The New York Times published a very nice press release from the desk of Humana, one of the nation's largest health insurance companies. The reporter interviewed a bunch of employees at Humana, all of whom were horrified to see themselves depicted as "villains" in the health care debate. I agree with Yves Smith, this is an absurd angle for a story, an extreme example of selection bias. The people who work at Humana probably have a sense that their employer, um, pays their salary, and thusly, what's good for the employer is probably good for them. Similarly, most people hold a favorable opinion of themselves just as a matter of getting through the day. Not to mention the fact that their understanding of the functioning of Humana is limited to their job description. It is not possible to gain much of a perspective on the health care debate or industry practices by asking a mid-level manager "Do you think you're the worst person alive?"
As Smith writes,
Since when is it legitimate, much the less newsworthy, to get a company's perception on its embattled status, at least without introducing either some contrary opinion or better yet, facts, to counter the views of people who will inevitably see what they are doing as right? I hate to draw an extreme comparison to make the point, but staff in Nazi concentration camps also thought they were good people. It is well documented that for all save the depressed, people's assessments of their own behavior is biased in their favor.
There is some revelatory stuff in the article, however. David Sirota flags one employee saying that Humana believes in keeping down costs by "controlling utilization":
Now, I know we're supposed to think that private for-profit health care companies don't ration care, while government-run programs like Medicare do - but as the insurance industry admits right here for all to see, that's just not the case. The obvious truth is that the health insurance industry works hard to "control utilization" - that is, it works hard to make sure that when you need a costly medical service, you are "controlled" (read: prevented) from getting it.Sure, we're all against excessive testing - and there are good ways to deal with those inefficiencies. But that's not what the insurance industry is talking about. It is talking about its practice of rationing care - and now that reality is right there in black and white for all to see.
The email is an example of the astroturf practices from the industry, including, no doubt, pitching to the New York Times a story putting the human face on insurers. Many of these astroturf efforts spring from the same sources as the corporate lobby groups activating the tea party protests at town hall meetings throughout the country this August. They're trying to change the subject, away from facts, like how they're spending less of their premium revenue on medical care over the years, from 90% in the early 1990s to around 80% today. Or how they use rescission and pre-existing condition to make profits off cherry-picking the healthy and denying everyone else care. House and Senate leaders have requested more and more information about insurance company practices; Dennis Kucinich has joined that effort. But the insurance industry, while nominally siding with reform, wants to keep the focus on efforts against it, in service to de-fanging it.
Follow David Dayen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ddayen
Miles White - Abbott - $17,395.00
Fred Hassan - Schering-Plough - $15,677.00
Bill Weldon - Johnson & Johnson - $13,022.00
Bob Essner - Wyeth - $12,552.00
Ron Williams - Aetna - $12,656.00
H. Edward Hanway - CIGNA - $6,373.00
Angela Braly -WellPoint - $5,127.00
This is what those poor souls at the town hall meetings are trying to protect. If they only knew.
Do not forget companies exist for one reason only;to make the maximum amount of profit possible, always on the lookout to increase the profit margins even further .You don't have to be a genius to understand that .Neither do you have to be very intelligent to understand what the result is on for the customers of those companies,they will be paying maximum price and receive minimum service .If those gentlemen of the insurance companies use every trick in the book to prevent the people in the USA from obtaining a decent health care system they should be exposed as egoistic thieves willing to sacrifice thousands of lives in order to continue enjoying their lifestyles .Why not some documentary about the people a the top .use their weapons against them without any apprehension,they've set the example didn't they ?
Corporations are the single most evil entity ever created in this country.
I wonder if there is a Canadian reading this who need a groundskeeper.
Still? Bush is gone now, you know. Doesn't that count?
Bush lite. That is Obama. Likeable guy, but in way over his head. Change we can't believe in.
Had hopes for your country, but it is down the drain already.
The more health they provide, the less wealth they create.
Why can't people understand this?
Its all about priorities. T
Their priority is WEALTH for them and their corporate backers OVER health care for ALL Americans.
Freaking focus. Reform is too important to pick this losing strategy. It's as short sighted and lazy as Republicans believing the answer to health care costs is tort reform.
Distorted characterization of the left's position.
IT'S NOT THAT "ALL WOULD BE WELL IN HEALTHCARE".
YOU freaking focus. The one thing that you ARE accurate about is that the overall fight IS in fact about trying to defeat "evil insurers trying to kill everyone so that they don't have to pay medical bills". That IS in fact the problem that we are trying to fix.
But - to repeat - it's not that by defeating that type of system that everything would be all hunky-dory. Nice usage of strawman logic. It's that by eliminating private, for-profit health insurance and providing better health care to every single American at what would actually end up being lower cost,
MAKES.
SENSE.
Wait for it.....an increase in private health insurance companies! Go figure.
“We believe there’s a better way to control costs by controlling utilization and getting people involved in their health care.” “We believe there’s a better way to control costs by controlling utilization and getting people involved in their health care.”
You know what "controlling utilization" means. Denials making doctors appeal denial of that prescription, test, surgery, procedure. As for "getting people involved" that means getting people to pay more and more out of their own pocket. The theory being that people will make health care decisions based on cost when they're paying for it.
It was disgusting to read about these people whining when they have been involved in the suffering and death of so many people. It simply does not compare.