3rd Attempt: GOP/Trump Repeal & Replace ACA and Trump lie about pre-exist coverage

Aetna sure is bad at this whole health insurance business. Maybe they should learn how to price their plans versus throwing in the towel.

 

there are restrictions on how they can price their plans (community rating, medical loss ratio), which is why they can't offer them without taking a loss, so they pull out

 

Different market segments. Individual marketplace is not profitable in most counties in America under ACA. For Aetna they are a dominant force in the large group market.

 

Let's say they pass this in the house, how are they going to get to 60 in senate? Are they going to get rid of filibuster completely?

 

Some Large Insurers Actually Made Money on Their Obamacare Plans

But some Obamacare insurers are turning a profit

Yet, some of the biggest names in health insurance, which have been among the most critical opponents of Obamacare, are actually making money (in some cases a lot of money) in select states according to USA Today.

In particular, privately operated Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina (BCBSNC) wound up reporting a gross profit of around $400 million on its statewide ACA plans after raising premiums by 32% in 2016. This comes after BCBSNC lost approximately $400 million on its statewide ACA plans in 2015.

In similar fashion, Aetna reported profits of $12 million on its ACA plans in Texas, and $8 million from its plans in Pennsylvania. However, that didn't stop Aetna from packing its bags and leaving both states.

Health insurers which have strong roots in helping Medicaid patients have also done well (in fact, far better than their larger counterparts). Centene (NYSE:CNC) and Molina Healthcare (NYSE:MOH), which both centered their businesses around low-income individuals and families, have benefited from 31 states taking federal funds and expanding their Medicaid programs. The result is both companies have generated profits from their association with Obamacare.


Other companies are turning a profit, while Aetna can not. This is how the free market system works. There are winners and losers. Aetna is a loser.

 

I don't know what's in this bill, but if changes the pre-x rule to essentially mirror the old Texas continuous coverage rule, I'd be all for it.

Cover pre-existing conditions, but require people to keep continuous coverage. That would be a HUGE help. Right now there isn't enough incentive for people to buy in unless they know they will need it.

 

When the tax cut for the wealthy is at stake you just have to assume the GOP will move mountains. Also see Mitch McConnell. Dude has no shame whatsoever.

Spoiler: Mitch

I think we have to assume that they will change the rules even though a lot of Republicans will start planning on early retirement because 2018 is going to be a blood bath if they do this.

 

What does your tax dollars have to do anything with a private company? Your tax dollars goes to Medicare, which I completely support in expanding, even into preexisting conditions.

Why is it so hard to understand that relying on a corporation, which answers to shareholders, is a terrible solution. You can rightfully hate insurance companies. Nobody is telling you that you must love them. (even though we love when our investment portfolios make money, even if its from these greedy insurance companies) The fact remains they are there to make money, not be charity cases .. no matter how awesome you think Obamacare is. Obamacare is the shitty legislation that attached itself to the most rotten part of our healthcare.

 

Probably the same as what makes someone an alt-right. Childish name calling.

You're exactly right. When a product becomes unprofitable, they discontinue the product. I know this seems to be a rare concept to you, but it happens all day every day.

If YOU expect Aetna to participate in the exchanges, then they need to be profitable. However its probably best not to rely on the most rotten part of our healthcare system simply because they are the low hanging fruit of the medice cartel.

I know alt-leftist would love the idea to force insurance companies to participate no matter what, at the end of the day they would just close the doors completely. There is a book alt-leftist hate that depict this exact same scenario. Its called Atlas Shrugged.

 

That is why insurance companies are part of the problem in the health care system, and single payer is the final solution.

 

Sounds like you support single payer system.

 

I am not sure why you are baffled by this. Do you think coupling the 'greatest healthcare reform' directly to the most rotten part of our healthcare system was a good idea?

Do you not understand a corporations primary goal is to maximize the highest profits? Why would I support legislation that directly depends on a entity who's only concern is to make a profit and not my health?

I get it. You hate insurance companies. And your narrow minded leftist mindset is to punish them for making too much money. I dont see an insurance company. I see a run-of-the-mill corporation that basically acts as any other corporation. And my basic knowledge of a corporation understands if you try to wrestle and control a corporation, it will either adapt or die. And the likes of you want to continue to wrestle it until it dies. If it doesnt produce a profit, its stock holders (ie: your investment vehicles which are making you money from these greedy companies) will abandon the company.

I dont fault the insurance companies for doing what they are designed to do. I fault the idiotic legislation that coupled itself to this nonsense.

 

1) I'm not in favor of state risk pools
2) I'm talking about modifying ACA to include the rule above about continuous coverage. This would mean plans would still be guarantee issue and still cover pre-x as long as you actually bought them. So in your scenario...you lose your job and keep COBRA. COBRA runs out so you go to the individual marketplace. Great, you get a plan at regular price and it covers Pre-X and as long as you keep it, no problem. Alternatively, if your Cobra runs out in say May, and you say "meh, we can float it until January 1" and then try to enroll in an individual plan, there should be a penalty. It is still a problem right now that people don't carry coverage all year long. I know a lady who got on Memorial Hermann to treat a severe medical condition this year and then dropped the plan in April knowing she can just pick it up again next year if she needs it again with no issue. That strains the system.

I'd be fully in favor of something that said January 1, 2018 is the last true open enrollment. After that anyone over say 21 who didn't carry continuous coverage would be subject to a 6 month waiting period on pre-x if they sign up for a plan and a penalty on price.

 

The most affordable and highest quality system would be a complete freemarket system that relied on the consumer to account for every dollar spent (not insurance companies)....with subsidies from the government to help. But that will never happen with our medicine cartel and lazy population.

So yes, as a second option, I support a single payer system.

 

No offense to Molina, but this would be like telling Ferrari that if they want to be more profitable they should make their cars more like the Pinto.