burwell said, HHS will concentrate its efforts on five geographic areas with large numbers of possible enrollees: Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Miami and northern New Jersey. These locations have the highest concentrations of uninsured but eligible people of anywhere in the nation. In addition, these areas have high concentrations of African-American and Hispanic residents -- and the uninsured rates remain higher in those communities than the national average, despite gains in recent years.
To cater to the remaining uninsured, HHS plans to intensify its public education about the tax credit subsidies available for private insurance on the exchanges, which 84 percent of current enrollees receive, Burwell said. The department will also unveil improvements to HealthCare.gov, the online portal to the federally run exchanges, such as better information about which medical providers and prescription drugs are covered by health insurance plans. And HHS will promote its call center and in-person assistance, which surveys have shown are especially valued by people of color.
HHS has not yet released its projections for how many more people will sign up on the exchanges during the open enrollment period for 2016 health coverage, which runs from Nov. 1 through Jan. 31. The federal government operates the health insurance exchanges, in whole or in part, in 37 states. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia run their own exchanges.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 5 hours ago.
By the end of this year, President Barack Obama's administration expects that a little more than 9 million people will be enrolled into health insurance policies obtained via the exchange marketplaces created by the Affordable Care Act. But the administration estimates another 10.5 million uninsured people are eligible -- and they're the most elusive customers in the market.
"As we reduce the rate of the uninsured, there are fewer potential marketplace customers out there," Burwell said during a speech at Howard University Hospital in Washington. "Overall, the open enrollment is going to be tougher than last year."
Nearly half of the remaining uninsured are between the ages of 18 and 34, the most coveted demographic for health insurers because of their relatively low medical costs -- but among the most difficult to enroll for the same reason, because the value of health coverage may be less apparent to consumers who need little medical care. And six out of 10 of those who could sign up for health insurance exchange plans earn too much to qualify for generous subsidies -- or, in some cases, any subsidies at all -- which for them puts the price of health insurance out of reach. The remaining 40 percent who earn less than that can be challenging to enroll despite the financial assistance because they may find even small premiums unaffordable. HHS released these estimates in a report Tuesday.
Burwell highlighted Obamacare's progress to date, citing a new departmental report finding that 15.3 million previously uninsured adults gained coverage between October 2013 -- when the first enrollment period began -- and this month, either from the exchanges or from Medicaid in states that expanded eligibility for that program under the Affordable Care Act. A separate provision allowing young adults to remain covered by their parents' insurance until age 26 accounted for an additional 2.3 million people who have health coverage they wouldn't have absent Obamacare, HHS reported. That puts the total at 17.6 million, up from 16 million as of March, according to the department's analysis.
These findings are consistent with numerous other studies and surveys. The U.S. Census Bureau announced last week that 9 million people had gained coverage through the end of 2014, and Gallup polls have shown steep declines in the uninsured rate through the first half of 2015.Through the first half of this year, 9.9 million people were enrolled into health plans from the exchange marketplaces, down from 11.7 million in February. The decline came as some consumers gave up that insurance, whether because they got coverage from another source, they could not afford their premiums or for other reasons. HHS expects 9.1 million people will still have this coverage by year-end, which is in line with the department's own goals prior to the last open enrollment period.** **
Nevertheless, the pace of new sign-ups slowed during the first two years of Obamacare enrollment, and remains far behind what the Congressional Budget Office projects. The CBO expected 11 million people to have exchange plans this year, and for that number to more than double next year -- an outcome that seems far-fetched at current enrollment levels, especially given Burwell's assessment of the current challenges.
In addition, health insurance companies in some cases will implement large price increases that could dissuade consumers, though prices for the health insurance polices used to set subsidy levels appear more stable, suggesting that affordable options will remain available, at least in many markets. Enrollment also could be bolstered because the tax penalty for not complying with the Affordable Care Act's "individual mandate" to get coverage will be at least $325 per adult and $162.50 per child, an increase from this year, for people who don't qualify for an exemption.
To maximize enrollments during the upcoming sign-up round, Burwell said, HHS will concentrate its efforts on five geographic areas with large numbers of possible enrollees: Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Miami and northern New Jersey. These locations have the highest concentrations of uninsured but eligible people of anywhere in the nation. In addition, these areas have high concentrations of African-American and Hispanic residents -- and the uninsured rates remain higher in those communities than the national average, despite gains in recent years.
To cater to the remaining uninsured, HHS plans to intensify its public education about the tax credit subsidies available for private insurance on the exchanges, which 84 percent of current enrollees receive, Burwell said. The department will also unveil improvements to HealthCare.gov, the online portal to the federally run exchanges, such as better information about which medical providers and prescription drugs are covered by health insurance plans. And HHS will promote its call center and in-person assistance, which surveys have shown are especially valued by people of color.
HHS has not yet released its projections for how many more people will sign up on the exchanges during the open enrollment period for 2016 health coverage, which runs from Nov. 1 through Jan. 31. The federal government operates the health insurance exchanges, in whole or in part, in 37 states. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia run their own exchanges.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 5 hours ago.
↧
Who isn't signing up for Obamacare? HHS offers up some data
WASHINGTON - About 17.6 million Americans signed up for Affordable Care Act health insurance in 2015. But the Obama administration estimates that 10.5 million uninsured Americans were eligible, but didn't sign up -- despite subsidies designed to keep costs down....
Reported by nola.com 5 hours ago.
↧
Study shows employers shifting more medical costs to workers
Study shows employers shifting more medical costs to workers Employers are leaving a bigger chunk of the bill for care to workers who use their health insurance, and benefits experts see few signs of this trend slowing. Most companies now offer health coverage that requires employees to pay an annual deductible before insurance kicks in, and the size of that deductible has soared in the past decade, according to a survey released Tuesday by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust. Altman calls this cost shift a "quiet revolution in health insurance," obscured in recent years by the health care overhaul's coverage expansion for people who don't have coverage through work. Companies of all sizes offer coverage as a way to keep workers and make sure they stay healthy. The South Whitley, Indiana, company also helps cover about half the cost of that deductible with contributions to an employee health reimbursement arrangement account, Controller Eric Trump said. Paducah, Kentucky, resident Emmett Krall says the annual deductible of $3,500 on his employer-sponsored health insurance makes him think about cost more than he wants to, especially since his 10-year-old son was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes last year.
Reported by SeattlePI.com 5 hours ago.
↧
Obamacare Enrollment Increased to 17.6 Million
The total of Americans gaining health insurance through Obamacare has been revised to 17.6 million - a mark more than 1 million higher than previously believed.
Reported by Newsmax 4 hours ago.
↧
↧
Uninsured are getting harder to sign up
The most eager customers have already signed up; many of the remaining uninsured are young adults who may not see the value of coverage and those who remain are juggling tight household budgets. Burwell says an estimated 10.5 million Americans who remain uninsured are eligible for subsidized private health insurance through HealthCare.gov and state-run insurance markets.
Reported by SeattlePI.com 5 hours ago.
↧
Article on the Rise of House Call Medicine Highlights the Possibilities for Multi-Track Care, Notes House Call Doctor Los Angeles
Commenting on the recent article, the Los Angeles house call medicine service says that, while hospitals will always be needed, at-home medical care provides great opportunities for getting the best of both healthcare worlds.
Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) September 22, 2015
In an article published August 20th by FX Street, the authors from Dent Research noted that house call medicine may be the secret to keeping costs low in the future of healthcare. The writers explain that, with rising health insurance deductibles, the out-of-pocket cost for these house call visits can be far below the deductible amount that a patient would have to pay if they were to seek out healthcare at a hospital emergency room or local urgent care facility. This makes house call medicine an option that is not only incredibly convenient and comforting for the patient, but also financially competitive when it comes to receiving care that is identical or sometimes superior to what one might expect from a hospital.
Dr. Michael Farzam, the founder and head physician at House Call Doctor Los Angeles notes that many people, the authors of this article included, are realizing that house call medicine may be a way to save money on medical needs that don’t require true emergency care. Yet, Dr. Farzam also notes that this does not mean house call medicine is simply about writing prescriptions and treating the common cold. He explains several other areas where patients can skip the deductible by going with high quality, at-home care:· Urgent Care – While people don’t often think of staying in their home when they require urgent care, Dr. Farzam notes that House Call Doctor Los Angeles makes this a reality. While an apparently life-threatening injury should always lead to an immediate trip to the hospital, other urgent care needs such as a mysterious and sudden stomach ache, rash, or flu-like illness, can typically be treated with good results in the comfort of a patient’s home.
· Diagnostics – Dr. Farzam also points out that one of the reasons that hospitals became the centralized locations for medical care throughout the last century was that advanced machinery was needed for diagnosis and care. However, as technology has continued to move forward, that has become less important. Medical advancements have allowed machines such as x-rays and those needed to conduct blood draws to become mobile and available for use in a patients home. While Dr. Farzam notes that the need for extra equipment may increase the cost of a house call visit, the total bill will often come out to much less than the deductible to have the same care in a hospital.
Dr. Farzam notes that, as a physician who has gained a tremendous amount of experience from and who is still associated with hospitals, centralized medicine will always have an important place in our society’s medical care. Yet, those interested in a cheaper, more convenient, and more comforting way to receive high quality care for a wide variety of medical concerns can call House Call Doctor Los Angeles at 310-849-7991, or visit the medical practice online at http://www.HouseCallDoctorLA.com. Reported by PRWeb 4 hours ago.
Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) September 22, 2015
In an article published August 20th by FX Street, the authors from Dent Research noted that house call medicine may be the secret to keeping costs low in the future of healthcare. The writers explain that, with rising health insurance deductibles, the out-of-pocket cost for these house call visits can be far below the deductible amount that a patient would have to pay if they were to seek out healthcare at a hospital emergency room or local urgent care facility. This makes house call medicine an option that is not only incredibly convenient and comforting for the patient, but also financially competitive when it comes to receiving care that is identical or sometimes superior to what one might expect from a hospital.
Dr. Michael Farzam, the founder and head physician at House Call Doctor Los Angeles notes that many people, the authors of this article included, are realizing that house call medicine may be a way to save money on medical needs that don’t require true emergency care. Yet, Dr. Farzam also notes that this does not mean house call medicine is simply about writing prescriptions and treating the common cold. He explains several other areas where patients can skip the deductible by going with high quality, at-home care:· Urgent Care – While people don’t often think of staying in their home when they require urgent care, Dr. Farzam notes that House Call Doctor Los Angeles makes this a reality. While an apparently life-threatening injury should always lead to an immediate trip to the hospital, other urgent care needs such as a mysterious and sudden stomach ache, rash, or flu-like illness, can typically be treated with good results in the comfort of a patient’s home.
· Diagnostics – Dr. Farzam also points out that one of the reasons that hospitals became the centralized locations for medical care throughout the last century was that advanced machinery was needed for diagnosis and care. However, as technology has continued to move forward, that has become less important. Medical advancements have allowed machines such as x-rays and those needed to conduct blood draws to become mobile and available for use in a patients home. While Dr. Farzam notes that the need for extra equipment may increase the cost of a house call visit, the total bill will often come out to much less than the deductible to have the same care in a hospital.
Dr. Farzam notes that, as a physician who has gained a tremendous amount of experience from and who is still associated with hospitals, centralized medicine will always have an important place in our society’s medical care. Yet, those interested in a cheaper, more convenient, and more comforting way to receive high quality care for a wide variety of medical concerns can call House Call Doctor Los Angeles at 310-849-7991, or visit the medical practice online at http://www.HouseCallDoctorLA.com. Reported by PRWeb 4 hours ago.
↧
5 Ways to Get Personal Time Approved When Your Boss Isn't On Board
Sure, the summer may be over, but that doesn't necessarily mean we're done with beautiful weather. Whether or not September and October bring beautiful days of Indian summer and you enjoy a day off here or there, chances are your personal time bank may not necessarily be empty.
According to Fortune, employees in the U.S. squander approximately 429 million paid vacation days every year. That's worth repeating: 429 million days of unused paid time!
Data from a new Monster poll shows 22 percent -- that's nearly one out of four -- U.S. employees don't exactly have the easiest time getting to enjoy the actual paid time off, better known as PTO. Chalk it up to a difficult approval process, boss and/or challenging culture, the point remains: Some workplace environments may not necessarily be supportive of well-deserved and well-earned time away from the office as in unplugged, logged off and enjoying life. Here's what you can do about it.
*
Start small: Ask for one day off.* If your boss isn't the most receptive when you ask for a week off, break it down. Tack on a day here or there so you have long weekends to check out the foliage, get a head start on holiday or shopping or to simply enjoy a staycation in your backyard.
And when you're offline, stay offline. Ask yourself if the entire company will collapse just because you're out of sight, out of mind for eight hours. Have a back-up contact in place for your OOO and provide colleagues with your cell phone number if they don't already have it so you're reachable in case of a true emergency. Sometimes even a mental health day where you do nothing more than clean out the garage is just what the doctor ordered. Hopefully when you return to work your boss will realize it's definitely not a bad thing you were absent. In turn, you will hopefully get more green lights to take PTO.
*Be cognizant of when you're asking for time off.* If you've consistently asked for time off during your department's busiest time of the year, as 2015 heads into the home stretch, be aware of asking for time pegged to your most hectic time of year. There may be a reason why, valid or not, your boss has not been on board.
That said, sometimes the time for PTO isn't exactly in your control, especially when there's a family commitment like an out of town wedding. You can say something to reference that you realize it isn't the best scenario and that you also have time left which will likely go unspent. Illustrate how you'll prepare your colleagues ahead of time.
*Be aware of how you're asking.* Communication styles matter. If your boss hasn't been on board, maybe email isn't the best way to get a quick, curt response. Have a conversation instead and mention you're entitled to time off and it won't significantly impact your department.
Sometimes one of the biggest barriers we have to overcome is ourselves. Once you convince yourself wholeheartedly that you deserve this time off and leadership created this policy for a reason, respect and honor it, then figure out how to approach it based on your boss's preferred communication styles. Plus, realize you're setting a positive example for others in the group about the importance of taking care of yourself. In turn, that will hopefully make a positive impact on your office even though it may not be culturally accepted to do so.
*Accept time off as a job requirement. *When I worked in recruiting, while extending job offers, salary and title were the first points to communicate, the personal day policies followed soon thereafter. It's no different, really than viewing it as your employer's potential 401(k) match or health insurance -- items available with implicit assumptions to be utilized to the fullest extent. These items are an all or nothing approach -- why shouldn't PTO be viewed the same way?
While some employees may bank their days since they don't know what lies ahead, keep in mind many companies have policies in place so you can leave your personal time intact. For instance, if there's an unfortunate death in the family, that may be tacked onto a bereavement policy of a day or two or more. And if you're in the hospital with a loved one, perhaps there's leniency to work remotely instead of tapping into your PTO.
Remind yourself, and your boss, of the value added when taking a break and returning to the office refreshed. If you've ever been burned out, you know the feeling. And in this day and age with technology, it's harder and harder to unplug but here's why you should: The Harvard Business Review commented on an EY study revealing that for each 10 hours of vacation employees actually took, employees' performance ratings landed better feedback on their performance reviews the following year.
Feel free to remind both yourself and your boss that people who take time off return to the office refreshed, creative, productive and, according to the data, with an 8 percent higher performance rating!
*Find a better job.* Many times a boss and/or corporate culture that are unsupportive of taking a break and returning to work refreshed may be reflective of bigger, underlying issues. If you discover there isn't a work-life balance and instead, it's all work work work, it may be time to pause and wonder about a recurring theme as to why you're constantly getting push back on time off that you're entitled to. Constant push back is a sign your boss isn't ever going to be on board. This may provide inspiration to seek a better job externally with an employer placing an emphasis on its people and their time off.
In addition, if the approval process is complex and you need several rounds of approvals and find you're having to justify what you're doing while you're out of the office, like if it's a cruise it's worthy but if it's a matter of spending time spring cleaning, it's not, then it's definitely time to pause and seek a better culture that values its employees and most importantly, their well being. All paid time off is created equally whether or not you're doing something fun or doing chores at home. You're still entitled to take it.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.
According to Fortune, employees in the U.S. squander approximately 429 million paid vacation days every year. That's worth repeating: 429 million days of unused paid time!
Data from a new Monster poll shows 22 percent -- that's nearly one out of four -- U.S. employees don't exactly have the easiest time getting to enjoy the actual paid time off, better known as PTO. Chalk it up to a difficult approval process, boss and/or challenging culture, the point remains: Some workplace environments may not necessarily be supportive of well-deserved and well-earned time away from the office as in unplugged, logged off and enjoying life. Here's what you can do about it.
*
Start small: Ask for one day off.* If your boss isn't the most receptive when you ask for a week off, break it down. Tack on a day here or there so you have long weekends to check out the foliage, get a head start on holiday or shopping or to simply enjoy a staycation in your backyard.
And when you're offline, stay offline. Ask yourself if the entire company will collapse just because you're out of sight, out of mind for eight hours. Have a back-up contact in place for your OOO and provide colleagues with your cell phone number if they don't already have it so you're reachable in case of a true emergency. Sometimes even a mental health day where you do nothing more than clean out the garage is just what the doctor ordered. Hopefully when you return to work your boss will realize it's definitely not a bad thing you were absent. In turn, you will hopefully get more green lights to take PTO.
*Be cognizant of when you're asking for time off.* If you've consistently asked for time off during your department's busiest time of the year, as 2015 heads into the home stretch, be aware of asking for time pegged to your most hectic time of year. There may be a reason why, valid or not, your boss has not been on board.
That said, sometimes the time for PTO isn't exactly in your control, especially when there's a family commitment like an out of town wedding. You can say something to reference that you realize it isn't the best scenario and that you also have time left which will likely go unspent. Illustrate how you'll prepare your colleagues ahead of time.
*Be aware of how you're asking.* Communication styles matter. If your boss hasn't been on board, maybe email isn't the best way to get a quick, curt response. Have a conversation instead and mention you're entitled to time off and it won't significantly impact your department.
Sometimes one of the biggest barriers we have to overcome is ourselves. Once you convince yourself wholeheartedly that you deserve this time off and leadership created this policy for a reason, respect and honor it, then figure out how to approach it based on your boss's preferred communication styles. Plus, realize you're setting a positive example for others in the group about the importance of taking care of yourself. In turn, that will hopefully make a positive impact on your office even though it may not be culturally accepted to do so.
*Accept time off as a job requirement. *When I worked in recruiting, while extending job offers, salary and title were the first points to communicate, the personal day policies followed soon thereafter. It's no different, really than viewing it as your employer's potential 401(k) match or health insurance -- items available with implicit assumptions to be utilized to the fullest extent. These items are an all or nothing approach -- why shouldn't PTO be viewed the same way?
While some employees may bank their days since they don't know what lies ahead, keep in mind many companies have policies in place so you can leave your personal time intact. For instance, if there's an unfortunate death in the family, that may be tacked onto a bereavement policy of a day or two or more. And if you're in the hospital with a loved one, perhaps there's leniency to work remotely instead of tapping into your PTO.
Remind yourself, and your boss, of the value added when taking a break and returning to the office refreshed. If you've ever been burned out, you know the feeling. And in this day and age with technology, it's harder and harder to unplug but here's why you should: The Harvard Business Review commented on an EY study revealing that for each 10 hours of vacation employees actually took, employees' performance ratings landed better feedback on their performance reviews the following year.
Feel free to remind both yourself and your boss that people who take time off return to the office refreshed, creative, productive and, according to the data, with an 8 percent higher performance rating!
*Find a better job.* Many times a boss and/or corporate culture that are unsupportive of taking a break and returning to work refreshed may be reflective of bigger, underlying issues. If you discover there isn't a work-life balance and instead, it's all work work work, it may be time to pause and wonder about a recurring theme as to why you're constantly getting push back on time off that you're entitled to. Constant push back is a sign your boss isn't ever going to be on board. This may provide inspiration to seek a better job externally with an employer placing an emphasis on its people and their time off.
In addition, if the approval process is complex and you need several rounds of approvals and find you're having to justify what you're doing while you're out of the office, like if it's a cruise it's worthy but if it's a matter of spending time spring cleaning, it's not, then it's definitely time to pause and seek a better culture that values its employees and most importantly, their well being. All paid time off is created equally whether or not you're doing something fun or doing chores at home. You're still entitled to take it.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.
↧
New Data Show Slow Health Care Cost Growth is Continuing
New data released today by the Kaiser Family Foundation show that premium growth in employer-sponsored coverage remained slow in 2015, extending the recent streak of unusually slow growth. Taken together with estimates of current trends in Medicare spending released this summer, these data suggest that underlying growth in per-enrollee health care costs remains low, even as the dramatic expansion in coverage since early 2014 drives a temporary uptick in the growth of aggregate health care spending. Recent years’ slow growth in health care costs—which is thanks in part to the Affordable Care Act—is already generating major benefits for workers and our fiscal outlook. Looking ahead, keeping these positive trends going will require that we continue to make good use of the tools provided by the Affordable Care Act, including: moving our health care system toward payment models that reward efficient, high-quality care; continuing to foster a transparent and competitive Health Insurance Marketplace; and implementing the law’s tax provision that encourages high-cost employer plans to become more efficient.
SIX KEY POINTS ON NEW DATA ON EMPLOYER COVERAGE IN 2015
*1. Premiums in employer-based coverage continued to grow slowly in 2015.* The new Kaiser survey finds that the average premium for employer-based family coverage grew 4.2 percent in 2015. While slightly faster than the record-tying 3 percent rate recorded in 2014, this reading for 2015 continues the recent pattern of unusually slow growth; the last four years account for four of the five lowest growth rates since the survey began in 1999. The Kaiser estimates corroborate earlier estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employer Cost Index that showed that slow growth in employers’ health benefit costs continued into 2015, as well as results from a national survey released last week by the consulting firm Mercer, which found that employers have seen slow growth persist through 2015 and expect it to continue into 2016.
Sustained slow premium growth is generating major benefits for families and businesses. Had premium growth since 2010 matched the average rate recorded over the preceding decade, the average total premium for employer-based family coverage would have been nearly $2,600 higher in 2015. A large portion of these savings have accrued directly to workers in the form of lower premium contributions. Employers’ savings on their portion of premium spending may be reducing total compensation costs in the short run, helping to boost job growth; economic theory and evidence indicate that these savings will be passed on to workers as higher wages in the long run.
*2. Recent estimates suggest that Medicare spending per enrollee is continuing to grow slowly as well. *In July, the Office of the Actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services released updated projections of growth in per-enrollee spending in Medicare for 2014 and 2015. While these estimates are projections, they reflect data on actual Medicare spending for all of 2014 and part of 2015, so they tend to be particularly reliable. Nominal Medicare spending per beneficiary is projected to grow just 1.0 percent in 2015, only slightly faster than recent projections of overall inflation in 2015 and slower than measures of inflation that exclude the recent sharp decline in energy prices. If this projection holds, then 2015 will be the sixth consecutive year in which growth in Medicare spending per beneficiary was roughly in line with overall inflation economy-wide, a stark contrast to trends over the decade preceding 2010.
*
*
*3. The continued slow growth in per-enrollee spending in employer coverage and Medicare shows that the pickup in aggregate health care spending growth since the start of 2014 largely reflects transient effects of expanding coverage. *Data for the last several quarters have shown a turn toward faster (though still moderate in historical terms) growth in aggregate spending on the three largest categories of health care goods and services: hospital services, ambulatory services, and prescription drugs.
However, this faster aggregate growth does not reflect rapid growth in the cost of health care for an individual or a family; the data presented above for the two largest segments of the United States health care system indicate that growth in per-enrollee costs has ticked up only modestly, if at all. Rather, the driving factor is likely the significant expansion in insurance coverage since late 2013 as the main coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act have taken effect, an expansion of coverage that is by far the largest since the decade following the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. As we have noted on several prior occasions, it is not a surprise, nor a cause for concern, to see a temporary period of faster growth as newly insured individuals begin to access care.
The exception is prescription drug spending, where the uptick in spending growth is much larger than can be accounted for by recent coverage expansions. Available data indicate that the main factor driving faster drug spending has been the arrival of costly, though often effective, new therapies. While the implications of the recent acceleration in drug spending for the overall health care spending outlook should not be overstated since drug spending currently accounts for only about one-tenth of total health care spending and drug spending growth may decline somewhat relative to its recent rapid pace, trends in this area have raised concerns about access and affordability in both the public and private sectors.
*
*
*4. Average deductibles in employer coverage rose again in 2015, but the increase was in line with trends stretching back more than a decade. *Typical deductibles in employer coverage have been rising for more than a decade, and the new Kaiser data indicate that that trend continued in 2015. As demonstrated in the figure above, however, neither the Kaiser data nor the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (which provides a longer-term view on these trends) indicate that deductibles have risen more quickly in recent years. This means that there is no sense in which continued growth in deductibles is “cancelling out” the benefits to workers stemming from recent years’ very slow premium growth and that rising deductibles are unlikely to be an important reason that premium growth has been so much slower recently than in the past.
*5. Virtually all workers enrolled in employer coverage now have a limit on their annual out-of-pocket spending, a protection that more than one in six enrolled workers lacked when the ACA became law.* One core function of health insurance is to provide protection against catastrophic costs in the face of serious illness. Starting in 2014, the ACA required that all non-grandfathered health insurance plans place a limit on total annual out-of-pocket spending, protection which 18 percent of workers enrolled in single coverage lacked as of 2010, according to the Kaiser survey. The share without an out-of-pocket limit drifted lower after 2010 (possibly in part because firms were preparing for 2014), then fell sharply as the ACA requirement took effect; today’s data show that just 2 percent of workers in single coverage lacked such a limit in 2015. If the prevalence of out-of-pocket limits had remained at its 2010 level, we estimate that at least 22 million people enrolled in employer coverage would lack this protection today.
*
*
*6. The persistence of slow health care cost growth raises the likelihood that much of the health care cost slowdown reflects long-lasting structural changes in the health care sector, including changes in public policy, not the aftereffects of the Great Recession or other transitory factors. *As we have discussed previously, the Great Recession likely played some role in reducing health care cost growth during the downturn itself and in the early stages of the recovery (at least in the private sector). However, the United States is now more than six years into an economic recovery that has created 13.1 million private sector jobs over 66 months of job growth and driven the unemployment rate back to levels last seen in the spring of 2008, before the worst of the financial crisis hit. It is therefore increasingly likely that whatever role macroeconomic factors may have played in the immediate aftermath of the Great Recession, structural changes in the health care system—including changes in public policy and other factors that would have a persistent effect on health care spending over the long run—are playing the lead role in keeping health care cost growth low today.
Matt Fiedler is Chief Economist of the Council of Economic Advisers. Reported by The White House 3 hours ago.
SIX KEY POINTS ON NEW DATA ON EMPLOYER COVERAGE IN 2015
*1. Premiums in employer-based coverage continued to grow slowly in 2015.* The new Kaiser survey finds that the average premium for employer-based family coverage grew 4.2 percent in 2015. While slightly faster than the record-tying 3 percent rate recorded in 2014, this reading for 2015 continues the recent pattern of unusually slow growth; the last four years account for four of the five lowest growth rates since the survey began in 1999. The Kaiser estimates corroborate earlier estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employer Cost Index that showed that slow growth in employers’ health benefit costs continued into 2015, as well as results from a national survey released last week by the consulting firm Mercer, which found that employers have seen slow growth persist through 2015 and expect it to continue into 2016.
Sustained slow premium growth is generating major benefits for families and businesses. Had premium growth since 2010 matched the average rate recorded over the preceding decade, the average total premium for employer-based family coverage would have been nearly $2,600 higher in 2015. A large portion of these savings have accrued directly to workers in the form of lower premium contributions. Employers’ savings on their portion of premium spending may be reducing total compensation costs in the short run, helping to boost job growth; economic theory and evidence indicate that these savings will be passed on to workers as higher wages in the long run.
*2. Recent estimates suggest that Medicare spending per enrollee is continuing to grow slowly as well. *In July, the Office of the Actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services released updated projections of growth in per-enrollee spending in Medicare for 2014 and 2015. While these estimates are projections, they reflect data on actual Medicare spending for all of 2014 and part of 2015, so they tend to be particularly reliable. Nominal Medicare spending per beneficiary is projected to grow just 1.0 percent in 2015, only slightly faster than recent projections of overall inflation in 2015 and slower than measures of inflation that exclude the recent sharp decline in energy prices. If this projection holds, then 2015 will be the sixth consecutive year in which growth in Medicare spending per beneficiary was roughly in line with overall inflation economy-wide, a stark contrast to trends over the decade preceding 2010.
*
*
*3. The continued slow growth in per-enrollee spending in employer coverage and Medicare shows that the pickup in aggregate health care spending growth since the start of 2014 largely reflects transient effects of expanding coverage. *Data for the last several quarters have shown a turn toward faster (though still moderate in historical terms) growth in aggregate spending on the three largest categories of health care goods and services: hospital services, ambulatory services, and prescription drugs.
However, this faster aggregate growth does not reflect rapid growth in the cost of health care for an individual or a family; the data presented above for the two largest segments of the United States health care system indicate that growth in per-enrollee costs has ticked up only modestly, if at all. Rather, the driving factor is likely the significant expansion in insurance coverage since late 2013 as the main coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act have taken effect, an expansion of coverage that is by far the largest since the decade following the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. As we have noted on several prior occasions, it is not a surprise, nor a cause for concern, to see a temporary period of faster growth as newly insured individuals begin to access care.
The exception is prescription drug spending, where the uptick in spending growth is much larger than can be accounted for by recent coverage expansions. Available data indicate that the main factor driving faster drug spending has been the arrival of costly, though often effective, new therapies. While the implications of the recent acceleration in drug spending for the overall health care spending outlook should not be overstated since drug spending currently accounts for only about one-tenth of total health care spending and drug spending growth may decline somewhat relative to its recent rapid pace, trends in this area have raised concerns about access and affordability in both the public and private sectors.
*
*
*4. Average deductibles in employer coverage rose again in 2015, but the increase was in line with trends stretching back more than a decade. *Typical deductibles in employer coverage have been rising for more than a decade, and the new Kaiser data indicate that that trend continued in 2015. As demonstrated in the figure above, however, neither the Kaiser data nor the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (which provides a longer-term view on these trends) indicate that deductibles have risen more quickly in recent years. This means that there is no sense in which continued growth in deductibles is “cancelling out” the benefits to workers stemming from recent years’ very slow premium growth and that rising deductibles are unlikely to be an important reason that premium growth has been so much slower recently than in the past.
*5. Virtually all workers enrolled in employer coverage now have a limit on their annual out-of-pocket spending, a protection that more than one in six enrolled workers lacked when the ACA became law.* One core function of health insurance is to provide protection against catastrophic costs in the face of serious illness. Starting in 2014, the ACA required that all non-grandfathered health insurance plans place a limit on total annual out-of-pocket spending, protection which 18 percent of workers enrolled in single coverage lacked as of 2010, according to the Kaiser survey. The share without an out-of-pocket limit drifted lower after 2010 (possibly in part because firms were preparing for 2014), then fell sharply as the ACA requirement took effect; today’s data show that just 2 percent of workers in single coverage lacked such a limit in 2015. If the prevalence of out-of-pocket limits had remained at its 2010 level, we estimate that at least 22 million people enrolled in employer coverage would lack this protection today.
*
*
*6. The persistence of slow health care cost growth raises the likelihood that much of the health care cost slowdown reflects long-lasting structural changes in the health care sector, including changes in public policy, not the aftereffects of the Great Recession or other transitory factors. *As we have discussed previously, the Great Recession likely played some role in reducing health care cost growth during the downturn itself and in the early stages of the recovery (at least in the private sector). However, the United States is now more than six years into an economic recovery that has created 13.1 million private sector jobs over 66 months of job growth and driven the unemployment rate back to levels last seen in the spring of 2008, before the worst of the financial crisis hit. It is therefore increasingly likely that whatever role macroeconomic factors may have played in the immediate aftermath of the Great Recession, structural changes in the health care system—including changes in public policy and other factors that would have a persistent effect on health care spending over the long run—are playing the lead role in keeping health care cost growth low today.
Matt Fiedler is Chief Economist of the Council of Economic Advisers. Reported by The White House 3 hours ago.
↧
↧
Open Letter to Dr. Ben Carson on His Disregard for the U.S. Constitution
Dear Dr. Carson,
I write to express my disappointment at best for your statements on the NBC Sunday broadcast of "Meet the Press" on September 20, 2015. Host Chuck Todd raised the controversy surrounding Donald Trump's failure to correct an audience member in a town hall meeting in New Hampshire last week who asserted that President Obama is a Muslim, and then he advocated for the forceful deportation of Muslims from the U.S. Todd then asked you about your take on the controversy, to which you replied that a Muslim should not become president of our country: "I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that."
As a highly educated person, as a candidate for the presidency, and as someone who has co-authored, along with your wife Candy, a book titled A More Perfect Union: What We the People Can Do to Reclaim Our Constitutional Liberties, you should have a more enlightened understanding of our nation's foundational document.
In the book you write generally about the "basic principles" of the Constitution and how "they relate to our everyday lives." You go on to state: "I believe that making a difference starts with understanding our amazing founding document, the U.S. Constitution." You assert that both you and Candy wrote the book to "help defend" the Constitution "from those who misinterpret and undermine it."
Well, now I'm really confused! How can you inform others and "help defend" the Constitution when you do not have even a basic understanding? Your recorded statements indicate that you have misinterpreted and undermined the document. If this were not the case, you would not have made your blatantly Islamophobic assertions on "Meet the Press," especially when Todd asked you, "So do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution," and you replied, "No, I don't. I do not."
Your answer leads me to believe that you practice a version of "cafeteria Constitutionalism" picking and choosing which of the passages should refer to which groups of people. Since you are a Christian follower of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, I am assuming that you are not placing Article VI of the US Constitution on your cafeteria tray: "No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." In addition, you seem to want to delete the First Amendment from the menu and toss it down the garbage disposal: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..."
When Donald Trump makes his racist and xenophobic statements about immigrants, and when he throws misogynistic tantrums about women, and when he does not correct questioners about President Obama's religion and birth status, I am not particularly surprised since Trump has centered his entire campaign on issues and discussions based on hate and fear that seem to have resonated with the base of the Republican Party.
You Dr. Carson, in fact, appear to practice the same sort of despicable tactics as Donald Trump (as well as many others with whom you share the debate stage and the clown car as you all drive down the path toward the presidential primaries). I see an underlying philosophical trend among many of you Republican candidates, whether on issues around immigration, issues of equity between genders and sexual identities, and issues of religion.
Once people like yourselves have entered the doorway of opportunity, you attempt to close the door in the face of others. All of the candidates are citizens of the United States, so now you want to close the door of citizenship to others. Since you all have quality healthcare, you want to take it away from the estimated 16 million people who now have health insurance for the first time under the Affordable Care Act. Though you may assume that all presidents since George Washington have followed Christian faiths -- though some have defined themselves instead as "Deists" -- you want to close the door of the office to anyone other than those of you with verified Christian credentials.
Dr. Carson, you are running for the presidency by standing on the shoulders of the brave and tireless pioneers who came before you who made it possible for you and for Mr. Obama. I still remember seeing on television the lunch counter sit-ins, the voting rights registration drives, the "Freedom Schools," the marches, and the many other forms of civil disobedience aimed at abolishing discriminatory and abusive "Jim Crow" laws, which advanced and strengthened white supremacy by maintaining segregation and withholding the ballot from people of color.
Your statements and those of many of your challengers on the Republican side of the political spectrum are replicating discriminatory policies by advancing and strengthening Christian supremacy by maintaining segregation and withholding opportunities from non-Christians, in particular, Muslims. How "Constitutional" Dr. Carson are these actions?
In your book you write: "And as someone who has performed brain surgery thousands of times, I can assure you that the Constitution isn't brain surgery." Well, Dr. Carson, maybe you need to rethink your candidacy, and instead keep your day job, since you understand much better the structures of the brain instead of how to use it to defend and preserve the Constitution of the United States of America.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 3 hours ago.
I write to express my disappointment at best for your statements on the NBC Sunday broadcast of "Meet the Press" on September 20, 2015. Host Chuck Todd raised the controversy surrounding Donald Trump's failure to correct an audience member in a town hall meeting in New Hampshire last week who asserted that President Obama is a Muslim, and then he advocated for the forceful deportation of Muslims from the U.S. Todd then asked you about your take on the controversy, to which you replied that a Muslim should not become president of our country: "I would not advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation. I absolutely would not agree with that."
As a highly educated person, as a candidate for the presidency, and as someone who has co-authored, along with your wife Candy, a book titled A More Perfect Union: What We the People Can Do to Reclaim Our Constitutional Liberties, you should have a more enlightened understanding of our nation's foundational document.
In the book you write generally about the "basic principles" of the Constitution and how "they relate to our everyday lives." You go on to state: "I believe that making a difference starts with understanding our amazing founding document, the U.S. Constitution." You assert that both you and Candy wrote the book to "help defend" the Constitution "from those who misinterpret and undermine it."
Well, now I'm really confused! How can you inform others and "help defend" the Constitution when you do not have even a basic understanding? Your recorded statements indicate that you have misinterpreted and undermined the document. If this were not the case, you would not have made your blatantly Islamophobic assertions on "Meet the Press," especially when Todd asked you, "So do you believe that Islam is consistent with the Constitution," and you replied, "No, I don't. I do not."
Your answer leads me to believe that you practice a version of "cafeteria Constitutionalism" picking and choosing which of the passages should refer to which groups of people. Since you are a Christian follower of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, I am assuming that you are not placing Article VI of the US Constitution on your cafeteria tray: "No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." In addition, you seem to want to delete the First Amendment from the menu and toss it down the garbage disposal: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..."
When Donald Trump makes his racist and xenophobic statements about immigrants, and when he throws misogynistic tantrums about women, and when he does not correct questioners about President Obama's religion and birth status, I am not particularly surprised since Trump has centered his entire campaign on issues and discussions based on hate and fear that seem to have resonated with the base of the Republican Party.
You Dr. Carson, in fact, appear to practice the same sort of despicable tactics as Donald Trump (as well as many others with whom you share the debate stage and the clown car as you all drive down the path toward the presidential primaries). I see an underlying philosophical trend among many of you Republican candidates, whether on issues around immigration, issues of equity between genders and sexual identities, and issues of religion.
Once people like yourselves have entered the doorway of opportunity, you attempt to close the door in the face of others. All of the candidates are citizens of the United States, so now you want to close the door of citizenship to others. Since you all have quality healthcare, you want to take it away from the estimated 16 million people who now have health insurance for the first time under the Affordable Care Act. Though you may assume that all presidents since George Washington have followed Christian faiths -- though some have defined themselves instead as "Deists" -- you want to close the door of the office to anyone other than those of you with verified Christian credentials.
Dr. Carson, you are running for the presidency by standing on the shoulders of the brave and tireless pioneers who came before you who made it possible for you and for Mr. Obama. I still remember seeing on television the lunch counter sit-ins, the voting rights registration drives, the "Freedom Schools," the marches, and the many other forms of civil disobedience aimed at abolishing discriminatory and abusive "Jim Crow" laws, which advanced and strengthened white supremacy by maintaining segregation and withholding the ballot from people of color.
Your statements and those of many of your challengers on the Republican side of the political spectrum are replicating discriminatory policies by advancing and strengthening Christian supremacy by maintaining segregation and withholding opportunities from non-Christians, in particular, Muslims. How "Constitutional" Dr. Carson are these actions?
In your book you write: "And as someone who has performed brain surgery thousands of times, I can assure you that the Constitution isn't brain surgery." Well, Dr. Carson, maybe you need to rethink your candidacy, and instead keep your day job, since you understand much better the structures of the brain instead of how to use it to defend and preserve the Constitution of the United States of America.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 3 hours ago.
↧
CEOs of Aetna, Anthem make case for health insurance mergers
WASHINGTON (AP) — The leaders of two major health insurers planning separate multi-billion dollar acquisitions made the case for the deals to Congress as senators questioned whether they would hurt competition and raise prices for consumers.
Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurer Anthem plans to buy Cigna for $48 billion, and rival Aetna is looking to buy Medicare Advantage coverage provider Humana for $35 billion. As a wave of consolidation sweeps through the industry, the deals came under scrutiny at a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing Tuesday.
The Justice Department must pass judgment on whether the mergers would make the companies so dominant that they could create a competitive imbalance and push already high health-care costs even higher.
Mark Bertolini, CEO of third-largest U.S. health insurer Aetna Inc., testified "robust choice and competition will remain in the Medicare market" after the acquisition of Humana. Anthem Inc. CEO Joseph Swedish said competition would be preserved and consumers would benefit from expanded access to care in its combination with Cigna.
If they are both approved by the government, the five major U.S. health insurance companies would be reduced to three. Of the current five biggest U.S. health insurers, only UnitedHealthcare isn't jostling to combine with another health insurer. It's doing its own big deal, adding a pharmacy benefits manager.
Insurers say these combinations can help them save money by cutting overlapping costs and improving their technology, which is becoming more important in monitoring patient health and helping customers find care. The acquisitions also are a way to quickly push into new markets and gain negotiating leverage over care providers like hospitals that have been growing and adding their own negotiating muscle in recent years.
But the consolidation wave could lead to fewer choices for consumers in some markets. Several provider and patient advocate groups have raised concerns about that.
The possible impact of these big acquisitions on consumers is murky and likely won't be felt for at least a year because insurers have already ironed out most of their plans for 2016 coverage. Whether the combinations lead to fewer choices and price changes depending on where the customer lives and what sort of presence the insurers already have in their market.
"I am deeply concerned about these mergers," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told the CEOs. "I'm deeply troubled by the evidence that shows that neither (health care) providers nor consumers benefit from these mergers."
Blumenthal said both proposed mergers raise "serious competitive concerns" and expressed skepticism that cost savings realized by the companies through the combinations would be passed on to consumers.
The Aetna and Anthem CEOs downplayed concerns about how their proposed acquisitions would affect competition. Bertolini said there are at least 10 other competitors on public insurance exchanges in markets where Aetna and Humana overlap.
"We are not at all concerned about the lack of competition in local markets," he said.
Swedish noted that a small insurer named Oscar started up to serve the New York and New Jersey markets and accumulated 45,000 customers in its first year.
"There are many new players that have entered the market and continue to enter the market," he said.
Rick Pollack, president and CEO of the American Hospital Association, who appeared at the hearing with the two CEOs, warned that both mergers "could be a blow to millions of health care consumers as well as the hospitals, doctors and others who are working to improve quality and efficiency while making care more affordable to patients."
The mergers could make health care more expensive and less accessible for consumers, Pollack said.
The American Medical Association analyzed both deals and expects that they would diminish competition in up to 154 metropolitan areas within 23 states. That could lead to higher coverage prices and unfair reimbursement terms for doctors, the physician group noted.
However, the insurance industry trade group America's Health Insurance Plans has said that the AMA analysis uses misleading data that does not accurately reflect the market.
__
Tom Murphy reported from Indianapolis.
Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 3 hours ago.
Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurer Anthem plans to buy Cigna for $48 billion, and rival Aetna is looking to buy Medicare Advantage coverage provider Humana for $35 billion. As a wave of consolidation sweeps through the industry, the deals came under scrutiny at a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing Tuesday.
The Justice Department must pass judgment on whether the mergers would make the companies so dominant that they could create a competitive imbalance and push already high health-care costs even higher.
Mark Bertolini, CEO of third-largest U.S. health insurer Aetna Inc., testified "robust choice and competition will remain in the Medicare market" after the acquisition of Humana. Anthem Inc. CEO Joseph Swedish said competition would be preserved and consumers would benefit from expanded access to care in its combination with Cigna.
If they are both approved by the government, the five major U.S. health insurance companies would be reduced to three. Of the current five biggest U.S. health insurers, only UnitedHealthcare isn't jostling to combine with another health insurer. It's doing its own big deal, adding a pharmacy benefits manager.
Insurers say these combinations can help them save money by cutting overlapping costs and improving their technology, which is becoming more important in monitoring patient health and helping customers find care. The acquisitions also are a way to quickly push into new markets and gain negotiating leverage over care providers like hospitals that have been growing and adding their own negotiating muscle in recent years.
But the consolidation wave could lead to fewer choices for consumers in some markets. Several provider and patient advocate groups have raised concerns about that.
The possible impact of these big acquisitions on consumers is murky and likely won't be felt for at least a year because insurers have already ironed out most of their plans for 2016 coverage. Whether the combinations lead to fewer choices and price changes depending on where the customer lives and what sort of presence the insurers already have in their market.
"I am deeply concerned about these mergers," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told the CEOs. "I'm deeply troubled by the evidence that shows that neither (health care) providers nor consumers benefit from these mergers."
Blumenthal said both proposed mergers raise "serious competitive concerns" and expressed skepticism that cost savings realized by the companies through the combinations would be passed on to consumers.
The Aetna and Anthem CEOs downplayed concerns about how their proposed acquisitions would affect competition. Bertolini said there are at least 10 other competitors on public insurance exchanges in markets where Aetna and Humana overlap.
"We are not at all concerned about the lack of competition in local markets," he said.
Swedish noted that a small insurer named Oscar started up to serve the New York and New Jersey markets and accumulated 45,000 customers in its first year.
"There are many new players that have entered the market and continue to enter the market," he said.
Rick Pollack, president and CEO of the American Hospital Association, who appeared at the hearing with the two CEOs, warned that both mergers "could be a blow to millions of health care consumers as well as the hospitals, doctors and others who are working to improve quality and efficiency while making care more affordable to patients."
The mergers could make health care more expensive and less accessible for consumers, Pollack said.
The American Medical Association analyzed both deals and expects that they would diminish competition in up to 154 metropolitan areas within 23 states. That could lead to higher coverage prices and unfair reimbursement terms for doctors, the physician group noted.
However, the insurance industry trade group America's Health Insurance Plans has said that the AMA analysis uses misleading data that does not accurately reflect the market.
__
Tom Murphy reported from Indianapolis.
Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 3 hours ago.
↧
CEOs of Aetna, Anthem Make Case for Health Insurance Mergers
CEOs of Aetna, Anthem make case for big health insurance mergers; panel looks at competition
Reported by ABCNews.com 3 hours ago.
↧
Health Insurance Deductibles Are On The Rise
The steep rise of the cost of deductibles since 2010 could be one reason healthcare spending has slowed in recent years, even as companies look to cut health costs.
Reported by IBTimes 2 hours ago.
↧
↧
Health Insurers Aetna, Anthem Defend Merger Deals
The chief executives of Aetna and Anthem defended their planned deals before a Senate subcommittee, facing sharply critical testimony that raised questions about the impact of health-insurance consolidation.
Reported by Wall Street Journal 2 hours ago.
↧
Health insurance premiums up only 4% - unless your business is really small
Premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance rose an average of 4 percent this year, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation/Health Research & Educational Trust. For employers as a whole, that continues a 10-year trend of modest increases in premiums, compared with the 11 percent annual increases, on average, they saw between 1999 and 2005. The news wasn’t so good for businesses with fewer than 25 employees, however. Their premiums for single coverage went up nearly 11 percent in 2015 to…
Reported by bizjournals 44 minutes ago.
↧
What would Aetna, Anthem health insurance merger deals mean for you?
The CEOs of two major health insurers planning separate multi-billion dollar acquisitions made the case for the deals to Congress as senators questioned whether they would hurt competition and raise prices for consumers.
Reported by Christian Science Monitor 44 minutes ago.
↧
Health insurance CEOs vow mergers won't make marketplace less competitive
Proposed mega-mergers between health insurance giants prompted by the Affordable Care Act won't harm the level of competition in the market, two chief executives pledged Tuesday to skeptical lawmakers.
Reported by L.A. Times 23 hours ago.
↧
↧
Employer-sponsored health insurance rises moderate on a national level
Employer-sponsored insurance premiums across the nation rose an average of 4 percent over the last year, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust. Increases to premiums over the last decade have been relatively modest, compared to an 11 percent average increase between 1999 and 2005. Most employers saw moderate increases because of higher employee contributions through deductibles. The national average annual single coverage premium is $6,251 and the average…
Reported by bizjournals 23 hours ago.
↧
Worst in the nation: Texas dead last for health insurance coverage, new data shows
Texas continues to lead the nation in the percentage of people lacking health insurance coverage, according to data released by the U.S. Census Bureau. Slightly more than 19 percent of Texas' population was without health insurance in 2014. That's about 5,047,477 people without insurance across the Lone Star State, down from 5,748,167, or 22 percent, in 2013. At the metro-area level, Texas' uninsured population ranks among the largest in the nation. Texas cities, large and small, make up seven…
Reported by bizjournals 22 hours ago.
↧
Health Insurers Aetna, Anthem Defend Merger Deals
The chief executives of Aetna and Anthem defended their planned deals before a Senate subcommittee, facing sharply critical testimony that raised questions about the impact of health-insurance consolidation.
Reported by Wall Street Journal 21 hours ago.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
