California: 59% health premium hike March 1

[roster]

By Parija Kavilanz, senior writerJanuary 7, 2011: 3:01 PM ET


NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- One of California's largest health insurers - Blue Shield - announced plans to hike its premiums by as much as 59%.

The jacked up premium rates are set to take effect on March 1, pending review from state insurance regulators. The move impacts 193,000 individual Blue Shield policy holders.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/07/news/co ... /index.htm

[Breathe Jimbo]

Thank you, Obamacare! This is what happens when the government prohibits the exclusion of preexisting conditions and allows people to wait until they are sick to buy insurance.

[Janknitz]

I don't think this is Obamacare, this is BS trying to make billions more than they already are, while trying to make Obamacare look bad.

I heard a woman on the radio last night who is one of the people getting this premium hike. She is single, self-employed, and because of a pre-existing condition she has no choice but to stay with BS until she qualifies for Medicare in 2014. One of the reasons BS claims they are raising the premiums so high is that insurance companies will no longer be able to charge women higher premiums than men simply because of their gender. In the letter concerning the rate hike, BS blames it, in part on the fact that they have to "equalize" the premiums. Exactly how does raising a woman's premiums by almost 60%--which are already higher than a male counterpart's--equalize her premiums???????

[Slinky]

Horsepuckies! This is just plain BC and a lot of other companies hedging their bets and raising their premiums to 1] cover their arse if the Republicans don't follow thru on their promise to repeal the health care bill, 2] give the Republicans more support to dismantle the health care bill and 3] continue to make excessive profits to fatten their CEOs and higher ups with.

[jmelby]

Thank you, Obamacare! This is what happens when the government prohibits the exclusion of preexisting conditions and allows people to wait until they are sick to buy insurance.

The provision prohibiting exclusion of preexisting conditions takes effect in 2014, the same time that the individual mandate to buy insurance also takes effect. You're right that one without the other breaks the insurance model... which is why the lawsuits brought by all the republican attorney generals to rule the individual mandate unconstitutional will absolutely ruin the system. But, you are placing the blame with the wrong party...

[Captain_Midnight]

As a Californian who has Blue Shield health coverage, I’m tempted at first to blame the company. However, as one who has worked for the government for three decades and seen first-hand the inefficiencies and foolish and tyrannical regulations "promulgated", I believe that the Obama”care” is the real culprit. For example, when the govt tells insurance companies that they have to cover "children" of patients until age 26 and to take patients with any pre-existing condition then the cost will rise predictably.

For Obama and Sibelius to say that government regulations can lower cost is to trick you into falling for a Ponzi scheme. (No, I don't think that Blue Shield is without "issues", but I worry that it will be forced out-of-business, and the government option will be the only option left.)

I lived for a time in England. Great country, great people, and a very good first-hand look at how uncaring and unresponsive is socialized medicine. Trust me; you don't want the government's approval before you have a medical procedure or an expensive course of drug therapy. And you don’t want to wait in line for a year to find out that you won't get the treatment that you need.


.

[DreamLady]

Give me a break, Captain_Midnight! Do You REALLY think BC/BS is "caring"? If you believe that ANY insurance company really and truly "cares" about your health, I've got a bridge for sale you might be interested in purchasing.

To compare the health care plan with socialized medicine is misleading at best.

[jmelby]

Did anyone read the article before blaming the health care reform law?

The company, a member of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association with 3.3 million members, which announced the move late Thursday, stressed that its decision has "almost nothing to do with the federal health reform law" and that ultimately the law will help slow down health care costs.

But responding to this most recent increase the company said, "our individual market medical costs are rising rapidly due to higher provider prices, increased utilization, and the fact that healthier people are dropping coverage during a bad economy," the company said.

So... the cost increase is due to healthy people dropping coverage. The health care reform law requires all individuals to carry health insurance, therefore is a fix for that issue, unless of course the republicans have their way and take away the individual mandate, which will just encourage people to wait to buy insurance until they really need it... it's akin to waiting to buy home insurance until your house burns down and then expecting the insurance company to pay for it.

[LinkC]

And they're OFF...

Y'all wait til I get settled in with a beer and some pretzels!

[montana]

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/ ... obamacare/

[So Well]

Give me a break, Captain_Midnight! Do You REALLY think BC/BS is "caring"? If you believe that ANY insurance company really and truly "cares" about your health, I've got a bridge for sale you might be interested in purchasing.

To compare the health care plan with socialized medicine is misleading at best.

I don't want to deal with insurance companies who "care" about my medical care.

I want to deal with insurance companies who care about their bottom line and know they have to compete and offer a good product with good money-value in order to keep me as a customer.

Currently the state government has my options severely limited. Limited to companies operating in CA - I cannot buy medical insurance from companies in any of the other 49 states.

The state government limits the policies that can be offered, dictating certain things that must be in the policies.

The insurance companies and I cannot negotiate for a policy that makes both of us happy - the government is meddling and dictating.

Think about that dent the punk put in my right fender. My wife and my family "care" about me and my car. They don't want me to be driving around with a dented fender. Despite all this "care" none of them has repaired my fender. But next week I am taking the car to a body shop that "cares" about his profits. They will treat me very nicely and repair that fender very nicely.

This is just not correct that you will get good medical care because someone "cares" about your health. You will get good medical care from people who want to earn a living and maybe make a little profit.

[So Well]

Let me add I am sitting here looking at a post on FB by a sweet little friend who is a nurse. She is posting about eating and getting ready to commute to work the night shift at the hospital. I know the patients she deals with tonight will think she cares about their health and will like having a nurse with such a sweet personality (good looking also!).

But let's tell her we are no longer going to pay her a good wage to work at the hospital and you will see that she really cares about her "profits" more than her patients and will be working for someone else quickly.

[JohnBFisher]

This has nothing to do with the new healthcare laws.

Several years ago my employer provided healthcare decided to deny coverage at several hospitals across the country. Their claim was that it was in an effort to control costs. Anyone who had ANY business (no matter how tangential) was denied coverage. Unfortunately for us that included coverage for my wife's skin cancer. Because the doctors were allowed to do business at the hospital they denied all coverage. Not that she ever went to the hospital. I was forced to pay for that out of pocket. They had a contract that they abriged without my consent to recourse.

Of course, to make matters worse. This very same company that decided to "save" money decided to give their outgoing CEO a bonus of almost *$1 BILLION*.

Now, you tell me how breaking the contract with me did anything other than make it possible to pour that money into his pocket !!

No the insurance companies have decided they can take us for every dime they want. This is just another example.

[So Well]

No the insurance companies have decided they can take us for every dime they want. This is just another example.

Do you understand that they are being enabled by state and federal government and would not be able to do this if they had to compete for your business in a free market?

[JohnBFisher]

Yes, I understand that. However, that has NOTHING to do with the new healthcare laws. In fact, the effort to provide an alternative (and competition) to the current system - a public option - was defeated by the insurance industry puppets - the Republican party. They refused to have any competition to the existing system.