State business and government leaders say federal rules stemming from the national health care overhaul threaten to drive up insurance costs in Massachusetts, a state widely viewed as a model for the sweeping legislation signed by President Obama in 2010.
Under the new regulations, Massachusetts health insurers will have to set premium rates for small businesses and individuals once a year rather than quarterly, as they do now. The rates also would be issued six to 18 months prior to taking effect. Insurers say that means premiums would have to be more expensive to hedge against unforeseen events — such as an influenza outbreak — that may crop up before rates can be adjusted again.
Comments
What happened to 'Your insurance rates will go down 2500.00 a year.............
You say:
“Under that law, Massachusetts became the first state in the country to put small businesses and individuals together in the same risk pool as a way to make coverage more affordable for self-employed residents.”
Check with the Department of Insurance. You are not accurate. Prior to 2006 and the merged market concept in Massachusetts, self employed residents in Massachusetts (I was one) were already covered in the small group pool (back to 1997 or even earlier). The merged market law actually raised our rates. We were (only in Massachusetts would legislators write such a rule) called “groups of one.”
I believe the people helped by the merged market were people who chose not to work or whose employer had insurance options they didn’t like or whose employer did not offer insurance as a benefit. But DOI can explain it to you. Or read the Gorman report on the merged market, page 12 and elsewhere, released in December 2006. Fifteen percent of the people in the small group pool before 2006 were self employed individuals.
But...wait....if we just do as He asks, it will all be good for everyone...right?
Pressed to name a benefit to MA under Obamacare, the best one of the Believers can offer is "$1 billion" in additional Federal funds. Where do you think THAT money, and similar funds used to placate lawmakers in the other 49 states, came from? Come on, folks...it's a shell game! That's YOUR money being sucked up in higher taxes (with more to come). And for what? For the Feds to impose more regulations that mess with a system that, even flawed, works better in MA than does their alternative?
"For some in Massachusetts, the new US rules — handed down by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Feb. 27 — are another affront to a state that pioneered expanded access to health care and has been working to rein in costs"..This is the Boston Globe, an ardent supporter of the Unaffordable Patient Care and Non-Protection Act", trying to BACKTRACK and pretend that it has no responsibility for any of the many negative effects of the law. The Liberal Globe knows full well that ObamaCare will greatly INCREASE costs. To the ignorant taxpayer. ..If the Globe is truly honest, it would call for the REPEAL of ObamaCare...And let's see the Globe tell people what those Medicaid Exchanges are really all about (the ones that the Globe blames Republican governors for oppposing). But don't hold your breath waiting for these. Meanwhile the Herald is way out in front of this issue, as is the WSJ.
And these extra costs are the REAL reason that Deval will be calling for higher taxes in MA. It's NOT for more education and transportation. The MA budget is way in the hole because of both ObamaCare costs and RomneyCare costs. Globe isn't telling you that one either. The WSJ also exposed Patricks's dishonesty on that one.
Mitt Romney was right. There is no "one size fits all" way that Obamacare can work. It is leading to higher premiums, as we predicted it would.
Unfortunately Romney's plan for MA was an is as flawed as Obama's national plan.
Both assume that what's needed to bring more efficiency to the market is to give government appointees greater control over insurance providers and customers. Providers are told what to sell, where to sell it, and how much they may charge. Customers are not only told where they can buy and whom to buy from, but they are now compelled by law to buy.
Scratch the surface of any ardent Obamacare supporter and I bet you'll find a control freak.
The complaints are coming from health insurers trade organizations. That means some heavy grains of salt are required in listening to their visions of doom. In reality nothing has happened yet and the Health Care Law allows some leeway in organization at the state level. Also the act stipulates a ceiling on operational costs so the sky is not the limit on premiums. Without doubt this law needs tweaking but not in the direction of going back to a system where premiums were rising out of sight and too many had no insurance at all.
Maybe if they read the law before they passed it it wouldn't need "tweaking".
Keep drinking the liberal cool-aid Ma. Why do people think there is some special Government fairy ,who will give people things for free! That is of course ,unless you are...do I say illegal ailein!,!!!!!!!
If you don't like it, time for Single Payer. Medicare for all--then it's a certainty everyone's rates would go down.
Umm.... you clearly do not understand how single payer works...
@thecpt - Please take an honest look at the Canadian model. Ignore the anectodal evidence of long waiting lists (not true in 99% of the cases) or ambulances taking people to the US (shortest distance) or Doctors leaving for the US (again, an incredibly small percentage). Better outcomes, lower costs, overwelming public support (and yes, not 100%, but very hight).
Wow, quite an impresseive use of sublte disinformation in this one.
The clear impression we're meant to have after ready this report is that Masschusetts was well on its way to controlling healthcare costs before our well intentioned representatives in Washington starting imposing their will. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Pior to 2006, Massuchetts was merely among the top 5 most expensive states in which to purchase health insurance. The state's 2006 healthcare "reform" -- aimed at lowering cost and destined to the be the "model" for the national plan -- has not acccomplished that. In fact, as of last year, we've vaulted to the top of the league; in 2012 Massachusetts had the higthest average insurance premimum in the country. Now Obamacare is laying on yet more inefficienty and therefore more cost, and the local defenders of big government solutions have the nerve to act surprised.
Folks, this is what happens when we decide to give Democrats, Republicans, and their appointees the task of lowering healthcare costs. The concerns about the heavy hand of govenrment in this market are no longer theoretical. The data is beginging to roll in, and it's leading to only one conclusion: programs like Romneycare and Obamacare are making the healthcare cost problem worse, not better. And if thoser costs continue to rise, rationing is next.
It's time for a new approach.
Anxiously awaiting to hear your new approach.
We can start with the Hippocratic oath and do no harm. A plan that has government agencies dictating nearly all facets of the market is worse that our current system; step 1 is repeal the spectacularly misnamed Affordable Care Act.
Second, we lift the restrictions and regulations that were in place prior to ACA that warped market. Eliminate the tax incentives for employer-funded health insurance to solve the portability problem. Forbid states from barring out-of-state competitors. Forgo state and federal mandates on price and coverage options. Let consumers and providers sort out the right coverage options.
Third, used the group purchasing power of the state and/or federal government to subsidize the purchase of basic health insurance for low-income individuals and families based on their ability to pay.
Obamacare will cause insurance rates to rise??? Surprise, surprise.
And do you think insurance rates would go down without the Affordable Care Act? And now everyone will have coverage. Win-Win.
@PL, any guesses as to why rates in states that did not enact "Romneycare" are lower?
Of course Obamacare will hurt businesses. Obamacare, like Romneycare, was all about expanding coverage for the uninsured first. Totally left as an after-thought was the corresponding need for more primary care physicians, and the effects on businesses and the middle class.
another lie
These types of discussion about health care costs are nothing but smoke. Read Steven Brill's "Bitter Pill" article in Time. The reason health care costs are high and rising is that those with private insurance are being robbed by hospitals, owners of high tech diagnostic machines and the pharmacutical industry. Health care by it's nature, is not and can not be a free market, and it needs to be highly reguated, or move to a single payer. It is hilarious to hear folks say the only way to fix health care is to let consumers decide for themselves. These same "conservatives" blame the great recession on people who got tricked into house loans they could not afford, yet they expect the health care system to be fixed by the collective preasure of the average person making good, well informed decisions about health care.
True, and the government sets low reimbursement fees for medicare/medicaid. Doctors/Hospitals have to make that up somewhere. It's the same as college loans, the federal government is such a huge factor that it distorts any market it enters.
When they shovel endless cash into college loans the colleges keep raising tuitions because they know that kids can get the money, even if it bankrupts the middle class.
People got "tricked into loans they could not afford"? Wow, someone just got their script for medical pot...
tyfox"n"...
Next time you or a loved one hit the ED...make sure to tell them "I don't want any of those high tech diagnostic machines....give me some leeches and bleed me a bit. A sip of mercury might help. I'm sure that will fix that bone poking thru my skin".
I guess Joe WIlson was right
Maybe Dr. Nelsons model?