Informal Agreement, is actually a weeklong lavish vacations in warm climate to discuss their set prices. In a message dated 10/17/2009 2:26:18 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
Hello Greg, Other Q's & Family, To me, the scariest (and frankly, most telling) so-called "news" about health care insurance is the "news" of its history. I'm talking about the recent reminder (instead of "news") that the Insurance Industry has been exempt from Anti-Trust laws for the past 64 years!! Translation: As a group, Insurance Companies have been *allowed*, by a 1945 law specifying a Federal exeption for them, to engage in deliberate price fixing rather than actual capitalistic competition and supply/demand sales. Insurance companies can limit their coverage to be within the borders of a single state or a set of states. In several states, 80% or more of the available Health Insurance is controlled by a single Insurance Company! In 1945, when this Anti-Trust Exemption began, it was intended to apply to Life Insurance Companies. However, over time those Life Insurance Companies began small-but-growing Health Insurance subsidiaries that, while still owned by Federally Protected Entities, proved to be quite profitable -- especially if their charges weren't regulated by the Feds or by the ups and downs of the Market but instead by informal "agreements" with other companies (so-called "Competitors") to charge similarly higher rates. This explains why Health Insurance costs --to those who can afford it-- have risen at 4-times the rates of incomes, inflation and any other goods. For Example (quoting Greg): > Insurance companies have asked courts for the right to dump people > who have had catastrophic injures, AIDS, etc. because it costs them > too much money, even though they have paid premiums for years. > Clearly this system is broken. A Health Insurance Company in New York (The Guardian I believe) recently discovered it was paying a lot --close to $1 Million this year-- for an individual with Muscular Dystrophy. While I don't know this person's particular circumstances (like were hospitalizations and sudden deterioration involved?), I do know the Insurance Company didn't want to pay his (her?) bills EVEN THOUGH premiums had always been paid in full and on time. SO, since they couldn't refuse this person a policy based on his/her disability and the costs related --because terminating one person's policy like that would be discriminatory-- the Company's new policy beginning December 1 will reportedly no longer cover anyone in the state with this level of disability. And worse, based on the Anti-Trust laws, the New York courts had to uphold the Insurance Company's decision!! Now the only hope for this person and everyone else affected by the Company's greedy decision is that the Federal Health and Human Services Department will step in to find some way to intervene. The problem, though, is that HHS will likely have to take matters to Federal Court and through each level up to the Supreme Court and hope that at least a part of the Anti-Trust Exemption can be narrowed. Then, dependeding on Court decisions, it won't be (or become) so much of a Free-For-All precedent for Other Insurers to follow ... basically allowing Health Insurers to drop, or refuse to cover, people who can pay premiums but have MD --and likely other disabilities to follow (like us Quads). Greg is right. The system is broken. How to fix it...? Maybe removing the Exemption? Maybe threatening to do so? Maybe removing just a portion of it? Maybe it's the Public Option or maybe a "trigger" that Insurers can choose to pull or not that would create that Option? Maybe it's Co-Ops? Maybe it's a combination of all of the above. But something... almost ANYTHING... must be done to improve our health care system so it isn't just a "Care for the Healthy System." Best wishes to All! And if you reached this point, Thank You for reading my rant!!! Sincerely, --Tod P.S. While I know Keith Olberman of MSNBC's "Countdown with Keith Olberman" is a "raging/flaming liberal," ... I'm wondering... Did anybody see his 1-Hr Special Comment on Health Care in America? It ran last Wed., Oct. 7, and was repeated yesterday, Fri., Oct. 16. While not perfect, he did have some pretty solid points about the Industry and where the US stands compared to overall world health (among a few other points). I was just curious who saw it and what they thought. As a result of this show, over $1 Million was raised (so far) to help provide free Public Health Clinic for a day in the Capital Cities of the 6 Democratic Senators in the Finance Committee who were outspoken against a "Public Option." ---- Greg <[email protected]> wrote: > I think profits are great I have a bit in the Market, but people's health > and lives should not be decided by profit and loss. Those who don't > want the government to make decisions seem to feel fine with an > insurance company making the decisions on their health based on > profits. People who work at insurance companies get bonuses if the > decline services. They often decline services that are covered knowing > a percentage of the people never ask for appeals. Insurance > companies have asked courts for the right to dump people > who have had catastrophic injures, AIDS, etc. because it costs them > too much money, even though they have paid premiums for years. > Clearly this system is broken. Even if some think it's a bad idea, I don't > understand why some are so viscous and even violent about it. Lets > see, I feel like going out and causing trouble and fighting to support a > company that will not take me if I have an injury, try to dump me if I get a > bad one, making record profits by deny services even if covered. Ya, I > want to fight for those guys. I'm very disappointed with Obama so far. > He needs to stand up instead of cowering to the Rep. Having just a > National Medicare has to be better than this. Just because Canada's > system might have its faults, doesn't mean we need to use that exact > system. Have National Medicare for those who want it and those who > want to can buy their own coverage. Although, maybe we shouldn't talk > about this publicly. Someone from one of those Death Panels might > see it. > They might want to add quads to the Death List with old people. > > > Greg >
