I found this especially interesting considering the source:

D

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_33/b4143034820260.htm

 *Cover Story* August 6, 2009, 5:00PM EST text size:
T<http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/09_33/b4143034820260.htm#>
T<http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/09_33/b4143034820260.htm#>
 The Health Insurers Have Already Won How UnitedHealth and rival carriers,
maneuvering behind the scenes in Washington, shaped health-care reform for
their own benefit

By Chad Terhune
<http://www.businessweek.com/print/bios/Chad_Terhune.htm>and Keith
Epstein <http://www.businessweek.com/print/bios/Keith_Epstein.htm>

As the health reform fight shifts this month from a vacationing Washington
to congressional districts and local airwaves around the country, much more
of the battle than most people realize is already over. The likely victors
are insurance giants such as UnitedHealth Group
(UNH<http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?symbol=UNH>),
Aetna 
(AET<http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?symbol=AET>),
and WellPoint 
(WLP<http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?symbol=WLP>).
The carriers have succeeded in redefining the terms of the reform debate to
such a degree that no matter what specifics emerge in the voluminous bill
Congress may send to President Obama this fall, the insurance industry will
emerge more profitable. Health reform could come with a $1 trillion price
tag over the next decade, and it may complicate matters for some large
employers. But insurance CEOs ought to be smiling.

Executives from UnitedHealth certainly showed no signs of worry on the
mid-July day that Senate Democrats proposed to help pay for reform with a
new tax on the insurance industry. Instead, UnitedHealth parked a shiny
18-wheeler outfitted with high-tech medical gear near the Capitol and
invited members of Congress aboard. Inside the mobile diagnostic center,
which enables doctors to examine distant patients via satellite television,
Representative Jim Matheson didn't disguise his wonderment. "Fascinating,
fascinating," said the Democrat from Utah. "Amazing."

Impressing fiscally conservative Democrats like Matheson, a leader of the
House of Representatives' Blue Dog Coalition, is at the heart of
UnitedHealth's strategy. It boils down to ensuring that whatever overhaul
Congress passes this year will help rather than hurt huge insurance
companies.

Some Republicans have threatened to make health reform Obama's "Waterloo,"
as Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina has put it. The President has fired
back at what he considers GOP obstructionism. Meanwhile, big insurance
companies have quietly focused on what they see as their central challenge:
shaping the views of moderate Democrats.

The industry has already accomplished its main goal of at least curbing, and
maybe blocking altogether, any new publicly administered insurance program
that could grab market share from the corporations that dominate the
business. UnitedHealth has distinguished itself by more deftly and
aggressively feeding sophisticated pricing and actuarial data to
information-starved congressional staff members. With its rivals, the
carrier has also achieved a secondary aim of constraining the new benefits
that will become available to tens of millions of people who are currently
uninsured. That will make the new customers more lucrative to the industry.

Matheson, whose Blue Dogs command 52 votes in the House, can't offer enough
praise for UnitedHealth, the largest company of its kind. "The tried and
true message of their advocacy," he says, "is making sure the information
they provide is accurate and considered."

Representative Mike Ross, an Arkansas Democrat who leads the Blue Dogs'
negotiations on health reform, also welcomes input from UnitedHealth. "If
United has something to offer on cutting costs, we should consider it," says
Ross, a former small-town pharmacy owner. "We need more examples that work,
and everything should be on the table."
DEMOCRATIC WELCOME

Fifteen years after the insurance industry helped kill then-President Bill
Clinton's health-reform initiative, Ross is frustrating the Obama White
House by opposing proposals for a government-run insurance concern that
would compete with private-sector companies. The President argues that
without a public plan, premiums and medical bills will remain prohibitively
high. Ross and Matheson have given strong voice to the industry's contention
that such a public insurer would actually reduce competition by undercutting
private plans on price and driving them out of business. "We have concerns
about a public option if it's not done on a level playing field," Ross says.


Obama launched his Administration vowing to extend coverage to all Americans
and help pay for it by reining in insurance costs. Seven months later,
insurers and pharmaceutical manufacturers that appeared vulnerable to a
regulatory crackdown have been welcomed to the negotiating table by the
President's own party.

The several competing bills pending in Congress would guarantee all
Americans access to health coverage, addressing the plight of the 47 million
who are now uninsured. Congress plans to achieve that by expanding Medicaid,
the government program for the poor and disabled; requiring insurers to
accept all applicants regardless of their health; and mandating that
everyone purchase coverage. Government subsidies would make the obligatory
coverage more affordable. The legislation would do little, however, to slow
spending by Medicare, the public program for senior citizens, or cut overall
medical costs. Congress is considering taxes on the wealthy and on benefits
now provided to many white-collar workers.

During the UnitedHealth road show in July, Democrat after Democrat clambered
into the company's promotional vehicle beneath a sign declaring: "Connecting
You to a World of Care." Judah C. Sommer, who heads the company's Washington
office, looked on with satisfaction. "This puts a halo on us," he explained.
"It humanizes us."

And that Democratic proposal to tax insurance companies? It seems to be
fading after the industry said it would raise rates for workers and their
families.

UnitedHealth's relationship with Democratic Senator Mark R. Warner of
Virginia illustrates the industry's subtle role. Elected last fall, Warner,
a former governor of his state and a wealthy ex-businessman, received a
choice assignment as the Senate Democrats' liaison to business. The rookie
senator landed in the center of a high-visibility political drama—and in a
position to earn the gratitude of a health insurance industry that has
donated more than $19 million to federal candidates since 2007, 56% of which
has gone to Democrats.

UnitedHealth has periodically served as a valuable extension of Warner's
office, providing research and analysis to support his initiatives.
Corporations and trade groups play this role in all kinds of contexts, but
few do it with the effectiveness of the insurers. In June, Warner introduced
legislation expanding government-backed Medicare and Medicaid coverage for
hospice stays for the terminally ill and other treatment in life's final
stages. The issue isn't a top UnitedHealth priority. But the corporation
wanted to help Warner with his argument that in the long run, better hospice
coverage would save money. UnitedHealth prepared a report for lawmakers
finding that 27% of Medicare's budget is now spent during the last year of
older patients' lives, often on questionable hospital tests and procedures.
Expanded hospice coverage and other services could save $18 billion over 10
years, UnitedHealth asserted.

When Warner went to the Senate floor on June 15 to offer his bill, he cited
those exact figures. He thanked the company for its support and put a letter
from UnitedHealth applauding him in the Congressional Record.

Warner acknowledges in an interview that he worked on the hospice-care
legislation with UnitedHealth executives. But he stresses that he has long
experience with health issues and has formed his own views. The senator
echoes UnitedHealth's contention that a so-called public option could be a
"Trojan horse for a single-payer system," meaning government-run medical
care. Warner has heard from some of UnitedHealth's largest employer clients,
such as Delta Air Lines
(SWY<http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?symbol=SWY>).
Delta CEO Richard H. Anderson, a former UnitedHealth executive, has told
Warner and other lawmakers that big companies don't want government to limit
their flexibility in crafting employee health benefits.
ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTION

Obama's promise to boost competition and lower costs by having the
government play a much broader role in health coverage has been steadily
compromised because of the resistance of such Democrats as Warner. "There
are different ways to skin this and get competition" in the insurance
market, Warner says.

Warner and other opponents of a public plan have relied on an estimate by
John Sheils, an actuary who says that 88 million people, or 56% of those
with employer-provided coverage, would desert private insurance for a
government-run program. That would destabilize the marketplace and
potentially kill the private insurance industry, according to Sheils, who
works for the Lewin Group, a corporate consulting firm in Falls Church, Va.

UnitedHealth lobbyists routinely cite Lewin's work, as do Senator Orrin G.
Hatch (R-Utah), the second-ranking Republican on the Senate Finance
Committee, and Eric Cantor (R-Va.), the House Republican Whip. Left out of
these testimonials or buried in the fine print is that a UnitedHealth unit
owns the Lewin Group and thus is ultimately responsible for Sheils'
paycheck. In an interview, Sheils says UnitedHealth gives him and the Lewin
firm complete independence: "We call it like we see it," he adds.

Some Democrats differ. Says Representative Pete Stark, the liberal
California Democrat who chairs the House Ways & Means health subcommittee:
"The Lewin Group's so-called analysis is suspect." The nonpartisan
Congressional Budget Office has stated that the Sheils-Lewin figure is far
too high.

UnitedHealth brings a mixed record to its role helping to guide health
reform. The company has repeatedly hit smaller employers and consumers with
double-digit rate hikes in recent years, far greater than the overall rate
of inflation. An investigation last year by New York's Attorney General will
force the company to stop running two huge databases used widely within the
insurance industry. By allegedly setting medical reimbursements too low—that
is, skewing statistics in favor of insurers by understating "usual and
customary" physician fees—the databases had resulted in the overcharging of
consumers by billions of dollars nationwide. In January, UnitedHealth agreed
to resolve the situation by paying $400 million in a pair of agreements with
the New York Attorney General and the American Medical Assn., although it
didn't admit any wrongdoing.

In a separate case last year, UnitedHealth was forced to stop selling
"limited benefit" plans with capped payouts under the imprimatur of the
senior citizen group AARP. It turned out that the policies provided very
modest coverage, catching many customers off guard, according to Senator
Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), who helped bring the practice to light.
Grassley pointed out that UnitedHealth paid as little as $5,000 toward
surgery costing several times as much.

Despite such episodes, UnitedHealth is generally well received in
legislative circles in Washington. In late May its in-house point man on
reform, Simon Stevens, hand-delivered a report to key senators detailing
ways to save an estimated $540 billion in federal spending over 10 years. A
week later, on June 4, Stevens accompanied UnitedHealth's chief executive,
Stephen J. Hemsley, to a meeting with Senator Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), an
influential moderate member of the Senate Finance Committee. Conrad has
since led an effort to create nonprofit medical cooperatives that would
operate much like utility co-ops as a substitute for a federally run plan.
With less heft than a proposed national plan, the state medical cooperatives
would pose a far weaker competitive threat to private insurers.

Conrad says in an interview that the co-op idea evolved independently of any
industry input. Skirmishing over the public plan could jeopardize efforts at
reform, he warns. Co-ops, he argues, are "the only alternative that's got
much of a shot" to gain sufficient votes in the Senate.
BRITISH EXPERIENCE

UnitedHealth followed up on June 30 with another report for lawmakers
pinpointing $332 billion in savings through better use of technology and
administrative simplification. If enacted, those changes would potentially
benefit UnitedHealth's Ingenix data-crunching unit. Ingenix, with annual
revenue of $1.6 billion, is poised to establish a national digital
clearinghouse to ensure the accuracy of medical payments and provide a
centralized service for checking the credentials of physicians.

Stevens, an Oxford-educated executive vice-president at UnitedHealth, once
served as an adviser to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. In that
capacity, Stevens tried to fine-tune the U.K.'s nationally run health
system. Today he tells lawmakers that the U.S. need not follow Britain's
example. Concessions already offered by the U.S. insurance industry—such as
accepting all applicants, regardless of age or medical history—make a
government-run competitor unnecessary, he argues. "We don't think reform
should come crashing down because of [resistance to] a public plan," Stevens
says. Many congressional Democrats have come to the same conclusion.

UnitedHealth has traveled an unlikely path to becoming a Washington
powerhouse. Its last chairman and chief executive, William W. McGuire,
cultivated a corporate profile as an industry insurgent little concerned
with goings-on in the capital. From its Minnetonka (Minn.) headquarters, the
company grew swiftly by acquisition. McGuire absorbed both rival carriers
and companies that analyze data and write software. Diversification turned
UnitedHealth into the largest U.S. health insurer in terms of revenue. In
2008 it reported operating profit of $5.3 billion on revenue of $81.2
billion. It employs more than 75,000 people.

In 2006, McGuire lost his job after getting caught up in the manipulation,
or "backdating," of company stock options. UnitedHealth was forced to
restate earnings over a 12-year period to reflect the extra compensation it
had granted McGuire and other executives. McGuire's chief lieutenant,
Stephen Hemsley, took over as CEO in December 2006. Two independent
inquiries concluded that Hemsley wasn't involved with the backdating.
Nevertheless he forfeited $190 million in past stock compensation and
unrealized gains to resolve the matter.

Hemsley, a former chief financial officer of the now-defunct Arthur Andersen
accounting firm, generally shuns the spotlight. But when health reform
became a central issue in the runup to the last Presidential election,
company executives say they realized UnitedHealth needed to go on the
offensive. Hemsley met with White House officials on May 15 and May 22 to
promote his company's prescription for cutting federal health spending.

In August 2007, the company hired Sommer, who previously headed global
lobbying for Goldman Sachs
(GS<http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?symbol=GS>).
He quickly built a new Washington team of former congressional aides and
other K Street operatives. One key acquisition: Cory Alexander, former chief
of staff for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), an influential
moderate Democrat. Alexander had been lobbying for the huge mortgage
financier Fannie Mae
(FNM<http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/snapshot/snapshot.asp?symbol=FNM>).
Today, Sommer directs a team of nearly 50 people from UnitedHealth's
spacious Washington office on Pennsylvania Avenue, equidistant between the
Capitol and White House. The company spent more than $3.4 million on
in-house and outside lobbying in the first half of 2009.

Sommer has retained such influential outsiders as Tom Daschle, the former
Democratic Senate Leader who now works for the large law and lobbying firm
Alston & Bird. Daschle, a liberal from South Dakota, dropped out of the
running to be Obama's Secretary of Health & Human Services after disclosures
that he failed to pay taxes on perks given to him by a private client. He
advised UnitedHealth in 2007 and 2008 and resumed that role this year.
Daschle personally advocates a government-run competitor to private
insurers. But he sells his expertise to UnitedHealth, which opposes any such
public insurance plan. Among the services Daschle offers are tips on the
personalities and policy proclivities of members of Congress he has known
for decades.

Conceding that he doesn't always agree with his client, Daschle says: "They
just want a description of the lay of the land, an assessment of
circumstances as they appear to be as health reform unfolds." He says he
leaves direct contacts with members of Congress to others at his firm.

What people in Washington tend not to discuss, at least on the record, is
the open secret that insurers are minimizing their forecasts of the eventual
windfall they will enjoy from expanded coverage for Americans. UnitedHealth
has given certain key members of Congress details about its finances and tax
liability—both historical numbers and figures projected under various
cost-sharing scenarios. But some on Capitol Hill are skeptical. "The bottom
line," says an aide to the Senate Finance Committee, "is that health reform
would lead to increased revenues and profits [for the insurance industry].
... There will be [added] costs [to the companies], but we're not sure the
revenues and profits will be as low as they say."

A fundamental question about the health overhaul is what minimum standards
will apply to the coverage all Americans will be required to have.
UnitedHealth has been exchanging a high volume of information on the topic
with members of the Senate Finance Committee and their staff. Stevens, the
former British health aide, regularly scans PowerPoint presentations
generated by the committee staff that attempt to calculate the actuarial
value of proposed benefit packages. Senators stung by the projected $1
trillion price tag are winnowing down the required coverage levels to cut
costs.

This is good news for UnitedHealth, which benefits when patients pick up
more of the tab. In late spring, the Finance Committee was assuming a 76%
reimbursement rate on average, meaning consumers would be responsible for
paying the remaining 24% of their medical bills, in addition to their
insurance premiums. Stevens and his UnitedHealth colleagues urged a more
industry-friendly ratio. Subsequently the committee reduced the
reimbursement figure to 65%, suggesting a 35% contribution by consumers—more
in line with what the big insurer wants. The final figures are still being
debated.

Stevens says UnitedHealth and its corporate clients want to steer Congress
toward benefit levels and cost sharing that can help control overall health
spending: "We are providing another resource of actual modeling and advice
on how proposals in the committees are structured and some potential
unintended consequences of going down certain routes."

Perhaps more than any other insurer, UnitedHealth is poised to profit from
health reform. Its decade-long series of acquisitions has made the company a
coast-to-coast Leviathan enmeshed in the lives of 70 million Americans.

United's AmeriChoice unit is the largest government contractor administering
state Medicaid programs for the poor and federally sponsored plans for
children. AmeriChoice's revenue rose 34% last year, to $6 billion, and it
has 2.7 million people enrolled. Those numbers should continue rising under
reform since congressional Democrats are proposing an expansion of Medicaid
to help achieve universal coverage. More of the working poor would qualify
for Medicaid, and AmeriChoice can sell itself to states as the leading
service provider.
HEALTH COACH AT THE OFFICE

Another of the big beneficiaries among UnitedHealth's stable of subsidiaries
is OptumHealth. It's the company's one-stop shop for managing the
chronically ill, offering wellness programs and guiding consumers on
treatment options. Even before the reform debate, these services were
growing in demand as big employers, state and local governments, and others
tried to curb health-care spending by supervising patients more
aggressively.

OptumHealth provides a broad range of services, from a 24-hour hotline where
nurses can suggest the best hospital for a transplant to "health coaches"
who dole out meal plans, to-do lists, and motivational messages. Some
OptumHealth clients bring coaches into the office or onto the factory floor
to teach about diet and exercise. Many of the cost-containment strategies
Democrats are pushing call for more of the preventive care that OptumHealth
sells.

"We are extremely well positioned for a much broader adoption," says Dawn
Owens, OptumHealth's chief executive. Her division, based in Golden Valley,
Minn., already boasts $5.2 billion in annual revenue.

Stevens argues that while UnitedHealth will likely benefit financially from
health reform, the company will also aid the cause of reducing costs. He
cites what he says is its record of "bending the cost curve" for major
employers.

During a media presentation in May in Washington, Stevens said medical costs
incurred by UnitedHealth's corporate clients were rising only 4% annually,
less than the industry average of 6% to 8%. But that claim seemed to
conflict with statements company executives made just a month earlier during
a conference call with investors. On that quarterly earnings call,
UnitedHealth CEO Hemsley conceded that medical costs on commercial plans
would increase 8% this year.

Asked about the discrepancy, Stevens says the lower figure he is using in
Washington represents the experience of a subset of employer clients who
fully deployed UnitedHealth's cost-saving techniques, including oversight of
the chronically ill. "These employers stuck at it for several years," he
says. "We are putting forward positive ideas based on our experience of what
works."

Terhune is a senior writer for BusinessWeek based in Florida.
Epstein<[email protected]>is a correspondent in
BusinessWeek's Washington bu

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know 
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:302071
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5

Reply via email to