Showing posts with label PUBLIC OPTION. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PUBLIC OPTION. Show all posts

Monday, June 14, 2021

RSN: FOCUS: David Sirota and Andrew Perez | Nobody Should Be Celebrating the Affordable Care Act

 

 

Reader Supported News
13 June 21


You ARE Still Here

If you are reading this, then you did not depart, and from this morning’s readership numbers most people did not. We are glad you are still here.

We need you to GET SERIOUS about RSN. When you donate, you take an ownership stake. You should do that, and you should have that.

It is day 8 of the June fundraiser. We should be done. We are not.

Why?

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!


Update My Monthly Donation


If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043
Citrus Hts
CA 95611


 

Reader Supported News
13 June 21

It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News


IS IT POSSIBLE PEOPLE VIEW RSN AS ENTERTAINMENT? Searching for a reason why so many people would come to RSN, read and participate but not contribute. Is it possible people view the material we publish as somehow entertaining? We are trying to publish material that we believe is of the most urgent nature, of immediate concern to the public. However, for some reason when we ask for support to help run the process, it is extraordinarily difficult to get. Your contributions are of the utmost importance. / Marc Ash • Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!


FOCUS: David Sirota and Andrew Perez | Nobody Should Be Celebrating the Affordable Care Act
Barack Obama and Joe Biden. (photo: Carolyn Kaster/AP)
David Sirota and Andrew Perez, Jacobin
Excerpt: "Presidents Obama and Biden yukked it up this weekend in a video celebrating the Affordable Care Act. But the real thrust of Obamacare was always finding ways to pretend to address the health care crisis while protecting the health insurers fueling it."

n fortifying for-profit health care companies, the Affordable Care Act became a cautionary tale about the political supremacy of an insurance industry that many Americans hate. But it has now become something even more profound: the ACA’s modest popularity, forged in desperation, proves that an initiative can now be considered a political “win” even as it preserves a problem, steamrolls alternatives, and makes a crisis more difficult to fix.

In essence, a policy sold on the “audacity of hope” has helped deflate hope for anything better.

This past weekend, winning and hope were the big messages from the White House, where President Joe Biden and former president Barack Obama released a video celebrating the news that a record thirty-one million Americans are now getting their health insurance coverage through Affordable Care Act exchanges and an expanded Medicaid.

There’s a lot of laughing and yukking it up in the video — it has the corny vibe of a nineties buddy-reunion comedy flick, and in this case, the intent is to gaslight. You’re supposed to walk away from the Instagram-optimized clip feeling like everything is going in the right direction — and most importantly, feeling like “the ACA works,” as Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) triumphantly declared.

Now sure, the ACA has been working to boost insurance industry profits and executive pay — indeed, as millions of Americans lost their health insurance last year, six health insurance CEOs were paid a combined $120 million. Those winnings are also working for politicians — some of those riches have been recycled into more than $150 million of insurance industry campaign donations funneled to Democrats since Obamacare was first enacted.

But the Democrats’ signature health care law is not working nearly as well to address the health care crisis that is quietly exploding across the country.

The ACA “Works” Best for Insurance Companies

Amid all the triumphalist rhetoric about the ACA, consider a few data points:

  • The uninsured rate in America has steadily increased over the last several years. Nearly thirty million Americans were uninsured in 2019, according to Census data.

  • Eighty percent of Americans told Gallup that they have not seen their health insurance premiums decline since the passage of the ACA — and 50 percent say they fear being medically bankrupted.

  • Medical claim denial rates have been skyrocketing. Insurers reject more than one out of every six health insurance claims made by patients on ACA exchange plans.

  • Reuters recently reported that while the uninsured rate is lower than it was two decades ago, “the proportion of adults unable to afford doctor visits climbed from 11.4 percent to 15.7 percent.”

  • “Annual family premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance rose 4 percent to average $21,342” in 2020, according to data from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

  • Among those with employer-based health care coverage, “About one in five say that someone in their household has been contacted by a collection agency in the past 12 months because of medical bills, and 9 percent say they have at some point declared personal bankruptcy because of medical bills,” according to a 2019 Los Angeles Times/KFF study.

To be sure, the simple, straightforward expansion of Medicaid was the best part of the original law. But by its own authors’ admission, Obamacare went out of its way to try to halt the larger push for a single-payer system, because in the words of Obama Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius, they believed “dismantling private health coverage for the 180 million Americans that have it, discouraging more employers from coming into the marketplace, is a bad direction to go.”

The real thrust of the ACA has always been to find ways to pretend to address the health care crisis while enriching the health insurers that are fueling it.

The law spends hundreds of billions of dollars on such subsidies, and the American Rescue Plan expanded who’s eligible for subsidies. Those expenditures are touted for somewhat decreasing people’s premium costs — and indeed, more than one million Americans recently signed up for ACA exchange policies. But subsidizing coverage only limits the premium costs people pay themselves, with the government picking up the rest, on what are expensive plans. Overall health care costs remain sky-high.

While the new ACA sign-ups were celebrated as an enormous victory, many more Americans lost their employer health insurance coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic. And left unsaid by all the fist-pumping, high-fiving, self-congratulation from pro-ACA politicians is the fact that the ACA exchange plans that more and more Americans are being forced into also tend to feature excessive out-of-pocket costs — meaning many people are being shuffled onto plans they can’t actually afford to use.

Health insurers saw their profits boom during the pandemic last year, too, while millions lost their job-based health insurance coverage and people avoided going to doctors and put off elective procedures.

Overall, a decade into the ACA’s attempt to prop up and promote corporate health insurers, “individuals with private insurance were more likely to report poor access to care, higher costs of care, and less satisfaction with care compared with individuals covered by publicly sponsored insurance programs,” according to a study by California researchers just published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Put it all together, this data shows the ACA works in the same way a train robbery works — it works really well for the thieves but not so well for the passengers.

Demoralization, Tribalization, and Health Care Surrender

People generally understand their insurance company is out to screw them. About a third of unvaccinated Americans believe they “might have to pay an out-of-pocket cost to get the COVID-19 vaccine,” even though it’s free, according to recent survey data from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

And yet here’s the thing: many of the passengers seem fairly content with the heist — or at minimum, grateful that it’s just larceny and not an execution.

Gallup recently found that even as health care costs continue to increase, more Americans are now saying they are satisfied with what they’re paying. When it comes to the ACA in specific, KFF’s most recent polling found 53 percent of Americans view the program favorably.

Some of that can be attributed to the varied and nebulous understanding of what the ACA hodgepodge actually is. Some understand it primarily to be just a long-overdue prohibition on denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions. Some view it as just subsidies for slightly lower premiums. Some perceive it as the devil they know that’s safer than the devil they don’t. And some see it as at least modestly better than the Republican agenda of just sending people to the glue factory when they get sick.

Fair or unfair, justified or unjustified, the bottom line is this: after a decade of Democratic Party propagandizing and GOP offering no alternative at all, the ACA remains somewhat popular. The support is thin — lots of polls show Americans want to see the program improved — but there’s no denying that it has support, even as it has politically fortified an abusive, for-profit insurance industry.

Of course, the ACA has helped make sure more people are able to get ripped off on medical care rather than get completely cut off from the entire medical system. In that sense, the ACA is better than nothing at all, just like a train robbery is better than being thrown off the back of the caboose.

But the ACA’s modest popularity reflects demoralization and tribalization at least as much if not more than it reflects genuine satisfaction with the existing system.

After decades of watching other industrialized countries establish functioning universal health care systems and our government continue to prop up a system based around corporate health insurance, many Americans have concluded that nothing will change, that even tiny improvements are a huge win — and that policies like the ACA that are billed as transformational don’t transform much at all. Meanwhile, in a nation where public policy is now just fodder for the red-versus-blue bloodsport, any mention of ACA shortcomings is often seen first and foremost as betraying the blue team, so the program’s popularity is further bolstered by home-team spirit.

The popularity that has accrued to the ACA doesn’t exist in a vacuum. As the law itself enriches insurance companies and thereby strengthens their political power to block structural reform, Obamacare’s modest popularity further bolsters insurers by reducing the public demand for change.

For example, Americans’ contentment with the crumbs offered by the ACA goes a long way in explaining why even something as minimal as a public health insurance option has become a political laughingstock akin to the football in the famous Charlie Brown–Lucy scene.

For a decade, the Democratic Party and its allied liberal groups in Washington have been able to beat back discussion of universal health care by pretending they support a public option to compete with private insurers — and then they have inevitably cast aside the proposal when they regain power. This is what happened in 2010, and what is now happening again after Biden abandoned his public option promise in favor of a health care policy quite literally written by insurance industry lobbyists.

“The health insurance public option might be fizzling. The left is OK with that,” NBC News reported over the weekend. “Joe Biden campaigned on making the public option a reality, but so far, he’s done little to get Congress to enact one. Instead of outrage, influential progressives seem to be OK watching the promise go unfilled, preferring to pursue universal health care through other means, like expanding Medicare eligibility.”

The public option betrayal is indirectly linked to ACA popularity: sure, public option promises helped Democrats win elections, but they pay no price for abandoning those promises because hey, everything’s totally fine and here’s a tweetable Biden-Obama ACA commercial to prove it.

The same dynamic is at play with proposed Medicare expansion and full-fledged Medicare for All. Like a public option, those policies may be conceptually supported by a majority of Americans, but it’s been a half-century since the creation of Medicare.

That’s a half-century of insurance industry hegemony in American politics — a half-century of the country being conditioned to expect that when it comes to health care, nothing can fundamentally change. All those years have taught successive generations that even if we may like the idea of big changes, we should just be content that the ACA protects people with preexisting conditions, lets more people buy bad insurance, and preserves a predatory health care system that “only” bankrupts half of all cancer patients.

Perhaps that perception is correct. Perhaps America’s government is so uniquely corrupt and singularly captured by the health care industry that our most enduring form of exceptionalism will be permanently remaining the only industrialized country to not guarantee medical care to all people.

But as resigned as many may be to an eternity of ever-increasing medical bills, that doesn’t have to be our destiny.

We don’t have to reward inadequate policies with favorable opinion polls.

Regardless of slick White House videos or football-spiking tweets from senators, we don’t have to believe it is some enormous victory that millions of people were thrown off their employer-based health care but at least some of them were able to get crappy coverage on for-profit insurance exchanges that involve high out-of-pocket costs and high claim denial rates.

In short, we don’t have to just accept that the best we can hope for is a policy that funnels more cash to private insurance companies in exchange for smaller and smaller discount coupons for more and more expensive medical care.

Perceiving that downward spiral as normal and laudable is a choice by elected officials, by party powerbrokers, and by voters — and it is a choice we can reject.

READ MORE


Contribute to RSN

Update My Monthly Donation





Sunday, April 25, 2021

RSN: FOCUS: The Nation's Largest Health Insurer Pressured Its Employees to Fight a Public Option

 

 

Reader Supported News
25 April 21

It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News


“SOMEONE ELSE” IS KILLING RSN — Why can’t we get 30 donations from the 20,000 people who visit RSN each day? “Someone else” never donates. 30 readers donating on a daily basis is all it takes. That’s an absurdly low bar. Not “someone else.” You. / Marc Ash, Founder Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!


FOCUS: The Nation's Largest Health Insurer Pressured Its Employees to Fight a Public Option
Former Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut torpedoed the public-option provision of the Affordable Care Act in 2009. (photo: Susan Walsh)
Julia Rock, Jacobin
Rock writes: "Health insurance giant UnitedHealth Group held a webinar to pressure its rank-and-file employees to mobilize against efforts in Connecticut to create a state-level public health insurance option, according to a video of the presentation we obtained."

A newly obtained video shows an executive at UnitedHealth Group, the country’s largest health insurer, opposing a proposed public option bill in Connecticut — and actually pushing employees to lobby against the bill.

ealth insurance giant UnitedHealth Group held a webinar to pressure its rank-and-file employees to mobilize against efforts in Connecticut to create a state-level public health insurance option, according to a video of the presentation we obtained.

“It does sound like it’s just an option. But the problem is that it would exist on an unlevel playing field with private insurance,” Mishael Azam, a UnitedHealth Group VP of external affairs, told employees on the February 24 webinar. “The public option really is the path to single-payer, where there is really no private option left.”

Azam slammed the public option proposal for potentially providing Connecticut residents “artificially low premiums.” She encouraged employees to call their legislators and express their concerns about Connecticut’s public option proposal, which is designed to create more insurance competition and reduce health insurance premiums for consumers.

“If you agree with anything that you’re hearing today, taking action and contacting your legislator really makes a difference. It did make a difference in 2019,” she said, referring to when the insurance industry successfully killed a previous public option effort in Connecticut.

UnitedHealth spokesperson Eric Hausman told us that employees’ attendance at the February webinar was voluntary. “While we do not discuss internal meetings, educational webinars on issues of importance to our industry and our communities, such as the proposed public option in Connecticut, are completely voluntary,” he said.

“They Think They Are Screwed”

The nation’s largest health insurer, UnitedHealth saw its profits boom last year during the COVID-19 pandemic, as people largely avoided going to the doctor and put off elective procedures, activities that cost insurers money.

The company reported more than $15 billion in profit in 2020, an 11 percent increase over the previous year. In the year prior to that, the company made headlines after its CEO netted more than $50 million. Now, UnitedHealth is taking action to protect its windfall, as lawmakers around the country weigh reforms to address soaring health care costs.

In Connecticut, where UnitedHealth asked regulators to approve large increases in premiums for this year, the company and other major insurers have undertaken a massive campaign to block a new legislative attempt at passing a state-level public option.

Hartford, the state capital, is a major hub for health insurers, which account for 25,000 jobs, according to the industry. The state has long been a battleground between the health insurance industry and those fighting for reforms.

In 2009, Connecticut passed a law that paved the way for the state to establish a public option. Six months later, though, Congress passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and the state never set up its own insurance option. Former Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman played a key role in killing the public option provision in the ACA, refusing to support the bill if it included a public option.

Connecticut lawmakers proposed public option plans in 2019 and 2020. Once again, legislators in the Democratic-held state house are considering public option legislation, backed by state comptroller Kevin Lembo and the chair of the Senate insurance committee, state senator Matthew Lesser. The bill passed the Senate finance committee on Thursday, and it will receive a vote on the floor of the Senate before going to the assembly.

The legislative proposal to create a public option in Connecticut would authorize the state comptroller to offer the state’s current health care plan for public employees to certain individuals, small businesses, and nonprofit employers. The so-called Connecticut Partnership Plan is currently administered by Anthem.

Additionally, the proposal would raise funds for subsidies for those people by instituting a tax on health insurance companies, similar to the Affordable Care Act’s health insurance tax. The health insurance tax, which cost Connecticut health insurers $300 million annually, was repealed in 2019, and the repeal took effect earlier this year. The new tax would cost insurers in the state $50 million.

Democratic governor Ned Lamont opposes the legislature’s bill and has instead proposed his own health insurance reform plan, which would tax insurance companies to fund more subsidies to buy health insurance on the state exchange.

Front group campaigns backed by the health insurance industry are working to kill the legislation, and they are spending millions of dollars to kill state-level public option legislation being considered in Colorado, too. They argue that if states set up even modest public option plans, it could be the start of a slippery slope toward a single-payer system where there’s no need for health insurance companies.

Hausman, the UnitedHealth Group spokesperson, additionally argued in an email that “public option proposals will disrupt current coverage platforms by reducing access to providers, shifting costs to small businesses, increasing taxes, and eliminating jobs.”

Tom Swan, the executive director of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group, a group advocating for the public option legislation, told us that health insurers “are so threatened by this because if a public option passes in the insurance capital of the United States, they think they are screwed. And we hope that’s true.”

“Really Grassroots”

During the webinar, Azam, the UnitedHealth Group VP, claimed that a state-run health insurance option would create an “unlevel playing field” in competing against private insurers, claims that have been widely repeated in the industry’s campaign.

When asked by an employee attending the webinar what it means for the premiums to be artificially low, she responded, “When I say ‘artificially low,’ I mean that we wouldn’t even be allowed to have premiums that low, because we are required to have revenues match claims. Whereas the state is not requiring itself to do so. And taxes have been increased to cover those state costs.”

Azam was repeating the false claim propagated by the Connecticut Business & Industry Association that the state’s Connecticut Partnership Plan does not charge high enough premiums to cover costs.

Lembo, the state comptroller, debunked that claim in a February letter, explaining that a 2019 legislative fix had brought premiums on par with the cost of care. The actual reason the partnership’s premiums are lower is that the difference between claims and premiums is not used to generate profits, according to a March report from the comptroller’s office.

In the presentation, Azam also laid out the company’s strategy for tanking the public option proposal. “We have three major coalitions in Connecticut in addition to our grassroots efforts,” she said.

The presentation slide listed the Stop the HIT national coalition, a group that was formed to push for the repeal of the original health insurance tax in the ACA; Insurance Matters to CT, a coalition of insurers, businesses, and trade groups in the state organizing against the public option; and Connecticut’s Health Care Future.

Connecticut’s Health Care Future is a campaign from the Partnership for America’s Health Care Future, a state-focused affiliate of the health care industry front group set up to oppose Medicare for All and a public option at the federal level.

“This national group has major members including the American Hospital Association, AHIP [America’s Health Insurance Plans], physician groups, business groups, and the Connecticut arm of it is really grassroots,” Azam said.

Connecticut’s Health Care Future has made radio ad buys, and Azam said during the February webinar that it is also “aggressively engaged in letter writing campaigns.”

She added: “There are over 10,000 members of ‘My Care, My Choice,’ a grassroots platform in Connecticut, that are engaged in letter writing, and we also have a targeted letter writing campaign to key members of the insurance committee in the legislature.”

Azam said that other insurers and trade groups are working to deploy their employees against the Connecticut legislation.

“We also have trade groups doing employee engagements like this and member engagements. And the other carriers in Connecticut, the other major health insurance carriers, are doing engagements like we are today as well,” she said.

Azam noted that Connecticut’s Health Care Future had recently done polling in the state and found that “consumers are very concerned about a government takeover of health care.”

The group’s polling was conducted by Locust Street Group, a public relations and grassroots consulting firm. They claimed that only 36 percent of respondents support a Connecticut public option, and only 40 percent support the idea of a national public option plan.

Meanwhile, a Fox News voter analysis survey of the American electorate, conducted just before the 2020 election, found that 74 percent of Connecticut voters support the idea of “changing the health care system so that any American can buy into a government-run health care plan if they want to.”

While Azam had previously said that Connecticut’s Health Care Future is “really grassroots,” when an employee asked how they can get involved with the group, she responded: “I don’t know that individuals can join the Connecticut for Health Care Future coalition. I think it’s mostly businesses.”

READ MORE


Contribute to RSN

Update My Monthly Donation





This Weekend in Politics, Bulletin 441.

                                                                               LOTS OF POSTS IGNORED BY BLOGGER..... OR REMOVED ON THEIR WHI...