Health Insurance Companies Want Severe Penalties For People Who Do Not Buy Coverage

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Health Insurance Companies Want Severe Penalties For People Who Do Not Buy Coverage stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 10- 5-09 11:55 PM   |   Updated: 10- 6-09 02:45 AM

What's Your Reaction?

WASHINGTON (AP)-- The health insurance industry doesn't want Congress to let you off easy if you decide to ignore a proposed requirement that all Americans must have coverage.

Determined to get as many people as possible covered, lawmakers first proposed fines of as much as $3,800 per family for health insurance scofflaws. But they have been steadily scaling back the penalties, with the Senate Finance Committee last week dropping them to $1,500 maximum per family in their version of a health care bill. The committee also phased the penalties in over five years with no fines at all in the first year and eliminated all criminal and most civil punishments for failure to pay.

The industry -- counting on millions of more Americans buying insurance -- says the penalties are now so weak they practically beg to be ignored. The result, the companies warn, is that people would wait until they get sick to buy coverage. That would raise premiums for everyone else, since Congress' health care overhaul would also require insurers to take all applicants.

"People will drop coverage and those who stay in would see rate shock," Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, the insurance industry trade group, said in an interview Monday.

Alissa Fox, a top lobbyist for the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, said the Senate Finance Committee had "severely weakened" the proposed requirement to buy health insurance.

"It's become an aspirational goal, because it's a mandate with no penalty, and a mandate with no penalty is not a requirement," Fox said.

The proposed new so-called individual mandate requiring everyone to buy health coverage or pay a fine is at the center of all the health care bills taking shape on Capitol Hill. After opposing it during his campaign for president, President Barack Obama embraced it earlier this year as the most effective way to get everyone covered as long as hardship waivers were included.

Subsidies would be provided to help low-income people afford the coverage. But many Democrats and consumer groups have begun to argue that the subsidies are not generous enough and that middle-income people still wouldn't be able to afford health care.

Story continues below
advertisement

"There's no doubt there's a trade-off," between keeping down costs and getting more people covered, White House budget director Peter Orszag said Monday in an interview with The Associated Press.

That was a major issue for the Finance Committee as it wrapped up work last week on sweeping legislation to extend coverage to uninsured Americans and make major changes in the insurance market, such as barring insurers from charging women more or denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions.

A final amendment to the Finance Committee bill addressed the affordability issue by exempting millions more people from the requirement to buy insurance, reducing and phasing in the penalties and getting rid of most legal repercussions if you don't pay the penalties.

Originally, the bill required individuals and families to buy coverage as long as it cost no more than 10 percent of their income. Under the change, that would be lowered to 8 percent.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., acknowledged the result would be an estimated 2 million additional individuals and families going without insurance in comparison with the original bill.

Insurers say the changes made the mandate toothless. And they've long argued that the only way they can keep premiums down while implementing the consumer protections like not charging more to sick people is by making sure that everyone is in the coverage pool.

"It might seem like they are solving the problem, but what happens is premiums for everyone are going to get more expensive in the new market," said Fox.

"It only works when everyone is in the pool," she added.

The Finance Committee is preparing for a final vote on its bill this week after which it will be merged with legislation from the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. In the House, lawmakers are working to meld health overhaul bills from three committees into one piece of legislation.

Insurers will be lobbying to strengthen the penalties. But on the other side, consumer groups say lawmakers still haven't gone far enough to address affordability concerns.

Senators say they're trying to balance the competing demands.

"We want to insure as many people as possible under this bill, but not in a way that forces people into plans they can't afford," said Schumer.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., said, "We all have to be part of the solution and have health care, but we don't want an onerous burden on individuals or families."

WASHINGTON (AP)-- The health insurance industry doesn't want Congress to let you off easy if you decide to ignore a proposed requirement that all Americans must have coverage. Determined to get as ma...
WASHINGTON (AP)-- The health insurance industry doesn't want Congress to let you off easy if you decide to ignore a proposed requirement that all Americans must have coverage. Determined to get as ma...
Filed by T.J. Ortenzi  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
2004
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (32 pages total)

One of my big concerns is they say the insurance will not be able to turn someone down for preexisting conditions but unless they put a cap on what they can charge it's irrelevant. All the insurance companies will do is say - I see you've had cancer 5 years ago, we can cover you for 5000.00 per month.....­......

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:16 PM on 10/18/2009

If you run across a Catholic or Christian who is against public healthcare you can say this:

I am Jesus, why are you denying me healthcare?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:55 PM on 10/07/2009
photo

no one is denying anyone health care, if you are indigent ANY county hospital will take care of you. So point Jesus to the nearest county hospital and he is covered FOR FREE. Health insurance is the issue, no where in the Constitution does it say you are entitled to health insurance. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness. If health insurance is part of your definition of happiness, the buy it. Oh you cannot afford it, then pursue it. Oh, the decision YOU HAVE MADE in your life leave you with no skills and no career? THEN FIX YOUR LIFE AND PAY YOUR OWN WAY!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!!!!!!­!!!!!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:46 PM on 11/07/2009
photo

I can't think of too many things more unAmerican and unConstitutional than forcing the entire citizenry to buy a product from a private company at risk of financial penalty. That's illegal!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:12 PM on 10/07/2009
- Tunde15 I'm a Fan of Tunde15 7 fans permalink

I couldn't agree with you more. It is a product. Charging whatever the market can bear is the rule. The idea that the government can force us to provide pure profit to the insurance companies is NOT going to happen. It is a tax for having a heart beat. It will be the only product we are forced to buy for being alive. Of course, the insurance companies love that: Pure profit. The profit incentive must be removed.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:18 PM on 10/18/2009
- goodnews7 I'm a Fan of goodnews7 19 fans permalink
photo

Is the Swiss Health Care System Really Better Than Ours?
We’ve looked at socialized health care systems in other developed countries around the World, but today we decided to take a more detailed look at a system that some people believe would be a good model for the United States to aim for. Switzerland has a system where everyone buys their own health insurance from private companies, but the basic coverage is the same across all plans and the costs are the same for everyone, regardless of age or prior medical [...]
http://silverbuzzcafe.com/?p=3508

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:13 AM on 10/07/2009
- wdw505 I'm a Fan of wdw505 71 fans permalink

what if i want better insurance than you?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:05 AM on 10/07/2009
- Chazmania I'm a Fan of Chazmania 68 fans permalink
photo

At this point anything the government says or does is suspicious at the least! there track record is one of deception duplicity and basically screwing the american people! have you not learned yet?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:26 AM on 10/07/2009
- jdunaway65 I'm a Fan of jdunaway65 7 fans permalink

OK, I have a solution (like this will EVER happen!)

The average American Household Income is reportedly somewhere in the range of $50,000 per year. If a family was charged $3,800 (I assume per year) for not getting insurance, that is 7.6% of their PRE-TAX income. The current number is $1,500 which is 3% of their pre-tax income.

MAKE the insurance companies drop pre-existing conditions, allow portability and make them stop dropping people for being "too sick to cover." Every time they break these rules, tax them 7.6% (or 3% under the new number) for each infraction!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:36 AM on 10/07/2009
- belyeu I'm a Fan of belyeu 17 fans permalink
photo

And I thought the insurance companies couldn't be any more arrogant than they already are.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 AM on 10/07/2009

So the people who cant afford insurance will be penalized for not buying it? Sounds like a crappy deal to me. How about gauranteeing everyone a decent JOB that they can actually live on and maybe everyone will buy into health insurance.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 10/06/2009
- gmailliw I'm a Fan of gmailliw 245 fans permalink
photo

The people who couldn't afford it would receive subsidies from the government to pay for it.

Also, keep in mind that under ALL the legislation, Medicaid would be expanded to 133% of poverty, so those at the very bottom would automatically be covered.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:18 PM on 10/06/2009
- dianhow I'm a Fan of dianhow 75 fans permalink
photo

Mandate of some kind will be necessary . The way this works is the more people who enroll- the more affordable the premiums. Thats how insurance works. We go to jail if we do not buy auto insurance- even if we think we do not need it. Its a similar idea. True no one likes to pay a penalty- but if more folks get preventive care- that will help us all. Example" If we get a screning for colon cancer- and they find an early tumor' that can be treated- that saves the patient and loads of money So It can be done.
Nay sayers tried to crush Medicare too - mostly the GOP> including Reagan- who fought Medicare intensely.­- calling it a ' gov't takeover and Socialism ! ' Sound familiar.?
Same old BS year after year -even the same exact words.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:01 PM on 10/06/2009
- gmailliw I'm a Fan of gmailliw 245 fans permalink
photo

You're right about mandates.

And I say that as a commenter who tra.shed Hillary and John Edwards over mandates in the primaries. But really, they are essential.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 PM on 10/06/2009

That's not how insurance works. What you've described is merely a mechanism to force some people to pay other peoples' expenses without regard for relative affordability. Auto insurers price premiums for each insured's risk. They aren't using big pools to make some drivers subsidize others, they're using them to boost administrative efficiency and reduce volatility. And the auto insurance mandate is only for liability coverage, you're free to take the risk that you'll wreck and be without a car. The auto insurance corollary would be if we required safe drivers to pay extra to subsidize the premiums of drivers with really bad driving records. Oh, and one more wrinkle: auto insurance is really insurance. A large part of the healthcare premium under the proposal pays for routine care, stuff most folks can afford to pay out of pockets just like they pay for food, cellphone, birthday gifts, etc. The current proposals all rip off people under 30.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:14 PM on 10/06/2009
- belyeu I'm a Fan of belyeu 17 fans permalink
photo

Center, Routine care is not even affordable. Maybe people can afford the doctors visit but as soon as they start adding on lab work, x-rays, medications, and even simple procedures the costs become unaffordable.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:02 AM on 10/07/2009
- JSDKoeln I'm a Fan of JSDKoeln 4 fans permalink

Actually, it IS how it works. One thing you youngsters are in denial about... you too, in the blink of an eye, will be "over 30". And in two more blinks, over 40. Let's see if you have the same arguments then. You make so many false assumptions, based on your own pocketbook. Most people cannot afford "out of pocket" routine expenses. The people who CAN afford this already have great insurance and don't pay these expenses.

Let me make it simple. I was unemployed paying 700/month for BC Cal. I had a heart attack. Mild, but my final bill ended up being 15K on TOP of that. I devastated my savings--having already been out of work for 9 months. If I had no insurance, I would have simply gone to the ER and skipped out on my bill at the end. The cost would have been passed on to YOU! Your premiums would go up, in turn. You see, this is the problem. The bill I had WITH insurance was 105K.... without it would have been 500K. You would have gotten the bill for 500K.

You just don't get it. I am in the german system now. I would never go back to that antiquated, and mean-spirited capitalistic system in the US.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:37 AM on 10/07/2009
- Tunde15 I'm a Fan of Tunde15 7 fans permalink

Your mandate idea does not work. I can chose not to drive a car so I don't have to buy car insurance; I can't chose NOT to live. That takes care of your main argument. If France can afford to provide healthcare to its citizens, and we consider ourselves the wealthiest nation on earth, then we can too. You will be mandating pure profit for the insurance companies. It is a product. AND within our economic system, charging whatever the market can bear applies.

By the way, how much does the government think I should be able to afford based on my income? Are you gonna use my income before taxes as a base? What if I'm paying off student loan, married with three kids, all of whom are in elementary school? What if I have a mortgage? How the hell is the government going to decide how much I can afford, or should we let the insurance companies decide that? Think about the unintended consequences of what you're suggesting.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:32 PM on 10/18/2009
- Tunde15 I'm a Fan of Tunde15 7 fans permalink

I can chose not to drive a car and therefore not buy car insurance. I cannot chose not to live. How do you decide how much we can each afford to pay for the so called health insurance? do you decide based strictly on income before tax or do you consider my expenses..­.student loans, mortgage, cost of educating three children? How do you decide, or shall we let the insurance companies decide that for us?

If the number of Americans who currently have health insurance don't have the buying power to make the cost of health insurance come down, I can assure you that the 45 million who would be added to the pool will NOT move the needle. IT IS A MONOPOLY.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:45 PM on 10/18/2009

Could insurers turn a profit under the provisions of the bill without a mandate? Insurers tie up capital, so if they don't turn a profit comparable to what that capital could generate in an industry with a similar risk, they'll go under. That's fine. But then we're on to the fallback - a public insurance program. Which leads to the question, could a public plan break even under the provisions of the plan without a mandate (or heavy subsidies from outside the plan)?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:52 PM on 10/06/2009
- gmailliw I'm a Fan of gmailliw 245 fans permalink
photo

Yes, they could pull a profit without mandates.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 10/06/2009

You know this... how? Has the CBO crunched the numbers?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:04 PM on 10/06/2009

i honestly cannot believe the above article. its shocking that people cannot afford health insurance now, yet the industry wants the government to mandate it and apply penalties to those who dont purchase????!!!!! what the he ll??????

first, the rates have to come down SUBSTANTIALLY for the general public to be able to afford premiums. second, if someone cant pay the rates, then how in the he ll do they think they will be able to pay the fines?

this thing is a mess. and this comment is from a repub - i gotta tell ya the dems are making a mistake on this one.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:19 PM on 10/06/2009
- dianhow I'm a Fan of dianhow 75 fans permalink
photo

katie Those who can not afford- will be SUBSIDIZED Thats been said over and over- by Obama
and others . REMEMBER we all pay right now for the Uninsured How ?
Through over charges- extravagant fees -rising health premiums - deductables- /
MD charges / hospitals bills / lab fees - etc. Its just hidden now. But we are paying NOW
We all have to buy auto insurance- or we go to jail or lose our license. Peventive medicine will help a lot- now poor folks can not get screened - so by the time they do get care-
the expense is massive. Thats one way it could help. Profiteering on the backs of sick folks-dropping them- denying them is just so wrong and ...immoral .

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:08 PM on 10/06/2009

dian, i see your point. however, i can guarantee you my health premiums wont be subsidized and i pay 1200 a month. my premiums HAVE to come down. i can promise you obamas plan wont help me. guarantee it.

i totally agree with you about insurance dropping people when they are sick, it is a crime and it is immoral. i also think they have to get rid of the preexisting conditions. im really mainly thinking about children when i say that. no child should EVER not have the very best of care.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:14 AM on 10/07/2009
- belyeu I'm a Fan of belyeu 17 fans permalink
photo

Katie; It's not the premiums as much as it is the co pays and deductibles. The price of medical care must be reduced because it is unsustainable. I cannot understand how the medical industry cannot see they are pricing themselves right out of existence.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 AM on 10/07/2009
- Josh Seipp I'm a Fan of Josh Seipp 27 fans permalink
photo

Yep, my premium is half as much as the medication I have to be on (and my premium isn't cheap, but I can afford it). HOWEVER if I want to put my wife and kids on my plan, the premium goes up 1000% - almost as much as my mortgage payment.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:06 AM on 10/07/2009

somewhat agree belyeu, but we dont take much if any medication. our premiums are 1200 a month. its outrageous. completely outrageous. it is a life altering amount. we could have one heck of a college fund for our kids if our premiums were cut in half.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:16 AM on 10/07/2009

hey bel, answered your tax question below as an answer to my own post since there were no more replies available.

thanks.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:51 PM on 10/07/2009

What I'm reading is the insurance industry whining about not making even more obscene money off of Americans if there isn't a mandate with chops. Well too frickin bad. They whine that we may not have a feisty mandate while they bilk Americans, take monthly payments from Americans, sometimes for decades, then when something goes wrong and we need to use the coverage we've paid for all that time, denying us coverage, rationing our care, stopping care, or dropping us altogether. This, in particular, needs to be illegal. I'm always amazed that they're allowed to do it now.

We need a robust Public Option. It's what Americans want and it's what we should get.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 PM on 10/06/2009
- dianhow I'm a Fan of dianhow 75 fans permalink
photo

54 None of us here cares about insurance Co profits either SCrew them
. Medicare for ALL - doing it slowly over a few years -1st those unfer 65 - the undr 60- inder 55
and so on. It could be gradual-so folks do not PANIC. And we all know what Medicare is and
that it works Bu tI know the GOP- fat cats - powerful interests who run this country will never
allow that to occur. They fight dirty as they are doing now- lie- smear-whatever it takes
I put NOTHING PAST THEM REALLY
EVEN INCITING VIOLENCE- WHICH THEY ARE DOING RIGHT NOW .

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:14 PM on 10/06/2009

Will the fines be tax deductible ?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:03 PM on 10/06/2009

isnt that the da mn truth bereasonable. good one.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:12 PM on 10/06/2009
- Woodn88s I'm a Fan of Woodn88s 7 fans permalink
photo

damn I sure hope so because I intend on racking up a lot of deductions

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:58 PM on 10/06/2009
photo

Well, if you can can't afford healthcare insurance and can be possibly sent to prison for not buying it, I guess it's one way to obtain free healthcare from the Government.

If you are jobless, homeless, struggling to put food on the table and have no healthcare, it could be a panacea solution.

Sorry for the cynicism and sarcasm but this whole debate is a farce and the way is stands at the moment, the only winners I can see are the damned insurance companies.

Hopefully, the Pols will come round and do what the majority of the American people want them to do and if they don't then the American people will get as many of them as possible out of Washington at the next election.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:58 PM on 10/06/2009
- dianhow I'm a Fan of dianhow 75 fans permalink
photo

2009 There will be subsidies if one can not afford it !
Good idea- lets do it
Retire / fire all the old rich greedy money grubbing folks - that have led us to this global disaster.
over the last 20 - 30 years .Reagan ' deregulated ' in 1981- Bush / W / Greenspan kept it going strong and then some.
ps Obama just got here ... Only 1 DEM pres in 29 yrs Clinton-who left a surplus and millions of new jobs.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 PM on 10/06/2009
photo

I am a Clinton fan BUT it was his administration that signed the deregulation bill in 1999.

"An agreement between the Clinton administration and congressional Republicans, reached during all-night negotiations which concluded in the early hours of October 22, 1999 sets the stage for passage of the most sweeping banking deregulation bill in American history, lifting virtually all restraints on the operation of the giant monopolies which dominate the financial system."

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:21 PM on 10/06/2009
- indy100 I'm a Fan of indy100 24 fans permalink
photo

"the only way they can keep premiums down while implementing the consumer protections like not charging more to sick people is by making sure that everyone is in the coverage pool." I agree and it's called universal healthcare, and it has nothing to do with insurance companies.

10% of income for a person who makes $10.50 per hour (my son) is $2,185 annually. My son currently lives at home, has a 10 year old truck and can't afford to move out until he finds a roommate. And the insurance companies want him to pay over $2,000 for health insurance or be fined $3,800?! Good grief, there is no end to the greed and corrpution. And if someone doesn't pay the penalty then what, jail? That's good old fashioned American logic for you.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:25 PM on 10/06/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (32 pages total)

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect