"Rate cap for insurer overturned; Move a blow to Patrick’s health strategy" by Jenn Abelson and Todd Wallack, Globe Staff | June 25, 2010
In a blow to the Patrick administration, an insurance appeals board yesterday overturned the state’s cap on health premium increases for small business and individual customers covered by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care.
The three-member administrative panel — which consists of attorneys who work for the state Division of Insurance — found that rate increases Harvard Pilgrim initially sought in April are reasonable given what it must pay to hospitals and doctors.
That ruling trumped the Insurance Division’s earlier finding that the requested increases were excessive, a view that reflects Governor Deval Patrick’s campaign to curb health costs.
Insurers yesterday cheered the ruling, which bodes well for three other companies now before the appeals board with their own cases against capped rates....
Barbara Anthony, the state’s consumer protection chief, said the ruling will not prevent the state from continuing to turn down increases it believes are too high. Anthony said the agency is also trying to work with insurers and hospitals to find alternate ways to make medical care more affordable.
“This is not a setback, because we are staying the course,’’ she said. “This is one bump in the road, a long road of getting health care costs under control.’’
--more--"Related: Insurance rate cap ruling has industry on edge
"State retains 137 rate caps on insurers" by Robert Weisman, Globe Staff | July 2, 2010
State regulators wrestling with soaring health care costs yesterday held fast to a cap on prices for 137 health insurance plans up for renewal this summer, freezing rates at 2009 levels, while sending three insurers scrambling to supply additional data to justify their proposed double-digit rate hikes.
At the same time, four other insurance companies won single-digit rate increases for 63 plans sold in the so-called small-group market, which covers individuals and small businesses. The state Division of Insurance said those insurers showed more restraint in their rate hike requests than the other companies.
The highly anticipated decision on proposed premium increases for the three-month period ending in September — released early last night after daylong deliberations by state officials — contrasts with regulators’ earlier denial of 235 of 272 rate hikes proposed for the April-to-June period....
State officials have said rate caps are needed to ease the burden of rising health costs on small businesses and working families in a fragile economy. But insurers have complained the state is forcing them to sell policies at a loss, undermining their financial stability....
What about YOUR FINANCIAL STABILITY, citizen?
Related: Insurer, state in surprise accord
Why am I not surprised?
And the fallout?
"Firms cancel health coverage; With cost rising, small companies turning to state" by Kay Lazar, Globe Staff | July 18, 2010
The relentlessly rising cost of health insurance is prompting some small Massachusetts companies to drop coverage for their workers and encourage them to sign up for state-subsidized care instead, a trend that, some analysts say, could eventually weigh heavily on the state’s already-stressed budget....
See: Why Wal-Mart Wants National Health Care
That's awfully nice of you to pick up Wal-Mart's health bills, taxpayers!
The issue is coming to a head as the Patrick administration battles insurers over swiftly escalating rates they have been charging small employers. In February, the governor filed sweeping legislation that proposes to give the Division of Insurance the power to essentially cap health care price increases. That proposal is still pending.
And on April 1, exercising authority the administration had never before used, the division denied 235 of 274 increases proposed by insurers for plans covering individuals and small businesses — base premiums would have increased as much as 32 percent. On July 1, it again held 137 proposed increases to 2009 rates.
The sides have been locked in negotiations for months, with the Patrick administration recently reaching agreement with two insurance carriers on lower rates....
Analysts said the burden of double-digit insurance increases shouldered by small businesses over the last several years is likely to become more of a public problem....
That's right, taxpayers; keep that wallet out.
Come 2014, when the bulk of the federal health care law goes into effect, the penalties for small companies that do not provide health insurance coverage will be less onerous than those in Massachusetts. That could tempt more small companies to opt out nationally, sending more workers to the public rolls....
Why couldn't we have gotten the DECENT, $INGLE-PAYER $Y$TEM we WANTED then, hanh?
more--""Hospitals stress cost cuts saving billions" by Liz Kowalczyk and Robert Weisman, Globe Staff | July 22, 2010
Massachusetts hospitals say in a new report that they have substantially slowed the rise in their costs in the past 18 months, saving insurers and employers billions of dollars, and showing that they do not deserve all the blame for skyrocketing health insurance premiums....
Hospital companies — including Partners HealthCare, which owns the well-paid Massachusetts General and Brigham and Women’s hospitals — are pushing back against attempts by insurers to paint them as the culprit in the cost debate.
Last week, in a letter to Lora Pellegrini, the president of the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans, Partners vice president of finance Peter Markell wrote that Partners’ annual rates have risen 5 to 6 percent, while insurers have boosted small business premiums by 15 to 20 percent or more in some cases. “Partners HealthCare is committed to doing everything we can to keep health care affordable and accessible to our patients,’’ Markell wrote.
Pellegrini, in a response sent Monday, noted that Partners’ rates are “substantially higher’’ than other health care providers’. “The prices paid to providers are the leading driver of increased premiums,’’ she wrote.
Related: Memory Hole: Why the Nation Doesn't Need Massachusetts Health Care
Yeah, they are charging 3x as much for the same services.
But Boston health care consultant Ellen Lutch Bender, who works for hospitals and physicians, said providers have been looking for ways to hold down costs.
That means LESS CARE for YOU, citizen!
The push is driven both by a recognition that rising costs are unsustainable and the precarious financial condition of many providers, she said. “Every hospital I talk with or represent has been implementing severe cost cutting for the past 18 months at least,’’ Bender said. “There isn’t a hospital leader that doesn’t understand that these are really dangerous times. Some hospitals are really up against the wall.’’
So when is the obscene executive compensation and outrageous amounts of lobbying money going to come to an end?
Related: The Massachusetts Model: Blue Cross Turns Green For Killingsworth
The Massachusetts Model: Blue Cross Drops Its Shield
The Massachusetts Model: Tax-Exempt Memory Hole
Are you s***ting me?
