Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
Insurers say the early buyers of health coverage on the nation's troubled new websites are older than expected so far, raising early concerns about the economics of the insurance marketplaces.

If the trend continues, an older, more expensive set of customers could drive up prices for everyone, the insurers say, by forcing them to spread their costs around. "We need a broad range of people to make this work, and we're not seeing that right now," said Heather Thiltgen of Medical Mutual of Ohio, the state's largest insurer by individual customers. "We're seeing the population skewing older."

The early numbers, described to The Wall Street Journal by insurance executives, agents, state officials and actuaries, are still small—partly a consequence of the continuing technical problems plaguing the federally run exchanges, experts say. HealthCare.gov, the federally run marketplace serving 36 states, is suffering serious technical problems that have prevented many people from signing up.

But the numbers demonstrate a real-world fallout from the digital snafus: Less-healthy customers are more likely to persevere through technical obstacles to gain coverage, insurers say. Younger, healthier customers who feel less need for insurance—but whose widespread participation is important to the financial success of the system—could be quicker to give up.

The average enrollee age at Priority Health, a Michigan insurer, has ticked up to age 51 for newcomers, from about 41 years old for plans offered for the current year, said Joan Budden, chief marketing officer. Arise Health Plan, Wisconsin's largest nonprofit insurer, said more than half its 150 signees are over 50, a higher proportion than expected, while declining to be specific on its target age.

Industry experts cautioned that, a month into the health law's enrollment period, it is too soon to say what insurers' final pool of members will look like. Medical Mutual, for instance, has seen health-law enrollments so far in the "low triple digits," and Priority Health has seen fewer than 100. Both are selling on the federal exchange.

A White House official said the Obama administration expects most young, healthy enrollees to wait until the last minute to sign up, citing research showing that pattern when Massachusetts embarked on a similar health overhaul in 2007. People have until Dec. 15 to enroll in coverage starting Jan. 1, with open enrollment for coverage during the year lasting through next March.

In states that are running their own marketplaces and have seen smoother rollouts, officials are now also reporting a similar phenomenon, suggesting the economics of the law play a role, too. In Connecticut and Kentucky, which have enrolled more than 4,000 people each in private health plans so far, the largest segments of enrollees in new commercial health-law plans are over age 55, much older than industry actuaries say they had anticipated. Each state ultimately expects to register several hundred thousand people in their exchanges.

Age expectations for enrollees vary by market, but one adviser and several insurers said an average age of around 40 would be a typical target.

The more difficult it is for a person to sign up, "the more danger there is of having a bad risk pool," said Jim Whisler, an actuary for Deloitte Consulting LLP, which advises health plans participating in the marketplaces. "Indications to date are that that is playing out," he said.

The law bars insurers from charging sicker customers higher rates, and limits the amount they can charge older people compared with younger ones. It offers new subsidies to help cover premiums available to many lower-income applicants. Insurers are relying on a steady stream of younger, healthier enrollees to offset medical bills of older, sicker customers.

"The more sick people who do enroll, the more exposed [insurers] become," said Jim O'Connor, an actuary for Milliman Inc., a consulting firm.

The law includes provisions to ease the risks insurers face. For instance, federal funds will reimburse insurers for certain losses if they underestimate costs. But, actuaries say if the overall pool of customers is significantly older than expected, those provisions may not be enough to protect insurers against losses.

Technological obstacles won't deter patients like Marian Furst, a 63-year-old from suburban Salt Lake City. Ms. Furst, whose current health plan is closing at the end of the year, receives a $5,260-a-month course of treatment for an immune-system disorder.

That means the odds that she will keep going back to the troubled federally run website, HealthCare.gov, are "100%," she says. Ms. Furst created an account on the morning of Oct. 3. She has been trying to log in every few days since, though she hasn't succeeded yet.

The website problems have attracted a backlash in Washington, where Republican lawmakers, and some Democrats, have called for an extension of the enrollment period, which ends in March, or a delay of a crucial health-law requirement that people obtain coverage next year or pay a tax penalty.

"There has to be a sufficient window for citizens to be able to exercise their judgment in signing up," Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, said last week.

Either approach could reduce the incentive for healthy people to get coverage, meaning insurers would have to increase rates next year "to account for fewer young and healthy people signing up for coverage," said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans.

"With nearly half of single, Marketplace-eligible uninsured young adults able to get coverage at $50 or less per month, the health care law is delivering the quality, affordable coverage people are looking for," said Joanne Peters of the Department of Health and Human Services, referring to recent research by the department.

So far, the young have remained elusive. At a health-law education event in North Carolina last week, more than 100 people, mostly in their 40s and 50s, came. "I actually didn't see a single young person," said Liz Gallops, an insurance agent from Raleigh, N.C., who attended.

In Kentucky, nearly 40% of 4,631 enrollees in private health plans are over age 55, while 24%, including children, fall under age 34. A much higher portion of young people signed up for Medicaid plans, which some states are expanding under the law, state data show.

Many more people have applied for coverage, but not yet enrolled, and data showing their ages wasn't immediately available, said Gwenda Bond, a spokeswoman for the Kentucky marketplace. The rollout of that state's website has been relatively smooth compared with the federally run site.

Private plans are seeing an older clientele in Connecticut, too, said Kevin Counihan, CEO of Access Health CT, the state's marketplace. Mr. Counihan, a former Cigna Corp. executive, said he anticipated younger people will wait until the last minute to sign up.

WellPoint Inc., the largest insurer offering plans in Connecticut, said most of its enrollees in that state were between 55 and 64 in a recent call with investors. The insurer said it predicted an initial wave of enrollees might be older, but that it would increase efforts to woo younger members.

"To get the right risk pool, we need to do marketing," said Ken Goulet, president of the insurer's commercial and specialty division.

The early hurdles could leave insurers with a less profitable cast of enrollees next year, said Matthew Borsch of Goldman Sachs in a note last week to investors. Mr. Borsch, who earlier anticipated the industry would profit, now projects losses of "less than $100 million" on pretax 2014 earnings.

The people most helped by the law are the ones who represent the biggest challenge for insurers, since they may be highly motivated to sign up for coverage despite malfunctioning websites. Jennifer Olski, a 46-year-old freelance writer from Kimberly, Wis., has been unable to afford coverage on her $25,000-a-year income: As a survivor of bladder cancer now contending with two types of nerve disease, she faced high prices under the old insurance rules.

Now, she is looking forward to another chance to gain coverage. "When you need something this bad, it's going to be worth the wait, even if it's for another couple of weeks," she said.

Kristina Peterson contributed to this article.
 

JBond

UDFA
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2
Why in the world would young healthy people want to pay 2 to 5 times as much for lesser coverage? Of course they are not signing up.

The young healthy people are the ones that voted for Obama and now he is fucking them hard.

Millions are losing their coverage. Obama's lie that he repeated 29 times on video tape regarding keeping your coverage if you liked it, was done to fool the fools. There are many very stupid people in this country.
 

VTA

UDFA
Messages
2,668
Reaction score
594
Why in the world would young healthy people want to pay 2 to 5 times as much for lesser coverage? Of course they are not signing up.

Because it's #kewl and #progressive (for *those poor people*) and helps the economy by centralizing a legitimate business model and cutting off competitive price variables. in theory.
 

JBond

UDFA
Messages
2,667
Reaction score
2
ObamaCare: Designed for Failure

By Charles E. Moore

You must understand, no matter what President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid say, that ObamaCare was designed for failure, not just for itself but all the insurance companies involved. When a poison pill is ingested into the system, the body starts to die, killing off the healthy organs and itself in the process... leaving a void for something far worse to take its place.

It has been the progressive's dream since 1912 to introduce national healthcare and control one-sixth of the nation's economy. Now that they are so close to the finish line, they needed one final push to send it home.

On one side of the table, you have a progressive government, and on the other side, you have those pesky free-market corporations that offer insurance to a couple hundred million people in this country. Now, if you are the government and you want the whole table to yourself, what is the fastest way to get rid of the competition? Bury them with a massive amount of regulations and mandates along with rules that make it nearly impossible to make a healthy three percent profit (according to US News and World Reports). Enter... ObamaCare.

A brief history lesson: prior to 1912, the Republican Party was made up of progressives like President Teddy Roosevelt. In his 1912 independent bid for a third presidential term, he called for universal health care for all Americans. After losing to the Republican ticket, many of the progressives left the GOP and the tone was set for a more conservative party ideology that has lasted generations. However, the seed was planted... universal health care for all the concept would bounce in and out of political conversations for the next hundred years.

Three decades later in 1943, President Franklin D. Roosevelt called for social insurance "from the cradle to the grave." The Wagner-Murray-Dingell bill was introduced to the full Congress. It called for compulsory national health insurance to be implemented within the Social Security Act. But opponents killed any vote on the legislation.

Over the following 50 years, presidents from both parties took several small steps including founding the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1953; tax exclusions for many employer-provided benefit plans in 1954, and Medicare and Medicaid in 1965. Then came the biggest stride towards national health care in the modern era, the Health Security Act in 1993 by the Clinton Administration, soon to be dubbed "Hillarycare" because of the powerful role given to her, i.e., to sell it to the American people. Ultimately the bill failed in 1994 because of staunch opposition from conservatives, libertarians, and the health-insurance industry. But Progressives were now closer than at any time in the past and it has been a major topic of every election since then. (Historical facts according to CNNhealth)

So now, back to the present... Obamacare is the last step towards universal health care and a single-payer government system. Over the past few weeks as the events of Healthcare.gov unfolded on the national news, I started to doubt my hypothesis that ObamaCare would overwhelm the private payer system and cause its ultimate collapse. But then, I began to expand my thinking.

Since 1995, along with my wife, I have owned and operated a successful health insurance brokerage agency in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Through many conversations in the past year with insurance company senior directors and vice presidents, I have heard echoed back to me one common theme... Obamacare will wreck the current system by placing too many burdens on private carries and making it nearly impossible to make the aforementioned healthy profit.

At the heart of ObamaCare is health insurance for all. To accomplish this, you must do away with medical underwriting so even the sickest in society can obtain coverage in the same manner as the healthiest of 25-year-old men and women. Sure, this seems reasonable but it strips the ability of insurance companies to properly price their product. So, in turn, they must price high to protect against unforeseen losses. The majority, healthy insured, will now have to pay higher premiums to cover the shock claim expense of the minority... the sick and unhealthy. Whether or not a successful society should help and protect the weakest among us is an argument for another article. (I can hear the critics roaring about this as I type these words, but this article is about cold hard business and cunning politics.)

Remember, President Obama has said what will make his system work is that millions of healthy uninsured Americans will buy coverage and offset the gigantic expense of the unhealthy. Keep this in mind as I quickly digress.

Here's a simple illustration of the absurdity of no medical underwriting allowed for the insurance companies. Imagine for a moment that your automobile needs a repair because the engine is running rough and stalling. Under the current free-market system, you could take your car to an auto repair garage where a qualified mechanic would test drive your car and look under the hood. After so doing, he would give you an idea of what was wrong and give you an estimate for the repair. If the mechanic simply thought that you needed an oil change and new plugs, the expense would be low, but if the mechanic felt that there was a larger problem, the expense would be higher. Now take away this dynamic. The mechanic cannot ask questions, cannot test-drive your car, and cannot look under the hood. He must give a price based on what you tell him over the phone. What do you think would happen? Suddenly, all mechanics in the country would start charging exceedingly high prices to protect themselves from large repairs. People would start doing small repairs themselves, thus robbing the garage of profitable, moneymaking customers. However, if the problem was too difficult, they would have to take it to the garage and pay a high price but the mechanic would have no room for profit because he still cannot ask how bad the problem is ... so he loses money because only the worst of car repairs come through his doors.

This is what is going to happen to insurance companies. I have seen the high prices coming for 2014. On October 31, I sat down with Congressman Timothy Murphy to show him real-world examples of what the rates from health-insurance companies would look like for small businesses in the Pittsburgh area. Increases of 50 percent or more will become the norm. I already know of several employers that plan on dropping healthcare once the increases take hold in 2014. When they drop the group coverage, they will give their employees extra money in their paycheck to buy coverage on their own. Once this happens, the users of health insurance will pay the premium out of their pocket but the young and healthy may chose to pay the $95 annual penalty and spend the money on consumer goods ... starving the insurance companies of the most-needed demographic.

If President Obama was serious about getting the young on the insurance doles, why did he make the penalty for the first and second year so low? The penalty is so low, almost as enticements for the young to not chose coverage and purposely starve the insurance companies of these very profitable clients. So, over the next two years, insurance companies would choke to death on the high-risk users of health insurance ... paying out claims that outnumber the premium dollars coming in. In two years, many more millions of Americans will be uninsured and others that want insurance will not be able to buy it. It will be a calamity and give the federal government the perfect crisis to come in and rescue the American people. And the pièce de résistance, President-elect Hillary Clinton will have the chance to say, "President Obama tried to give private insurance carriers the chance to be good citizens and provide a service that all American can afford but they failed because they are evil greedy corporations. Now it is time for the government to do what we should have done in 1993 ... single-payer health insurance provided by the government." Actually, President Obama is already uttering nearly this very thing, calling insurers 'bad apples'. Once the insurance companies have gone out of business or have been badly damaged it will be too late to stop it. The evil of last resort will be the federal government.

So, as I watched the failure of the rollout unfold on TV, I questioned whether or not the progressive agenda actually had the skill to pull this off. Maybe they were really inept, as government most times is, and there was no way to pull this off. But then it hit me like a Mack Truck. What if the rollout was going as planned, secretly behind closed doors it was planned to fail. You see, the insurance companies still must abide by the restrictive and burdensome regulations starting Jan. 1, 2014 no matter what happens with the government website. But the failure of the government web site only speeds the demise of the insurance companies.

The website was supposed to be a fast and efficient way for the young and healthy to sign up for affordable healthcare but its failure will only be an additional disincentive for people to sign up for health insurance -- leaving only the truly needy standing in line to buy coverage. The failure is basically a steroid injection into the true nature of ObamaCare. Destroy the body from the inside, quickly shutting down the organs badly needed for life, destroying the poison pill of Obamacare at the same time. Leaving the door wide open for Hillary Clinton to say in 2016 the nine most terrifying words in the English language, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/11/obamacare_designed_for_failure.html#ixzz2k4L5IQZM
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
 
Top Bottom