With half a million 55 plate cars racing off the forecourts in September, Nationwide has an unbeatable insurance offer for drivers. If customers find cheaper, like for like insurance than a Nationwide policy the Society will refund double the difference.
The offer applies to all policies purchased from now until 31 October 2005. If another provider offers a cheaper quote for the same level of cover, Nationwide will refund twice the difference. In addition, drivers who use a Nationwide personal loan to buy the car will receive 10% off their car insurance premium.
Steve Clode, marketing director at Nationwide says: "Nationwide's insurance price promise ensures drivers are getting a good deal. A Nationwide car insurance policy holder knows they are driving away with a real bargain."
Nationwide car insurance
On top of the price promise, Nationwide offers the following benefits as standard:
Up to 65% no claims discount for those under 50 and up to 70% if customers are 50 or over
The option to protect no claims discount
10% discount if the policy is purchased online
Temporary courtesy car while the policy holder's car is being repaired at an approved repairer following an accident
Cover for up to 90 days for European driving
24 hour claims for fast and effective help
The option to include legal assistance and/or Green Flag breakdown cover
The option to pay a higher excess and reduce the premium
Access to Nationwide's free 24 hour helpline for accident recovery, windscreen replacement and legal advice
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Many Americans without Health Insurance
The number of Americans without health insurance rose by 800,000 last year, reaching a record high of nearly 46 million, the U.S. Census Bureau reported Tuesday.
Officials blamed the increase in part on the continuing erosion of workplace-sponsored health insurance. A majority of Americans still get their coverage by sharing costs with their employer, though a smaller and smaller percentage of American jobs are now accompanied by medical benefits.
The number of Americans with no private or public medical coverage increased from 45 million in 2003 to 45.8 million in 2004, though the percentage of the population without insurance held steady at 15.7 percent.
Twenty-one million full-time workers had no health insurance in 2004, a 0.6 percent increase from the previous year, census officials said.
Workers' Health Care Costs Continue to Rise
Public Insurance vs. Private Insurance
Officials attributed that overall stability to public insurance programs for the poor, including Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Those programs saw a half-percent increase in coverage rates, nearly offsetting insurance losses in private insurance.
At the same time, 11.2 percent of American children remained uninsured in 2004, according to the figures.
Medical groups and advocacy organizations have urged elected officials to tackle the rising number of uninsured Americans, though the issue has proved to be one of the most politically contentious long-term issues in Washington.
U.S. Healthcare System Fails Many Women
View From the White House
President Bush has proposed a system of government tax credits designed to help families purchase insurance, though the White House has made no moves to spur action in Congress. Critics say that the $1,000 credits will do little to help most families buy coverage, which now costs upwards of $10,000 per year for the average family of four, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Bush also backs a plan allowing small businesses to join in purchasing worker coverage, though Congress has yet to approve the program.
Robert Helms, a health policy analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, argues that Tuesday's numbers give lawmakers little incentive to treat the nation's uninsured problem as a crisis.
"It doesn't put any increasing pressure on the politicians to do anything about this, and they don't seem to be inclined to do anything anyway," he tells WebMD.
The White House has proposed $10 billion in cuts to Medicaid to rein in 7 percent annual rises in program costs. But program advocates attacked the proposal Tuesday, noting that Medicaid provided a cushion that offset falling rates of employer-sponsored insurance in 2004.
"Americans are playing by the rules, they're working, they're waking up every morning to go to their jobs and they have no health security. Cuts to Medicaid are the wrong direction to move," says Kathleen Stoll, director of health policy for the consumer health group Families USA.
The group points out that 4.6 million more Americans lack medical coverage now than in 2001. "It's pretty much an epidemic of physical and financial crises for Americans here," she says.
Officials blamed the increase in part on the continuing erosion of workplace-sponsored health insurance. A majority of Americans still get their coverage by sharing costs with their employer, though a smaller and smaller percentage of American jobs are now accompanied by medical benefits.
The number of Americans with no private or public medical coverage increased from 45 million in 2003 to 45.8 million in 2004, though the percentage of the population without insurance held steady at 15.7 percent.
Twenty-one million full-time workers had no health insurance in 2004, a 0.6 percent increase from the previous year, census officials said.
Workers' Health Care Costs Continue to Rise
Public Insurance vs. Private Insurance
Officials attributed that overall stability to public insurance programs for the poor, including Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Those programs saw a half-percent increase in coverage rates, nearly offsetting insurance losses in private insurance.
At the same time, 11.2 percent of American children remained uninsured in 2004, according to the figures.
Medical groups and advocacy organizations have urged elected officials to tackle the rising number of uninsured Americans, though the issue has proved to be one of the most politically contentious long-term issues in Washington.
U.S. Healthcare System Fails Many Women
View From the White House
President Bush has proposed a system of government tax credits designed to help families purchase insurance, though the White House has made no moves to spur action in Congress. Critics say that the $1,000 credits will do little to help most families buy coverage, which now costs upwards of $10,000 per year for the average family of four, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Bush also backs a plan allowing small businesses to join in purchasing worker coverage, though Congress has yet to approve the program.
Robert Helms, a health policy analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, argues that Tuesday's numbers give lawmakers little incentive to treat the nation's uninsured problem as a crisis.
"It doesn't put any increasing pressure on the politicians to do anything about this, and they don't seem to be inclined to do anything anyway," he tells WebMD.
The White House has proposed $10 billion in cuts to Medicaid to rein in 7 percent annual rises in program costs. But program advocates attacked the proposal Tuesday, noting that Medicaid provided a cushion that offset falling rates of employer-sponsored insurance in 2004.
"Americans are playing by the rules, they're working, they're waking up every morning to go to their jobs and they have no health security. Cuts to Medicaid are the wrong direction to move," says Kathleen Stoll, director of health policy for the consumer health group Families USA.
The group points out that 4.6 million more Americans lack medical coverage now than in 2001. "It's pretty much an epidemic of physical and financial crises for Americans here," she says.
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
More Americans May Have Lost Medical Coverage for Fourth Year
Aug. 30 (Bloomberg) -- The number of Americans without medical insurance probably rose for a fourth straight year as costs climbed and companies cut benefits, health economists said.
The U.S. Census Bureau may report today that one million Americans lost coverage last year even as the economy expanded and created jobs, according to the economists. In 2003, a record 45 million Americans lacked coverage.
``No one's adding coverage in a meaningful way,'' said Kenneth Thorpe, a health economist at Emory University in Atlanta, in an interview last week.
Health-insurance costs for employers jumped an average of 12 percent last year, five times faster than wages, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, which studies health trends. As more people go without insurance, the costs of health care increase for companies and employees who do have benefits, Thorpe said.
The uninsured population has increased each year since the 2001 recession. In the two previous years, when the economy and employment grew, the number fell by 5.6 million. The 2003 total equaled 15.6 percent of the population, the highest since 1998.
Hospital operators such as HCA Inc. incur higher costs and bad debt when patients without insurance go to emergency rooms, required to provide services under federal law. Hospitals then charge more to paying patients. Each year, hospitals and doctors provide about $45 billion in uncompensated care, Thorpe said.
``There's a tremendous amount of money being paid on behalf of the uninsured, and it's not financed in a very thoughtful way,'' Thorpe said. In June, he published a study showing that families with employer-sponsored coverage will pay an average $922 in extra premiums this year because of the costs of treating patients who don't have insurance.
The U.S. Census Bureau may report today that one million Americans lost coverage last year even as the economy expanded and created jobs, according to the economists. In 2003, a record 45 million Americans lacked coverage.
``No one's adding coverage in a meaningful way,'' said Kenneth Thorpe, a health economist at Emory University in Atlanta, in an interview last week.
Health-insurance costs for employers jumped an average of 12 percent last year, five times faster than wages, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, which studies health trends. As more people go without insurance, the costs of health care increase for companies and employees who do have benefits, Thorpe said.
The uninsured population has increased each year since the 2001 recession. In the two previous years, when the economy and employment grew, the number fell by 5.6 million. The 2003 total equaled 15.6 percent of the population, the highest since 1998.
Hospital operators such as HCA Inc. incur higher costs and bad debt when patients without insurance go to emergency rooms, required to provide services under federal law. Hospitals then charge more to paying patients. Each year, hospitals and doctors provide about $45 billion in uncompensated care, Thorpe said.
``There's a tremendous amount of money being paid on behalf of the uninsured, and it's not financed in a very thoughtful way,'' Thorpe said. In June, he published a study showing that families with employer-sponsored coverage will pay an average $922 in extra premiums this year because of the costs of treating patients who don't have insurance.
Back-to-school with affordable health care
By Marshall Loeb, MarketWatch
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) - "Health insurance is just like car insurance. You want to get both before you wreck."
So says Robert S. Hurley, Vice President of Customer Care at eHealthInsurance.com, a company that compares health insurance policies.
Alarmingly, recent studies show that more than one in ten school-aged kids do not have health insurance. And in some states, as many as one in five kids are uninsured.
"Many parents don't know where to go to get health insurance and they don't know that it can be affordable," says Hurley.
One contributing factor to the huge numbers of children who go uninsured is the high number of small businesses. There are roughly 12 million across the nation and only about half offer coverage to their employees. Fewer than that offer to cover dependants, and when they do, they usually pass the entire cost to the family. Many families can't afford this daunting payment every month, and feel forced to leave their children uninsured.
"Families don't know that they can get coverage on their own that is more affordable than what small businesses offer," Hurley says. "Most children aged 5 to 18 can get an individual policy from $35 to $90 a month."
Keep these tips in mind, says Hurley, when getting health insurance for your kids:
Compare two to three health insurance companies because each is different. Usually a company shows you only one plan, so use the Internet and specifically look up as many as possible. On eHealthInsurance.com, you can compare policies in your area, side by side, freely and anonymously. Visit the site.
Buy only what you need. If you have children who are typically very healthy, don't buy a plan that offers a ten dollar co-payment to visit the doctor. Buy a plan that has a deductible involved so that you save on monthly premium.
Don't be afraid of the higher deductible plans. The deductible goes up so that you can save on your monthly premium.
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) - "Health insurance is just like car insurance. You want to get both before you wreck."
So says Robert S. Hurley, Vice President of Customer Care at eHealthInsurance.com, a company that compares health insurance policies.
Alarmingly, recent studies show that more than one in ten school-aged kids do not have health insurance. And in some states, as many as one in five kids are uninsured.
"Many parents don't know where to go to get health insurance and they don't know that it can be affordable," says Hurley.
One contributing factor to the huge numbers of children who go uninsured is the high number of small businesses. There are roughly 12 million across the nation and only about half offer coverage to their employees. Fewer than that offer to cover dependants, and when they do, they usually pass the entire cost to the family. Many families can't afford this daunting payment every month, and feel forced to leave their children uninsured.
"Families don't know that they can get coverage on their own that is more affordable than what small businesses offer," Hurley says. "Most children aged 5 to 18 can get an individual policy from $35 to $90 a month."
Keep these tips in mind, says Hurley, when getting health insurance for your kids:
Compare two to three health insurance companies because each is different. Usually a company shows you only one plan, so use the Internet and specifically look up as many as possible. On eHealthInsurance.com, you can compare policies in your area, side by side, freely and anonymously. Visit the site.
Buy only what you need. If you have children who are typically very healthy, don't buy a plan that offers a ten dollar co-payment to visit the doctor. Buy a plan that has a deductible involved so that you save on monthly premium.
Don't be afraid of the higher deductible plans. The deductible goes up so that you can save on your monthly premium.
Monday, August 29, 2005
Individual Health Insurance Plays Important Role in Nation's Health Care System
WASHINGTON, Aug. 29 /PRNewswire/ -- For millions of Americans seeking
coverage, individually purchased health insurance is more accessible and
affordable, and offers broader benefits, than widely known. Most applicants
for coverage are approved without restrictions, and the benefits commonly
purchased by consumers provide substantial financial protection.
(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20050829/DCM021 )
Those are among the findings of a study examining the marketplace for
individual major medical insurance released today by America's Health
Insurance Plans (AHIP). The U.S. Census Bureau estimates more than 16 million
non-elderly Americans obtained health insurance in the non-group market in
2003, the latest year for which they have data.
"The individual market is playing a vital and increasingly important role
in our nation's health care system by providing access to coverage and
substantial financial protection for millions of Americans who purchase
insurance without employer sponsorship," said AHIP President Karen Ignagni.
Private sector health insurance plans are offering innovative products
that are attractive to individuals purchasing coverage on their own and that
address the needs of segments of the population that were previously
uninsured, she said. Ignagni added that AHIP will make the information from
the study available to policymakers considering the role of the non-group
market in addressing the needs of Americans lacking health insurance.
The new study indicates the "typical" policy purchased by consumers in the
individual health insurance market is a preferred provider organization plan
with an annual deductible close to $2,000, annual out-of-pocket limits of
about $4,000 and a lifetime maximum benefit of nearly $5 million.
But, according to AHIP, consumers purchasing individual coverage choose
from a wide array of products, ranging from traditional indemnity plans and
plans eligible for health savings accounts to coverage offered by health
maintenance organizations.
AHIP found that in 2004 the annual premium for single coverage averaged
$2,268 and the average annual premium for family coverage was $4,424. By
comparison, annual premiums for employer-sponsored health plans during 2004
averaged $3,696 for single coverage and $9,948 for family coverage.
The study indicates premiums for non-group health insurance vary
significantly from state to state, depending on a variety of factors including
demographics, consumer benefit preferences and differences in health care
costs and regulations. However, 94% of the single policies surveyed were sold
in states where the average premiums were under $3,000, and 98% of family
policies in the survey were sold in states where the average premium was under
$6,000.
Nearly every plan in the market offered -- and most people purchased -- a
prescription drug benefit, coverage for inpatient and outpatient mental health
treatment, coverage for inpatient and outpatient substance abuse, annual
visits to an obstetrician/gynecologist, well-baby care, and for complications
of pregnancy.
One measure of the financial protection provided by an insurance policy is
the limit placed on the consumer's annual out-of-pocket spending. Most
consumers picked plans with annual out-of-pocket limits under $4,000.
Another important measure of financial protection provided by the policy
is the lifetime maximum benefit. All plans had lifetime maximum benefits of
$1 million or more. Most consumers picked plans with lifetime maximums of
more than $2 million, with the average at nearly $5 million.
The study shows that, even in states that allow insurers to consider an
applicant's medical history, nearly nine out of ten people who completed the
application process for non-group insurance were offered coverage. Of those
applicants offered coverage, more than three-quarters received their requested
coverage at standard rates, while 22 percent were offered full coverage at
higher initial premiums. Only 1 percent of offers included a coverage
exception for a specified condition.
According to the study, individual coverage is being purchased by people
of all ages. However, offer rates are lower for applicants who apply later in
life. Nonetheless, 80 percent of qualified applicants between the ages of 50
and 54, and 70 percent of those aged 60 to 64, were offered coverage.
The survey asked AHIP member companies active in the individual market to
provide detailed data on the benefits provided under policies and certificates
sold during the 12 month period ending June, 2004. The survey was designed to
provide a level of detail on individual market benefits comparable to that
available for employer-sponsored benefits. It represents the most
comprehensive study of the individual market undertaken so far.
coverage, individually purchased health insurance is more accessible and
affordable, and offers broader benefits, than widely known. Most applicants
for coverage are approved without restrictions, and the benefits commonly
purchased by consumers provide substantial financial protection.
(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20050829/DCM021 )
Those are among the findings of a study examining the marketplace for
individual major medical insurance released today by America's Health
Insurance Plans (AHIP). The U.S. Census Bureau estimates more than 16 million
non-elderly Americans obtained health insurance in the non-group market in
2003, the latest year for which they have data.
"The individual market is playing a vital and increasingly important role
in our nation's health care system by providing access to coverage and
substantial financial protection for millions of Americans who purchase
insurance without employer sponsorship," said AHIP President Karen Ignagni.
Private sector health insurance plans are offering innovative products
that are attractive to individuals purchasing coverage on their own and that
address the needs of segments of the population that were previously
uninsured, she said. Ignagni added that AHIP will make the information from
the study available to policymakers considering the role of the non-group
market in addressing the needs of Americans lacking health insurance.
The new study indicates the "typical" policy purchased by consumers in the
individual health insurance market is a preferred provider organization plan
with an annual deductible close to $2,000, annual out-of-pocket limits of
about $4,000 and a lifetime maximum benefit of nearly $5 million.
But, according to AHIP, consumers purchasing individual coverage choose
from a wide array of products, ranging from traditional indemnity plans and
plans eligible for health savings accounts to coverage offered by health
maintenance organizations.
AHIP found that in 2004 the annual premium for single coverage averaged
$2,268 and the average annual premium for family coverage was $4,424. By
comparison, annual premiums for employer-sponsored health plans during 2004
averaged $3,696 for single coverage and $9,948 for family coverage.
The study indicates premiums for non-group health insurance vary
significantly from state to state, depending on a variety of factors including
demographics, consumer benefit preferences and differences in health care
costs and regulations. However, 94% of the single policies surveyed were sold
in states where the average premiums were under $3,000, and 98% of family
policies in the survey were sold in states where the average premium was under
$6,000.
Nearly every plan in the market offered -- and most people purchased -- a
prescription drug benefit, coverage for inpatient and outpatient mental health
treatment, coverage for inpatient and outpatient substance abuse, annual
visits to an obstetrician/gynecologist, well-baby care, and for complications
of pregnancy.
One measure of the financial protection provided by an insurance policy is
the limit placed on the consumer's annual out-of-pocket spending. Most
consumers picked plans with annual out-of-pocket limits under $4,000.
Another important measure of financial protection provided by the policy
is the lifetime maximum benefit. All plans had lifetime maximum benefits of
$1 million or more. Most consumers picked plans with lifetime maximums of
more than $2 million, with the average at nearly $5 million.
The study shows that, even in states that allow insurers to consider an
applicant's medical history, nearly nine out of ten people who completed the
application process for non-group insurance were offered coverage. Of those
applicants offered coverage, more than three-quarters received their requested
coverage at standard rates, while 22 percent were offered full coverage at
higher initial premiums. Only 1 percent of offers included a coverage
exception for a specified condition.
According to the study, individual coverage is being purchased by people
of all ages. However, offer rates are lower for applicants who apply later in
life. Nonetheless, 80 percent of qualified applicants between the ages of 50
and 54, and 70 percent of those aged 60 to 64, were offered coverage.
The survey asked AHIP member companies active in the individual market to
provide detailed data on the benefits provided under policies and certificates
sold during the 12 month period ending June, 2004. The survey was designed to
provide a level of detail on individual market benefits comparable to that
available for employer-sponsored benefits. It represents the most
comprehensive study of the individual market undertaken so far.
Connecticut Auto Insurance Rates head lower
Drop in accidents is one factor
PAM DAWKINS pdawkins@ctpost.com
Connecticut motorists are digging deep to fill their tanks, but those rising gas prices could mean smaller car insurance bills.
More expensive gas is one factor cited by several insurance companies when asked why some premiums are dropping.
Not all policyholders will see their rates fall — individual factors like driving records play a part in the price of Connecticut auto insurance — but one company said its rates will drop an average of 2.1 percent next month, while another said its rates are already down 3.8 percent.
"There have been improvements," said Rod Curran, who heads the underwriting department in Geico's regional office on Long Island, N.Y. Not only are cars safer, resulting in a drop in accidents and injuries, but higher gas prices generally mean fewer miles driven, which lowers the risk factor, Curran said.
"It's been a downward trend [nationally]," said Tony Diodatu, vice president in insurance rating and information agency A.M. Best's property casualty division.
Because the severity and frequency of accidents has been "at a very low point" for the past several years, Diodatu said, the amount insurers are paying out for losses declined. "The profitability of auto insurance companies has gotten better," he said.
In Connecticut, said Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Cooper, auto accident fatalities have declined for several reasons, which he described as improved engineering of roads, enforcement and education.
"I think the statistics would bear out it's [the three reasons] having the desired effect," he said.
In 2000, the state saw 34,447 accidents, resulting in 51,124 injuries, according to the DOT. By 2003, the last year for which full data is available, the numbers dropped to 30,948 accidents, with 44,955 injuries. Alcohol-involved accidents also dropped in that time frame, from 1,123 (with 1,698 injuries) to 948 (with 1,465 injuries). Fatalities also declined, from 343 in 2000 to 298 in 2003. On the theft end, State Police spokesman Sgt. J. Paul Vance said there's been a "slight decrease" in the numbers. Between 2001 and 2003, he said, motor vehicle thefts dropped from 12,412 to 11,340. He credits, in part, better technology protecting cars, as well as an auto theft task force that works with local police departments.
Diodatu, too, credits better enforcement of traffic laws, safer cars and, maybe, higher gas prices for part of the drop, but said it is also a result of more sophisticated pricing models.
"It's allowed them more flexibility to lower rates," Diodatu said, because the companies are able to support more gradations in pricing.
Connecticut is one of the more expensive states in which to insure a car, said Susan Cogswell, commissioner of the state Department of Insurance. The relative wealth of Connecticut residents means they tend to drive more expensive cars, she said, adding that the population density also plays a part in auto insurance rates. Other factors include the high cost of labor, which affects repair costs, and health care.
Insurance companies file base rates with the department, which, Cogswell said,
analyzes them to make sure they are not "excessive, inadequate or discriminatory." The companies — there are 125 actively writing auto insurance policies here — must also submit the rules that detail how they apply individual factors, such as driving record, credit score and geographical location, according to Cogswell. Connecticut law allows what is called "territorial rating," which means insurers can factor the car's geographic base into their charges.
So far this year, Cogswell said, rates overall are up 0.4 percent, but, she added, "We have seen, in general, a decrease in rates."
There is no average decline for Geico, Curran said, but its rates have been falling in Connecticut in the last year or two. Part of that is due to what he called "efficiency improvements" at the company — such as $25 rebates for some customers who pay online — but the company is "trying to be aggressive, to keep our rates down." According to Curran, Geico is the second-largest auto insurance writer in Connecticut, behind Allstate.
The Progressive Group of Insurance Cos., which has two insurance businesses selling policies in Connecticut — one through independent agencies, the other direct to customers — recently received approval to lower rates for coverage. The direct-to-customers business will drop collision coverage rates in mid-September for new business and in November for renewals, said spokeswoman Christy Cote, in response to e-mailed questions. The average reduction, she said, will be 6 percent for customers with collision coverage.
And customers of the company that sells through agents will see an average rate drop of 2.1 percent in September (for new business) and November (for renewals).
The two companies dropped rates by 2.1 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively, in 2004, Cote said.
On Aug. 1, State Farm announced an average rate reduction of 3.8 percent but, cautioned spokeswoman Michelle Hare, that doesn't apply to all customers. "Individual rate decreases are dependent on the type of coverage a policyholder carries, applicable discounts, type of vehicle insured ," she wrote in response to e-mailed questions.
State Farm, which Hare said has about 3 percent of the market in Connecticut, ranked 12th in Connecticut in a 2004 A.M. Best ranking.
When asked if the reductions are going on anywhere else, she wrote, "Rate reduction allows the company to provide a more competitive price for our product. Realistically, however, rate reductions will continue to vary by state."
PAM DAWKINS pdawkins@ctpost.com
Connecticut motorists are digging deep to fill their tanks, but those rising gas prices could mean smaller car insurance bills.
More expensive gas is one factor cited by several insurance companies when asked why some premiums are dropping.
Not all policyholders will see their rates fall — individual factors like driving records play a part in the price of Connecticut auto insurance — but one company said its rates will drop an average of 2.1 percent next month, while another said its rates are already down 3.8 percent.
"There have been improvements," said Rod Curran, who heads the underwriting department in Geico's regional office on Long Island, N.Y. Not only are cars safer, resulting in a drop in accidents and injuries, but higher gas prices generally mean fewer miles driven, which lowers the risk factor, Curran said.
"It's been a downward trend [nationally]," said Tony Diodatu, vice president in insurance rating and information agency A.M. Best's property casualty division.
Because the severity and frequency of accidents has been "at a very low point" for the past several years, Diodatu said, the amount insurers are paying out for losses declined. "The profitability of auto insurance companies has gotten better," he said.
In Connecticut, said Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Cooper, auto accident fatalities have declined for several reasons, which he described as improved engineering of roads, enforcement and education.
"I think the statistics would bear out it's [the three reasons] having the desired effect," he said.
In 2000, the state saw 34,447 accidents, resulting in 51,124 injuries, according to the DOT. By 2003, the last year for which full data is available, the numbers dropped to 30,948 accidents, with 44,955 injuries. Alcohol-involved accidents also dropped in that time frame, from 1,123 (with 1,698 injuries) to 948 (with 1,465 injuries). Fatalities also declined, from 343 in 2000 to 298 in 2003. On the theft end, State Police spokesman Sgt. J. Paul Vance said there's been a "slight decrease" in the numbers. Between 2001 and 2003, he said, motor vehicle thefts dropped from 12,412 to 11,340. He credits, in part, better technology protecting cars, as well as an auto theft task force that works with local police departments.
Diodatu, too, credits better enforcement of traffic laws, safer cars and, maybe, higher gas prices for part of the drop, but said it is also a result of more sophisticated pricing models.
"It's allowed them more flexibility to lower rates," Diodatu said, because the companies are able to support more gradations in pricing.
Connecticut is one of the more expensive states in which to insure a car, said Susan Cogswell, commissioner of the state Department of Insurance. The relative wealth of Connecticut residents means they tend to drive more expensive cars, she said, adding that the population density also plays a part in auto insurance rates. Other factors include the high cost of labor, which affects repair costs, and health care.
Insurance companies file base rates with the department, which, Cogswell said,
analyzes them to make sure they are not "excessive, inadequate or discriminatory." The companies — there are 125 actively writing auto insurance policies here — must also submit the rules that detail how they apply individual factors, such as driving record, credit score and geographical location, according to Cogswell. Connecticut law allows what is called "territorial rating," which means insurers can factor the car's geographic base into their charges.
So far this year, Cogswell said, rates overall are up 0.4 percent, but, she added, "We have seen, in general, a decrease in rates."
There is no average decline for Geico, Curran said, but its rates have been falling in Connecticut in the last year or two. Part of that is due to what he called "efficiency improvements" at the company — such as $25 rebates for some customers who pay online — but the company is "trying to be aggressive, to keep our rates down." According to Curran, Geico is the second-largest auto insurance writer in Connecticut, behind Allstate.
The Progressive Group of Insurance Cos., which has two insurance businesses selling policies in Connecticut — one through independent agencies, the other direct to customers — recently received approval to lower rates for coverage. The direct-to-customers business will drop collision coverage rates in mid-September for new business and in November for renewals, said spokeswoman Christy Cote, in response to e-mailed questions. The average reduction, she said, will be 6 percent for customers with collision coverage.
And customers of the company that sells through agents will see an average rate drop of 2.1 percent in September (for new business) and November (for renewals).
The two companies dropped rates by 2.1 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively, in 2004, Cote said.
On Aug. 1, State Farm announced an average rate reduction of 3.8 percent but, cautioned spokeswoman Michelle Hare, that doesn't apply to all customers. "Individual rate decreases are dependent on the type of coverage a policyholder carries, applicable discounts, type of vehicle insured ," she wrote in response to e-mailed questions.
State Farm, which Hare said has about 3 percent of the market in Connecticut, ranked 12th in Connecticut in a 2004 A.M. Best ranking.
When asked if the reductions are going on anywhere else, she wrote, "Rate reduction allows the company to provide a more competitive price for our product. Realistically, however, rate reductions will continue to vary by state."
Maryland health insurance firms cut workers to save costs
By Neil Adler
Washington Business Journal
Updated: 8:00 p.m. ET Aug. 28, 2005
Two of Maryland's largest health insurers are slashing jobs.
CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield is laying off 103 workers because of its decision not to compete for renewal of a Medicare claims-processing contract that ends Sept. 30.
Meanwhile, Rockville-based Mid Atlantic Medical Services (MAMSI) and its parent company recently laid off about 80 Maryland employees to cut costs.
Insurance industry experts say the layoffs aren't a surprise.
"While employment reductions are not desirable, they are a result of a competitive marketplace as these carriers continue to fight for market share," says Maryland Insurance Commissioner Al Redmer.
Owings Mills-based CareFirst (www.carefirst.com) is hopeful that up to three-quarters of the affected workers could be hired by the new contractor.
Highmark officials are interviewing CareFirst workers -- claims handlers and customer-service representatives -- and could make some hires in the next few weeks . The new contract begins Oct. 1, says CareFirst spokesman Jeff Valentine.
CareFirst cut at least 200 jobs earlier this year as it continues to map out ways to reduce overhead while increasing its business. The insurer once employed 6,500, but the number is now about 6,000.
Revenue, though, increased to $4.98 billion in 2004, up from $4.64 billion a year earlier.
MAMSI cut 1 percent of its work force -- the company wouldn't provide an exact number -- "to fit a more efficient business model," says Beth Sammis, the senior vice president of corporate communications. MAMSI employs about 2,700 people at its Rockville headquarters and in offices in Frederick and Columbia.
MAMSI's parent, UnitedHealth Group, recently cut 53 jobs in Hunt Valley, according to the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation. Minneapolis-based UnitedHealth Group bought MAMSI (www.mamsi.com) in 2003 for nearly $3 billion.
Washington Business Journal
Updated: 8:00 p.m. ET Aug. 28, 2005
Two of Maryland's largest health insurers are slashing jobs.
CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield is laying off 103 workers because of its decision not to compete for renewal of a Medicare claims-processing contract that ends Sept. 30.
Meanwhile, Rockville-based Mid Atlantic Medical Services (MAMSI) and its parent company recently laid off about 80 Maryland employees to cut costs.
Insurance industry experts say the layoffs aren't a surprise.
"While employment reductions are not desirable, they are a result of a competitive marketplace as these carriers continue to fight for market share," says Maryland Insurance Commissioner Al Redmer.
Owings Mills-based CareFirst (www.carefirst.com) is hopeful that up to three-quarters of the affected workers could be hired by the new contractor.
Highmark officials are interviewing CareFirst workers -- claims handlers and customer-service representatives -- and could make some hires in the next few weeks . The new contract begins Oct. 1, says CareFirst spokesman Jeff Valentine.
CareFirst cut at least 200 jobs earlier this year as it continues to map out ways to reduce overhead while increasing its business. The insurer once employed 6,500, but the number is now about 6,000.
Revenue, though, increased to $4.98 billion in 2004, up from $4.64 billion a year earlier.
MAMSI cut 1 percent of its work force -- the company wouldn't provide an exact number -- "to fit a more efficient business model," says Beth Sammis, the senior vice president of corporate communications. MAMSI employs about 2,700 people at its Rockville headquarters and in offices in Frederick and Columbia.
MAMSI's parent, UnitedHealth Group, recently cut 53 jobs in Hunt Valley, according to the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation. Minneapolis-based UnitedHealth Group bought MAMSI (www.mamsi.com) in 2003 for nearly $3 billion.
Friday, August 26, 2005
Car renters often overdo car insurance
By Kathy Chu, USA TODAY
Feel run down by aggressive sales pitches for insurance at the car-rental counter?
You're not alone. Thousands of people will rent cars as Labor Day approaches and summer wanes. But many will pay more than they need for policies covering everything from car damage to stolen items.
Rental-car companies say the insurance can provide peace of mind on the road that if the unexpected happens, you're protected. But the four main types of coverage — collision, liability, personal accident and personal-effects insurance — cost up to $42 a day, according to the Insurance Information Institute in New York. That can be more than the price of renting the car.
"If you go on vacation for a week and buy auto-rental coverage, it could really add up," says Jeanne Salvatore, senior vice president at the insurance institute. "There are too many people who buy coverage they don't need."
A quarter of drivers buy rental insurance because they aren't sure of what their own auto policy covers, and 15% say they feel pressured to purchase these policies, according to a 2004 survey by Progressive, an insurer based in Mayfield Village, Ohio.
Do your research
Researching what you need before you get to the car-rental counter can help you save money. Some things to know:
• Collision-damage coverage, also known as a loss-damage waiver, protects you if the rental car is damaged or stolen.
But you probably won't need to buy it. If you own a car and have comprehensive and collision insurance, it likely will take care of damage to the rental. Check with your insurer to see if you're covered.
Many credit cards also provide this protection, although restrictions may apply.
Put the car-rental charges on any Visa or American Express, and you're generally covered. But this coverage may be secondary, which means that the credit card company will pay for what your auto-insurance policy doesn't.
Discover covers no more than $25,000 of damage to the rental car for platinum card holders. With platinum and gold MasterCards, the protection generally lasts for 15 consecutive days of the rental. Beyond that, you're on your own. Some MasterCard issuers also may choose not to offer this protection after Sept. 1, when the card association rolls out a program that makes it easier for banks to pick and choose which benefits to offer.
Some automobiles are exempt from the policy. American Express, for instance, doesn't cover what it calls "exotic" cars, including Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Maseratis.
If you buy a collision-damage waiver from the car-rental company, it's only in effect if you follow the rules; it may be void if you cause an accident while speeding, driving drunk or driving on unpaved roads.
• Supplemental liability protects you from damages for injuries or death to another person.
You may not need this if you are already covered under your own auto insurance or through umbrella home and auto policies. But if you only have the minimum state-required liability on your auto policy and want more coverage when renting a car, this could make sense, says Rick Crawley, a general manager at Progressive. "An argument could be made that if you're not in your home area, then you might not be as familiar driving" there and may need additional protection, he says.
On its Web site, Budget rental-car company touts the benefits of buying its liability coverage even if customers have their own policies: "By not having to file a claim under your own policy, you can probably avoid possible premium increases or even cancellation." Other companies have similar language in their rental brochures.
Robert Hunter, insurance director at Consumer Federation of America, says even if you don't tell your insurance company about the accident, it could still end up in the insurance-industry's database. That means that it could be reflected on your driving record.
"Even if it didn't get reported, why in the world would you want double insurance?" asks Hunter, the former Texas insurance commissioner.
States require rental companies to provide customers with a minimum level of liability insurance, but this coverage may not be enough if you are in a serious accident, according to the insurance institute.
• Personal accident insurance covers medical bills for you and your passengers. But you may be sufficiently covered by your health insurance or medical coverage under your auto policy.
• Personal effects insurance will pay for anything that gets stolen from the car. These items may already be covered under your homeowner's or renter's insurance. Buying this protection also doesn't make sense if the most valuable things in the car are your banged-up golf clubs.
If you hold an American Express Platinum or Centurion card, you are covered for damage or theft of your personal property for the amount that your own insurance policy won't pay.
• Some car-rental companies offer emergency sickness protection for foreigners traveling in the USA. This could be appropriate for non-citizens who have existing health conditions and don't have medical coverage, says Cindy Anderson, regional revenue manager at Dollar Thrifty rental-car company.
This coverage costs $3.99 a day at Dollar Thrifty and pays for up to $10,000 of medical care, including hospital services and visits to a doctor's office. Renters have to pay a $100 deductible per sickness.
Another option
If you rent cars often, do the math to figure out whether a "non-owner liability" policy from an insurer, which typically costs $200 to $300 a year, is cheaper than purchasing liability insurance every time you rent.
Generally, you'd have to rent a car at least 14 days a year and purchase liability protection every time for this policy to be worth it. This assumes that the rental company's liability coverage costs $9 to $14 a day, according to insurance institute estimates.
Insurance isn't the only area where you can save at the rental counter. Booking ahead, especially during busy periods such as Labor Day, can minimize the financial impact of renting a car for a weekend getaway.
Feel run down by aggressive sales pitches for insurance at the car-rental counter?
You're not alone. Thousands of people will rent cars as Labor Day approaches and summer wanes. But many will pay more than they need for policies covering everything from car damage to stolen items.
Rental-car companies say the insurance can provide peace of mind on the road that if the unexpected happens, you're protected. But the four main types of coverage — collision, liability, personal accident and personal-effects insurance — cost up to $42 a day, according to the Insurance Information Institute in New York. That can be more than the price of renting the car.
"If you go on vacation for a week and buy auto-rental coverage, it could really add up," says Jeanne Salvatore, senior vice president at the insurance institute. "There are too many people who buy coverage they don't need."
A quarter of drivers buy rental insurance because they aren't sure of what their own auto policy covers, and 15% say they feel pressured to purchase these policies, according to a 2004 survey by Progressive, an insurer based in Mayfield Village, Ohio.
Do your research
Researching what you need before you get to the car-rental counter can help you save money. Some things to know:
• Collision-damage coverage, also known as a loss-damage waiver, protects you if the rental car is damaged or stolen.
But you probably won't need to buy it. If you own a car and have comprehensive and collision insurance, it likely will take care of damage to the rental. Check with your insurer to see if you're covered.
Many credit cards also provide this protection, although restrictions may apply.
Put the car-rental charges on any Visa or American Express, and you're generally covered. But this coverage may be secondary, which means that the credit card company will pay for what your auto-insurance policy doesn't.
Discover covers no more than $25,000 of damage to the rental car for platinum card holders. With platinum and gold MasterCards, the protection generally lasts for 15 consecutive days of the rental. Beyond that, you're on your own. Some MasterCard issuers also may choose not to offer this protection after Sept. 1, when the card association rolls out a program that makes it easier for banks to pick and choose which benefits to offer.
Some automobiles are exempt from the policy. American Express, for instance, doesn't cover what it calls "exotic" cars, including Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Maseratis.
If you buy a collision-damage waiver from the car-rental company, it's only in effect if you follow the rules; it may be void if you cause an accident while speeding, driving drunk or driving on unpaved roads.
• Supplemental liability protects you from damages for injuries or death to another person.
You may not need this if you are already covered under your own auto insurance or through umbrella home and auto policies. But if you only have the minimum state-required liability on your auto policy and want more coverage when renting a car, this could make sense, says Rick Crawley, a general manager at Progressive. "An argument could be made that if you're not in your home area, then you might not be as familiar driving" there and may need additional protection, he says.
On its Web site, Budget rental-car company touts the benefits of buying its liability coverage even if customers have their own policies: "By not having to file a claim under your own policy, you can probably avoid possible premium increases or even cancellation." Other companies have similar language in their rental brochures.
Robert Hunter, insurance director at Consumer Federation of America, says even if you don't tell your insurance company about the accident, it could still end up in the insurance-industry's database. That means that it could be reflected on your driving record.
"Even if it didn't get reported, why in the world would you want double insurance?" asks Hunter, the former Texas insurance commissioner.
States require rental companies to provide customers with a minimum level of liability insurance, but this coverage may not be enough if you are in a serious accident, according to the insurance institute.
• Personal accident insurance covers medical bills for you and your passengers. But you may be sufficiently covered by your health insurance or medical coverage under your auto policy.
• Personal effects insurance will pay for anything that gets stolen from the car. These items may already be covered under your homeowner's or renter's insurance. Buying this protection also doesn't make sense if the most valuable things in the car are your banged-up golf clubs.
If you hold an American Express Platinum or Centurion card, you are covered for damage or theft of your personal property for the amount that your own insurance policy won't pay.
• Some car-rental companies offer emergency sickness protection for foreigners traveling in the USA. This could be appropriate for non-citizens who have existing health conditions and don't have medical coverage, says Cindy Anderson, regional revenue manager at Dollar Thrifty rental-car company.
This coverage costs $3.99 a day at Dollar Thrifty and pays for up to $10,000 of medical care, including hospital services and visits to a doctor's office. Renters have to pay a $100 deductible per sickness.
Another option
If you rent cars often, do the math to figure out whether a "non-owner liability" policy from an insurer, which typically costs $200 to $300 a year, is cheaper than purchasing liability insurance every time you rent.
Generally, you'd have to rent a car at least 14 days a year and purchase liability protection every time for this policy to be worth it. This assumes that the rental company's liability coverage costs $9 to $14 a day, according to insurance institute estimates.
Insurance isn't the only area where you can save at the rental counter. Booking ahead, especially during busy periods such as Labor Day, can minimize the financial impact of renting a car for a weekend getaway.
More state youngsters covered by health insurance
By Ed Anderson
Capital bureau
BATON ROUGE -- More than 52,000 more children have been insured in the past 18 months under a Medicaid-financed health insurance program for low-income families who cannot afford traditional health coverage, Gov. Kathleen Blanco said Thursday.
The 52,229 youngsters added to the rolls brings to 667,975 the number of those younger than 19 now covered either by Medicaid or the Louisiana Children's Health Insurance Program, said Bob Johannessen, chief spokesman for the Department of Health and Hospitals, the agency that administers the program.
Blanco said when she became governor about 77,000 eligible youths were not insured. She set her sights on cutting that number in half. That goal has been exceeded, she said.
"If there is health insurance, a child is less likely to end up in an emergency room with an illness out of control," Blanco said.
LaCHIP covers children who might otherwise fall through the cracks of the Medicaid system because their families make too much money.
Doreen Brasseaux, a senior adviser on health care reform in the state health and hospitals agency, said Medicaid covers children younger than 6 whose family income is less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level, and children 7 to 18 whose family income is less than 100 percent of the poverty level.
LaCHIP covers children younger than 6 whose family makes between 133 percent and 200 percent of the federal poverty level, and children from 7 to 18 whose families are at 100 percent to 200 percent of the federal poverty level.
For a family of four, the federal poverty level is $19,350, Brasseaux said.
Johannessen said when a new survey comes out next month, state officials expect the overall number of uninsured youth in the state will drop below 10 percent, or a little more than 100,000 youngsters.
He said that is based on changes in employment and income eligibility.
When the first survey was done in 1998, about 22 percent of youths younger than 19 were uninsured, and that number dropped to 11.1 percent in 2003. Brasseaux said that number is expected to be "significantly lower" than 11.1 percent when the new survey by the Louisiana State University Public Policy Research Lab is finished in a few weeks.
Blanco said notices to parents about the program have been sent home with about 1 million students in all schools. The notices explain how to apply and qualify. She said a new law will allow state officials to "reach out to families" who have children signed up for low-cost or free lunches in schools to see whether they have insurance.
Dr. Fred Cerise, secretary of the health agency, said his department also has tracked some eligible families through the federal food stamp program and programs in the juvenile justice system.
Capital bureau
BATON ROUGE -- More than 52,000 more children have been insured in the past 18 months under a Medicaid-financed health insurance program for low-income families who cannot afford traditional health coverage, Gov. Kathleen Blanco said Thursday.
The 52,229 youngsters added to the rolls brings to 667,975 the number of those younger than 19 now covered either by Medicaid or the Louisiana Children's Health Insurance Program, said Bob Johannessen, chief spokesman for the Department of Health and Hospitals, the agency that administers the program.
Blanco said when she became governor about 77,000 eligible youths were not insured. She set her sights on cutting that number in half. That goal has been exceeded, she said.
"If there is health insurance, a child is less likely to end up in an emergency room with an illness out of control," Blanco said.
LaCHIP covers children who might otherwise fall through the cracks of the Medicaid system because their families make too much money.
Doreen Brasseaux, a senior adviser on health care reform in the state health and hospitals agency, said Medicaid covers children younger than 6 whose family income is less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level, and children 7 to 18 whose family income is less than 100 percent of the poverty level.
LaCHIP covers children younger than 6 whose family makes between 133 percent and 200 percent of the federal poverty level, and children from 7 to 18 whose families are at 100 percent to 200 percent of the federal poverty level.
For a family of four, the federal poverty level is $19,350, Brasseaux said.
Johannessen said when a new survey comes out next month, state officials expect the overall number of uninsured youth in the state will drop below 10 percent, or a little more than 100,000 youngsters.
He said that is based on changes in employment and income eligibility.
When the first survey was done in 1998, about 22 percent of youths younger than 19 were uninsured, and that number dropped to 11.1 percent in 2003. Brasseaux said that number is expected to be "significantly lower" than 11.1 percent when the new survey by the Louisiana State University Public Policy Research Lab is finished in a few weeks.
Blanco said notices to parents about the program have been sent home with about 1 million students in all schools. The notices explain how to apply and qualify. She said a new law will allow state officials to "reach out to families" who have children signed up for low-cost or free lunches in schools to see whether they have insurance.
Dr. Fred Cerise, secretary of the health agency, said his department also has tracked some eligible families through the federal food stamp program and programs in the juvenile justice system.
Thursday, August 25, 2005
Consumers Need More Auto Insurance Education
August 25, 2005
The Colorado Legislature's Interim Committee on Auto Insurance has concluded that there needs to be more uniformity in presenting and explaining automobile insurance coverage options to residents buying or renewing policies.
Two years ago, the state converted from a "no fault" automobile insurance system to a system in which the driver at fault is reponsible for paying for the treatment of any other party's traffic accident injuries. However, the committee says many Coloradans remain confused about the implications of not purchasing personal medical coverage as part of their automobile insurance.
Representatives and agents from automobile insurance carriers, such as State Farm, Allstate and Progressive, told the committee about the steps their companies have taken to try to educate customers about the insurance system changes. However, Rep. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, said that what customers are being told can vary from agency to agency, and company to company.
The Colorado Legislature's Interim Committee on Auto Insurance has concluded that there needs to be more uniformity in presenting and explaining automobile insurance coverage options to residents buying or renewing policies.
Two years ago, the state converted from a "no fault" automobile insurance system to a system in which the driver at fault is reponsible for paying for the treatment of any other party's traffic accident injuries. However, the committee says many Coloradans remain confused about the implications of not purchasing personal medical coverage as part of their automobile insurance.
Representatives and agents from automobile insurance carriers, such as State Farm, Allstate and Progressive, told the committee about the steps their companies have taken to try to educate customers about the insurance system changes. However, Rep. Morgan Carroll, D-Aurora, said that what customers are being told can vary from agency to agency, and company to company.
Cost of Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance Has Increased for Workers, Study Finds - Kaisernetwork.org
Workers' contributions to employer-sponsored health coverage for families increased by an average of 79% from 1996 to 2003, according to an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality study published on Wednesday, the Washington Post reports. The average employee contributed $2,283 for family coverage in 2003, compared with $1,275 in 1996 (Washington Post, 8/25). Employers' contributions increased by about 89.3% -- or 59.9% adjusted for inflation -- from $3,679 in 1996 to $6,966 in 2003, Reuters reports (Reuters, 8/24). From 2002 to 2003, premiums increased by 9.2% for single coverage, 10% for employee-plus one coverage and 9.2% for family coverage, the study found (Washington Post, 8/25). Industry experts attribute the cost increases in part to high costs for new medical technology and the rising use and cost of prescription drugs (Reuters, 8/24). AHRQ's Medical Expenditure Panel Survey collected data from 48,000 U.S. employers for the survey. About 63% of U.S. residents have employer-sponsored health coverage (Washington Post, 8/25).
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Legislators to Consider Non-Auto Insurance Options to Provide Funding for Trauma Care
August 23, 2005
The American Insurance Association urged Colorado legislators to consider several viable non-auto insurance options for providing additional funding for trauma care, as needed, to address the shortfalls that arise for reasons having nothing to do with auto insurance.
"Funding of trauma care, including first responders, has been a long-standing issue, certainly pre-dating Colorado's change from a no-fault auto insurance system to a tort system," said David Snyder, AIA vice president and assistant general counsel. "Auto insurance will continue to pay for significant amounts of trauma care, including first responders, even without personal injury protection (PIP), as it does in other tort liability-based states."
While testifying before the Colorado Interim Study Committee on Auto Insurance, Snyder stated, "Colorado is now in the mainstream, along with the vast majority of other tort liability-based states, because it has recently determined that its automobile insurance compensation system is to be fault-based, where the party causing the accident pays the economic costs (including trauma care) and he also pays the non-economic losses of the victim he injures up to the policy limits. It would be premature to reconsider that determination, especially when there are many effective alternatives for addressing the root causes of any trauma care funding issues."
The issue of trauma care funding is not new because as early as 1991, 61 regional trauma centers had closed and the financial condition for trauma centers was deteriorating in 2001 and 2002. According to a report entitled "U.S. Trauma Center Crisis, Lost in the Scramble for Terror Resources," prepared by the National Foundation for Trauma Care (May 2004), the major economic problems for trauma centers include both unfunded care and management issues such as physician call pay and physician support.
The causes for the underfunding are the following:
The uninsured represent 18 percent of total costs but pay only 8 percent of those costs;
Medicaid patients account for 18 percent of total costs yet pay only 64 percent of their costs; and
Medicare patients account for 11 percent of total costs yet pay only 81 percent of their costs.
In contrast, insurance pays far more into the trauma system than the costs its policyholders incur.
To effectively address trauma care and first responder financing issues, AIA urged the committee to consider how other states have filled the gaps. Among the alternatives are:
Surcharges on traffic law violations to load the costs on to wrongdoers, or motor vehicle transactions to load the costs on to motorists generally, some of whom are probably uninsured;
Dedicated taxes that "sweep in" everyone, not just insureds but also government-reimbursed patients and the uninsured for health insurance purposes, and recognize that trauma care is a core governmental function and should be supported by everyone;
Special allocations to assist in supporting emergency medical services;
Mandatory trauma care coverage under health insurance so legislation should not greatly add to the net economic burden for health insurance; and
Direct charges for emergency medical services rendered.
Federal legislation directly relevant to the issue of first responder funding is under consideration as well. This legislation would go a long way toward eliminating the gap in government funding caused by inadequate Medicare reimbursement. The bills would raise the base rates for ambulance reimbursements to a level of average costs and provide additional reimbursements for rural ambulance trips, ranging from 5.5 percent to 22 percent.
Snyder concluded, "Any solution to the financing problem should, we believe, address those actual sources of funding deficits, not add additional burdens on health and auto/workers' compensation insurers and their policyholders, who are already paying far more into the trauma system than they are costing it."
The American Insurance Association urged Colorado legislators to consider several viable non-auto insurance options for providing additional funding for trauma care, as needed, to address the shortfalls that arise for reasons having nothing to do with auto insurance.
"Funding of trauma care, including first responders, has been a long-standing issue, certainly pre-dating Colorado's change from a no-fault auto insurance system to a tort system," said David Snyder, AIA vice president and assistant general counsel. "Auto insurance will continue to pay for significant amounts of trauma care, including first responders, even without personal injury protection (PIP), as it does in other tort liability-based states."
While testifying before the Colorado Interim Study Committee on Auto Insurance, Snyder stated, "Colorado is now in the mainstream, along with the vast majority of other tort liability-based states, because it has recently determined that its automobile insurance compensation system is to be fault-based, where the party causing the accident pays the economic costs (including trauma care) and he also pays the non-economic losses of the victim he injures up to the policy limits. It would be premature to reconsider that determination, especially when there are many effective alternatives for addressing the root causes of any trauma care funding issues."
The issue of trauma care funding is not new because as early as 1991, 61 regional trauma centers had closed and the financial condition for trauma centers was deteriorating in 2001 and 2002. According to a report entitled "U.S. Trauma Center Crisis, Lost in the Scramble for Terror Resources," prepared by the National Foundation for Trauma Care (May 2004), the major economic problems for trauma centers include both unfunded care and management issues such as physician call pay and physician support.
The causes for the underfunding are the following:
The uninsured represent 18 percent of total costs but pay only 8 percent of those costs;
Medicaid patients account for 18 percent of total costs yet pay only 64 percent of their costs; and
Medicare patients account for 11 percent of total costs yet pay only 81 percent of their costs.
In contrast, insurance pays far more into the trauma system than the costs its policyholders incur.
To effectively address trauma care and first responder financing issues, AIA urged the committee to consider how other states have filled the gaps. Among the alternatives are:
Surcharges on traffic law violations to load the costs on to wrongdoers, or motor vehicle transactions to load the costs on to motorists generally, some of whom are probably uninsured;
Dedicated taxes that "sweep in" everyone, not just insureds but also government-reimbursed patients and the uninsured for health insurance purposes, and recognize that trauma care is a core governmental function and should be supported by everyone;
Special allocations to assist in supporting emergency medical services;
Mandatory trauma care coverage under health insurance so legislation should not greatly add to the net economic burden for health insurance; and
Direct charges for emergency medical services rendered.
Federal legislation directly relevant to the issue of first responder funding is under consideration as well. This legislation would go a long way toward eliminating the gap in government funding caused by inadequate Medicare reimbursement. The bills would raise the base rates for ambulance reimbursements to a level of average costs and provide additional reimbursements for rural ambulance trips, ranging from 5.5 percent to 22 percent.
Snyder concluded, "Any solution to the financing problem should, we believe, address those actual sources of funding deficits, not add additional burdens on health and auto/workers' compensation insurers and their policyholders, who are already paying far more into the trauma system than they are costing it."
New Alternative Student Health Insurance Plan
Lawrence, Kan. - infoZine - The new plan, sponsored by the KU Student Senate and KU Medical Center Student Governing Council, is available for this academic year to undergraduates, graduate students and international students.
The insurance plan, underwritten by the MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company of Dallas, Texas, is an alternative to the State of Kansas Plan currently offered to all regents universities, offering more comprehensive benefits for a slightly higher annual cost.
"We are pleased to collaborate with KU's administration and the medical center in order to make a more comprehensive health insurance plan available to our students," said Nick Sterner, Student Senate President.
"We strongly encourage all students to have health insurance coverage during their time at KU," says Carol Seager, director of Student Health Services. "This new plan, along with the plan offered by the Board of Regents, provides options for those students who are currently without insurance coverage or those who decide to supplement or change their current coverage."
Compared to the existing health insurance plan, the new plan offers higher lifetime coverage amounts, more prescription drug coverage, coverage for additional services, higher payment for services outside the Student Health Center, 100 percent payment for covered services at the Student Health Center, and no need for a major medical rider.
There is a one-time opportunity during August 2005 for students who have already enrolled in the Board of Regents plan to change to the new plan if certain conditions are met. Students are encouraged to contact the Student Health Services Insurance Office at (785) 864-9522, www.ku.edu/~shs, or to visit www.studentresources.com for plan and enrollment information.
The insurance plan, underwritten by the MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company of Dallas, Texas, is an alternative to the State of Kansas Plan currently offered to all regents universities, offering more comprehensive benefits for a slightly higher annual cost.
"We are pleased to collaborate with KU's administration and the medical center in order to make a more comprehensive health insurance plan available to our students," said Nick Sterner, Student Senate President.
"We strongly encourage all students to have health insurance coverage during their time at KU," says Carol Seager, director of Student Health Services. "This new plan, along with the plan offered by the Board of Regents, provides options for those students who are currently without insurance coverage or those who decide to supplement or change their current coverage."
Compared to the existing health insurance plan, the new plan offers higher lifetime coverage amounts, more prescription drug coverage, coverage for additional services, higher payment for services outside the Student Health Center, 100 percent payment for covered services at the Student Health Center, and no need for a major medical rider.
There is a one-time opportunity during August 2005 for students who have already enrolled in the Board of Regents plan to change to the new plan if certain conditions are met. Students are encouraged to contact the Student Health Services Insurance Office at (785) 864-9522, www.ku.edu/~shs, or to visit www.studentresources.com for plan and enrollment information.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Health Insurance Rates rise for city employee
The Daily Sentinel
Published August 23, 2005
Health insurance rates are on the increase for Scottsboro city employees.
Carol Munster, a representative of the city’s health insurance carrier, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, told the Scottsboro City Council during a recent meeting that rates for the 2005-06 fiscal year would increase by 22 percent. Premiums have risen, on average, 15-30 percent for most groups insured by the company this year.
The city pays 100 percent of the premium for employee coverage and an equivalent amount toward those who select family coverage. Council president Harold Brookshire said it would cost the city approximately $200,000 “to maintain what we have.”
Munster said BCBS had gone in the hole on providing coverage to Scottsboro over the past three years. She said the company lost $70,000 in 2002-03, $290,000 in 2003-04 and it projects a loss of $485,000 in the current fiscal year which ends in September.
Claims frequency and severity is factored into the premium charged. The city’s group has had one employee with claims during the current fiscal year in excess of $100,000.
Munster said education of employees is a big factor in minimizing rate increases. She said each member must “take care, wear seatbelts, stop smoking and start moving.” She also suggested employees take advantage of the BCBS website, that the city consider providing incentives for employees to lead healthy lifestyles and gradually increase co-pays and deductibles.
Published August 23, 2005
Health insurance rates are on the increase for Scottsboro city employees.
Carol Munster, a representative of the city’s health insurance carrier, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, told the Scottsboro City Council during a recent meeting that rates for the 2005-06 fiscal year would increase by 22 percent. Premiums have risen, on average, 15-30 percent for most groups insured by the company this year.
The city pays 100 percent of the premium for employee coverage and an equivalent amount toward those who select family coverage. Council president Harold Brookshire said it would cost the city approximately $200,000 “to maintain what we have.”
Munster said BCBS had gone in the hole on providing coverage to Scottsboro over the past three years. She said the company lost $70,000 in 2002-03, $290,000 in 2003-04 and it projects a loss of $485,000 in the current fiscal year which ends in September.
Claims frequency and severity is factored into the premium charged. The city’s group has had one employee with claims during the current fiscal year in excess of $100,000.
Munster said education of employees is a big factor in minimizing rate increases. She said each member must “take care, wear seatbelts, stop smoking and start moving.” She also suggested employees take advantage of the BCBS website, that the city consider providing incentives for employees to lead healthy lifestyles and gradually increase co-pays and deductibles.
eHealthInsurance Taps RSA for Strategic Viral Marketing and Publicity Campaign
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., Aug. 23 /PRNewswire/ -- Unique hybrid entertainment
and grass roots agency Robertson Schwartz Agency (RSA) has been chosen by
eHealthInsurance, the nation's leading source for individual and family health
insurance, to provide strategic and tactical publicity and marketing counsel.
eHealthInsurance's choice of RSA as an agency of record is a move that
reflects the growing trend towards entertainment-based marketing. The new
alliance will bring together over 25 years of entertainment and grass roots
experience with one of the leading authorities on personal health insurance
solutions.
RSA and eHealthInsurance will together launch an innovative campaign to
include publicity, strategic partnerships, viral marketing and embedded
content placement. RSA will further build on eHealthInsurance's commitment to
provide the consumer with easy access to information and tools to make
informed health insurance decisions through consumer-focused educational
initiatives.
"Consumers nationwide are looking for health insurance solutions that meet
their needs," said Lyn Chitow-Oakes, Chief Marketing Officer of
eHealthInsurance. "Our goal is to make eHealthInsurance synonymous with the
ability to find accessible, affordable health insurance through innovative
marketing and publicity programs that reach beyond traditional marketing
approaches and set a new standard for marketing to consumers. RSA brings a
unique blend of skill sets and relationships that will make this possible."
"We are delighted to join eHealthInsurance in their mission to educate and
inform the American public that health insurance is affordable, necessary and
most importantly, accessible to everyone," said Rusty Robertson, Partner, RSA.
"eHealthInsurance is already a leader in providing health insurance
solutions," adds Sue Schwartz, Partner, RSA. "By utilizing our network of
alliances as well as working with the company to implement a comprehensive
publicity and entertainment campaign, eHealthInsurance will help to empower
American households with the knowledge they need to make smart health
insurance choices."
and grass roots agency Robertson Schwartz Agency (RSA) has been chosen by
eHealthInsurance, the nation's leading source for individual and family health
insurance, to provide strategic and tactical publicity and marketing counsel.
eHealthInsurance's choice of RSA as an agency of record is a move that
reflects the growing trend towards entertainment-based marketing. The new
alliance will bring together over 25 years of entertainment and grass roots
experience with one of the leading authorities on personal health insurance
solutions.
RSA and eHealthInsurance will together launch an innovative campaign to
include publicity, strategic partnerships, viral marketing and embedded
content placement. RSA will further build on eHealthInsurance's commitment to
provide the consumer with easy access to information and tools to make
informed health insurance decisions through consumer-focused educational
initiatives.
"Consumers nationwide are looking for health insurance solutions that meet
their needs," said Lyn Chitow-Oakes, Chief Marketing Officer of
eHealthInsurance. "Our goal is to make eHealthInsurance synonymous with the
ability to find accessible, affordable health insurance through innovative
marketing and publicity programs that reach beyond traditional marketing
approaches and set a new standard for marketing to consumers. RSA brings a
unique blend of skill sets and relationships that will make this possible."
"We are delighted to join eHealthInsurance in their mission to educate and
inform the American public that health insurance is affordable, necessary and
most importantly, accessible to everyone," said Rusty Robertson, Partner, RSA.
"eHealthInsurance is already a leader in providing health insurance
solutions," adds Sue Schwartz, Partner, RSA. "By utilizing our network of
alliances as well as working with the company to implement a comprehensive
publicity and entertainment campaign, eHealthInsurance will help to empower
American households with the knowledge they need to make smart health
insurance choices."
Judge approves Group Health takeover of KPS Health Plans
OLYMPIA, Wash. -- A $25 million takeover of financially fragile KPS Health Plans of Bremerton by Group Health Cooperative has been approved by a Thurston County Superior Court judge despite opposition by doctors.
With the decision by Judge Richard D. Hicks, the group formerly known as Kitsap Physicians Services could be owned and operated by the Seattle-based health maintenance organization within 31 days.
KPS, the last independent medical bureau in the state out of numerous similar nonprofit operations formed mostly by doctors at the county level after World War II, was placed in court receivership under supervision of the state insurance commissioner's office on Aug. 2, 1999.
About 300 doctors are the underlying owners of the group, which operates in 10 counties but remains strongest in Kitsap.
In a ruling Friday, Hicks said he was sympathetic to arguments by doctors and Kitsap County officials who said it would leave Group Health free to move KPS headquarters and 175 well-paying jobs out of the county after a four-year stabilization period.
Nonetheless, Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler was within his authority in arranging the deal after his agency managed to dig KPS out of an $8 million hole, leaving no grounds for Bremerton, the county, the county's medical society and three local doctors to intervene in an attempt to block the sale, the judge ruled.
Kreidler has said the group remains on shaky financial footing with a net worth of $4 million as of June 30 and needs the $19 million cash infusion Group Health promised as part of the deal.
Bremerton City Attorney Roger Lubovich said opponents would confer before deciding whether to ask Hicks to reconsider, appeal his decision to a higher court or let the ruling stand.
With the decision by Judge Richard D. Hicks, the group formerly known as Kitsap Physicians Services could be owned and operated by the Seattle-based health maintenance organization within 31 days.
KPS, the last independent medical bureau in the state out of numerous similar nonprofit operations formed mostly by doctors at the county level after World War II, was placed in court receivership under supervision of the state insurance commissioner's office on Aug. 2, 1999.
About 300 doctors are the underlying owners of the group, which operates in 10 counties but remains strongest in Kitsap.
In a ruling Friday, Hicks said he was sympathetic to arguments by doctors and Kitsap County officials who said it would leave Group Health free to move KPS headquarters and 175 well-paying jobs out of the county after a four-year stabilization period.
Nonetheless, Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler was within his authority in arranging the deal after his agency managed to dig KPS out of an $8 million hole, leaving no grounds for Bremerton, the county, the county's medical society and three local doctors to intervene in an attempt to block the sale, the judge ruled.
Kreidler has said the group remains on shaky financial footing with a net worth of $4 million as of June 30 and needs the $19 million cash infusion Group Health promised as part of the deal.
Bremerton City Attorney Roger Lubovich said opponents would confer before deciding whether to ask Hicks to reconsider, appeal his decision to a higher court or let the ruling stand.
Medicare May Spend $60 Billion on Private U.S. Health Plans
Aug. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Medicare may spend $60 billion, about 30 percent more than White House estimates, encouraging private health plans to provide benefits for seniors in the next decade, according to an analysis in the journal Health Affairs.
Co-author Steven Pizer, a health economist at the Department of Veterans Affairs in Boston and an assistant professor at Boston University, said the unexpected costs may eventually cause Congress to cut the subsidies. The analysis was published on the journal's Web site today.
``The government has a history of being a bad business partner, and that's why they have to put so much money on the table,'' Pizer said in an Aug. 19 telephone interview. ``That, in turn, increases the odds that it will be a bad business partner in the future.''
Private health plans such as Aetna Inc. and PacifiCare Health Systems Inc. will receive increased subsidies starting next year under a 2003 law. The measure was designed to generate more choices for the 42 million disabled and elderly Americans covered by the government's Medicare program. Currently, most Medicare patients are in a single, government-run plan.
Last year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the subsidies would cost about $14 billion over a decade, and the White House budget office predicted $46 billion. Medicare will spend about $332.3 billion on benefits this year. New coverage for prescription drugs will add $60 billion to costs next year.
`Wildly Premature'
Karen Ignagni, president of industry group America's Health Insurance Plans, said it was ``wildly premature'' to do an analysis of the program before the government approves health plans' bids and signs contracts.
``It's going to take time to see how the program plays out, and which plans seniors will choose,'' Ignagni said in a telephone interview yesterday.
Pizer said the two government estimates didn't take into account that Medicare may have to pay higher subsidies to companies with preferred-provider organizations, or PPOs, than they pay health-maintenance organizations, or HMOs.
HMOs tend to serve populated areas in and around cities and can extract deeper discounts from health-care providers by limiting networks to certain hospitals and doctors. That means HMOs will have a competitive advantage because they can focus only on certain markets, the analysis concluded.
PPOs are required to serve regions that include one or more states because Congress wanted patients in rural areas to have access to Medicare managed-care plans. As a result, the government will need to pay PPO plans more to keep them in the program, according to the analysis.
``Our findings indicate that regional PPOs will avoid competing with HMOs, focusing instead on underserved areas that will be profitable only because of overpayments,'' Pizer said.
Pizer and his co-authors, University of Minnesota Professor Roger Feldman and researcher Austin Frakt at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Boston, said PPOs will enter only eleven of 26 U.S. regions because that is where they can make a profit. Those regions include New York, Florida, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada and California.
Co-author Steven Pizer, a health economist at the Department of Veterans Affairs in Boston and an assistant professor at Boston University, said the unexpected costs may eventually cause Congress to cut the subsidies. The analysis was published on the journal's Web site today.
``The government has a history of being a bad business partner, and that's why they have to put so much money on the table,'' Pizer said in an Aug. 19 telephone interview. ``That, in turn, increases the odds that it will be a bad business partner in the future.''
Private health plans such as Aetna Inc. and PacifiCare Health Systems Inc. will receive increased subsidies starting next year under a 2003 law. The measure was designed to generate more choices for the 42 million disabled and elderly Americans covered by the government's Medicare program. Currently, most Medicare patients are in a single, government-run plan.
Last year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the subsidies would cost about $14 billion over a decade, and the White House budget office predicted $46 billion. Medicare will spend about $332.3 billion on benefits this year. New coverage for prescription drugs will add $60 billion to costs next year.
`Wildly Premature'
Karen Ignagni, president of industry group America's Health Insurance Plans, said it was ``wildly premature'' to do an analysis of the program before the government approves health plans' bids and signs contracts.
``It's going to take time to see how the program plays out, and which plans seniors will choose,'' Ignagni said in a telephone interview yesterday.
Pizer said the two government estimates didn't take into account that Medicare may have to pay higher subsidies to companies with preferred-provider organizations, or PPOs, than they pay health-maintenance organizations, or HMOs.
HMOs tend to serve populated areas in and around cities and can extract deeper discounts from health-care providers by limiting networks to certain hospitals and doctors. That means HMOs will have a competitive advantage because they can focus only on certain markets, the analysis concluded.
PPOs are required to serve regions that include one or more states because Congress wanted patients in rural areas to have access to Medicare managed-care plans. As a result, the government will need to pay PPO plans more to keep them in the program, according to the analysis.
``Our findings indicate that regional PPOs will avoid competing with HMOs, focusing instead on underserved areas that will be profitable only because of overpayments,'' Pizer said.
Pizer and his co-authors, University of Minnesota Professor Roger Feldman and researcher Austin Frakt at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Boston, said PPOs will enter only eleven of 26 U.S. regions because that is where they can make a profit. Those regions include New York, Florida, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada and California.
Health Insurance Coverage Up For Kids
WASHINGTON—Health insurance coverage for children improved in 2004, and the percentage of working-age adults without insurance coverage, which had been climbing in recent years, did not increase last year, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The report, “Health Insurance Coverage: Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, 2004,” based its findings on CDC’s National Health Interview Survey, which provides estimates of insurance coverage for the United States in 2004. For the first time, the latest survey also includes statistics on insurance coverage for the nation’s 10 largest states.
The report found that in 2004, over 90 per cent of America’s children had health insurance at the time of the interview, a steady rise from the first report in 1997. In 2004, 9.4 per cent were without health insurance while in 1997 about 14 per cent lacked coverage. The report found that the improvement in coverage for children reflected an increase in public coverage, including the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which is for poor and near-poor children.
Among poor and near-poor children, lack of coverage dropped by about a third from 1997. For near-poor children, public coverage almost doubled from 24 per cent to 43 per cent between 1997 and 2004. Nearly 70 per cent of poor children under 18 years of age rely on public coverage.
Overall, 14.6 per cent of the population was without health insurance coverage in 2004, about the same level as in 1997. One in five working-age adults ages 18 to 64 were without insurance in 2004. This number had been steadily rising in recent years, but appears to have leveled off in 2004.
The report, “Health Insurance Coverage: Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, 2004,” based its findings on CDC’s National Health Interview Survey, which provides estimates of insurance coverage for the United States in 2004. For the first time, the latest survey also includes statistics on insurance coverage for the nation’s 10 largest states.
The report found that in 2004, over 90 per cent of America’s children had health insurance at the time of the interview, a steady rise from the first report in 1997. In 2004, 9.4 per cent were without health insurance while in 1997 about 14 per cent lacked coverage. The report found that the improvement in coverage for children reflected an increase in public coverage, including the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which is for poor and near-poor children.
Among poor and near-poor children, lack of coverage dropped by about a third from 1997. For near-poor children, public coverage almost doubled from 24 per cent to 43 per cent between 1997 and 2004. Nearly 70 per cent of poor children under 18 years of age rely on public coverage.
Overall, 14.6 per cent of the population was without health insurance coverage in 2004, about the same level as in 1997. One in five working-age adults ages 18 to 64 were without insurance in 2004. This number had been steadily rising in recent years, but appears to have leveled off in 2004.
Monday, August 22, 2005
Cuts in Auto insurance rates
Attorney General Tom Reilly will seek at least a ten percent cut in the state's auto insurance rate later this month.
BOSTON (AP) - Reilly tells The Associated Press that auto insurers enjoyed hefty profits at the expense of drivers last year and it's time for drivers to recover some of the money.
The Automobile Insurers Bureau of Massachusetts is seeking only a point-one percent rate cut for drivers next year.
The industry is suggesting the small rate cut for the first time in recent memory, citing declining claims in part because of anti-fraud campaigns.
Reilly says those recommendations would only translate into a dollar savings on the average car insurance policy.
The A-G's recommendation would return a least 100-dollars to car owners.
He plans to submit his preliminary findings today at the annual public hearing on car insurance rates.
BOSTON (AP) - Reilly tells The Associated Press that auto insurers enjoyed hefty profits at the expense of drivers last year and it's time for drivers to recover some of the money.
The Automobile Insurers Bureau of Massachusetts is seeking only a point-one percent rate cut for drivers next year.
The industry is suggesting the small rate cut for the first time in recent memory, citing declining claims in part because of anti-fraud campaigns.
Reilly says those recommendations would only translate into a dollar savings on the average car insurance policy.
The A-G's recommendation would return a least 100-dollars to car owners.
He plans to submit his preliminary findings today at the annual public hearing on car insurance rates.
HIP to Acquire PerfectHealth Insurance Company
NEW YORK, Aug. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- HIP Health Plan of New York has entered
into an acquisition agreement with PerfectHealth Insurance Company, a provider
of high deductible health insurance policies in the New York market.
Completion of the transaction is subject to regulatory approval.
HIP, a leading regional health plan serving the needs of over 1.4 million
members, recently launched its first consumer-directed health plan (CDHP),
myFund. The purchase of PerfectHealth recognizes the growing interest in
consumer-directed health care options. In addition, the acquisition will
expand the scope of HIP's CDHP product line through the provision of Health
Reimbursement Account (HRA) and Health Savings Account (HSA) offerings.
Daniel T. McGowan, President and Chief Operating Officer of HIP, noted:
"Increasingly, consumers wish to be involved in the decisions that affect
their health care. This fact, coupled with the access consumers now have to
health care information through the Internet and from other sources, is
driving their awareness about their health care options. With the acquisition
of PerfectHealth, which has extensive knowledge of HSAs in our market, HIP
expects to be able to meet the needs of employers and employees wishing to
purchase higher-deductible, lower-premium products coupled with HSAs."
Carmine A. Morano, President & CEO of PerfectHealth, said: "PerfectHealth
is pleased to join the HIP organization in designing products and services to
meet the evolving needs of consumers. We were the first insurance company to
offer HSA plans in the New York market and have long recognized the value of
HSAs in affording the consumer the option to be judicious when choosing care.
HSAs transform users of health care into consumers of health care. With the
strength and resources of HIP, we look forward to driving the future of this
product."
About Consumer-Directed Health Care Products
A CDHP is a high-deductible plan coupled with an HRA or HSA. The premium
for a CDHP is generally lower than for a conventional managed care plan. The
HSA allows members to roll over unused dollars to the next plan year, which
provides a financial incentive for them to be thoughtful when seeking care.
The HSA is funded with pre-tax dollars or tax-deductible contributions. Funds
can come from employers, employees or both and can be rolled over yearly and
earn interest. All funds, including any employer contributions, are portable
and controlled by the employees. CDHPs also attempt to reduce the unnecessary
use of health care resources and to encourage people to seek routine well-care
benefits and wellness and preventive services that require only a co-payment
and are not subject to the plan's deductible.
into an acquisition agreement with PerfectHealth Insurance Company, a provider
of high deductible health insurance policies in the New York market.
Completion of the transaction is subject to regulatory approval.
HIP, a leading regional health plan serving the needs of over 1.4 million
members, recently launched its first consumer-directed health plan (CDHP),
myFund. The purchase of PerfectHealth recognizes the growing interest in
consumer-directed health care options. In addition, the acquisition will
expand the scope of HIP's CDHP product line through the provision of Health
Reimbursement Account (HRA) and Health Savings Account (HSA) offerings.
Daniel T. McGowan, President and Chief Operating Officer of HIP, noted:
"Increasingly, consumers wish to be involved in the decisions that affect
their health care. This fact, coupled with the access consumers now have to
health care information through the Internet and from other sources, is
driving their awareness about their health care options. With the acquisition
of PerfectHealth, which has extensive knowledge of HSAs in our market, HIP
expects to be able to meet the needs of employers and employees wishing to
purchase higher-deductible, lower-premium products coupled with HSAs."
Carmine A. Morano, President & CEO of PerfectHealth, said: "PerfectHealth
is pleased to join the HIP organization in designing products and services to
meet the evolving needs of consumers. We were the first insurance company to
offer HSA plans in the New York market and have long recognized the value of
HSAs in affording the consumer the option to be judicious when choosing care.
HSAs transform users of health care into consumers of health care. With the
strength and resources of HIP, we look forward to driving the future of this
product."
About Consumer-Directed Health Care Products
A CDHP is a high-deductible plan coupled with an HRA or HSA. The premium
for a CDHP is generally lower than for a conventional managed care plan. The
HSA allows members to roll over unused dollars to the next plan year, which
provides a financial incentive for them to be thoughtful when seeking care.
The HSA is funded with pre-tax dollars or tax-deductible contributions. Funds
can come from employers, employees or both and can be rolled over yearly and
earn interest. All funds, including any employer contributions, are portable
and controlled by the employees. CDHPs also attempt to reduce the unnecessary
use of health care resources and to encourage people to seek routine well-care
benefits and wellness and preventive services that require only a co-payment
and are not subject to the plan's deductible.
Sunday, August 21, 2005
Short-term health insurance requires long consideration
Financial Planning Association of Greater Kansas City
Q. I recently graduated from college and am now on my own and looking for work. My parents said I need to look for temporary health-care insurance. What are some options, and what do they cost?
A. First, thank your parents for the timely and wise advice they have given you.
Proper insurance coverage, especially for health care until you are eligible for a group policy at your future employer, is very critical. Yet it is often overlooked.
There are many companies that offer individual short-term policies. Short term usually means 30-180 days, so you will have to seriously assess your employment probabilities to make sure your coverage lasts until you are employed.
I have included several Web sites for your research, and I encourage you to take the necessary time to review the best combination of benefits, premium and accessibility to cover your needs.
As you research the different companies and their options, consider the following:
■ Premium options: Are there monthly and single-pay? Are there discounts if you pay once in advance?
■ Any restrictions for pre-existing conditions?: Sometimes if you have been treated for something in the previous six months, they will exclude that from further coverage under their policy.
■ Deductible and/or coinsurance: This will be your out-of-pocket costs before the policy pays for a covered charge. The relationship is inversely related between deductibles and premiums — that is, the higher deductible you agree to have, the lower the premium, and vice versa. Copays are what you usually pay for each doctor’s office or hospital visit and may or may not count toward your deductible. Once a deductible is met, the policy’s payment percentage usually increases to 100 percent.
■ What plans are offered? The three choices generally are HMO, PPO and traditional, in the order of cost. See the Web site for a good definition of these three types.
■ Benefits: What is covered? Hospital, physician, pharmacy, emergency room and physical therapy are separate charges, and you will need to weigh the cost against the total package being offered.
■ Policy limits: Despite the fact this will only be for a short time and you hopefully will not have a claim, is there a maximum policy limit that will be paid?
Q. I recently graduated from college and am now on my own and looking for work. My parents said I need to look for temporary health-care insurance. What are some options, and what do they cost?
A. First, thank your parents for the timely and wise advice they have given you.
Proper insurance coverage, especially for health care until you are eligible for a group policy at your future employer, is very critical. Yet it is often overlooked.
There are many companies that offer individual short-term policies. Short term usually means 30-180 days, so you will have to seriously assess your employment probabilities to make sure your coverage lasts until you are employed.
I have included several Web sites for your research, and I encourage you to take the necessary time to review the best combination of benefits, premium and accessibility to cover your needs.
As you research the different companies and their options, consider the following:
■ Premium options: Are there monthly and single-pay? Are there discounts if you pay once in advance?
■ Any restrictions for pre-existing conditions?: Sometimes if you have been treated for something in the previous six months, they will exclude that from further coverage under their policy.
■ Deductible and/or coinsurance: This will be your out-of-pocket costs before the policy pays for a covered charge. The relationship is inversely related between deductibles and premiums — that is, the higher deductible you agree to have, the lower the premium, and vice versa. Copays are what you usually pay for each doctor’s office or hospital visit and may or may not count toward your deductible. Once a deductible is met, the policy’s payment percentage usually increases to 100 percent.
■ What plans are offered? The three choices generally are HMO, PPO and traditional, in the order of cost. See the Web site for a good definition of these three types.
■ Benefits: What is covered? Hospital, physician, pharmacy, emergency room and physical therapy are separate charges, and you will need to weigh the cost against the total package being offered.
■ Policy limits: Despite the fact this will only be for a short time and you hopefully will not have a claim, is there a maximum policy limit that will be paid?
Friday, August 19, 2005
Health insurance costs dog would-be entrepreneurs
NEW YORK — Jeff Kushner seems perfectly poised to start a company helping families fight cybercrime, a business he's long dreamed of.
Demand for the advice he'll sell is soaring as consumers worry about online thieves swiping Social Security numbers and other private data. With start-up costs falling, Kushner, 46, can launch the business for less than $5,000 from his Houston home.
But Kushner, recently laid off from a tech job, is such a reluctant entrepreneur that he's only committing to self-employment for six months while he continues job hunting. Why? It's going to cost him $1,145 a month for health insurance for himself, his wife and two kids.
"A big shock," he says after hunting for better deals.
As health costs soar, more would-be entrepreneurs are reluctant to quit Corporate America and its blue-chip benefits to start businesses, entrepreneurship experts say. That raises alarms about the impact on innovation and job growth, when both are of growing importance to the U.S. economy.
"This is a real problem," says Carl Schramm, CEO of the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, Mo., one of the USA's biggest entrepreneurship advocates.
These concerns come as self-employment rates continue a decades-long slump.
About 8.8% of non-farm, private-sector workers were self-employed last year. That was up slightly from 2002, when rates sank to a record low of 8.5%. Overall, however, rates have fallen in 30 of the last 50 years even as the workforce mushroomed, Labor Department data show.
That's worrisome because start-ups and other small firms have historically created most innovations and as much as 75% of new jobs. In Cincinnati, for example, health costs have slowed Wendy Hunt and her husband, Brian Germ, from starting a dog day care business that would employ up to 10 workers.
That may not sound like much. But multiplied across thousands of start-ups, these new jobs would replace many lost when mature companies such as Eastman Kodak and Hewlett-Packard are slashing payrolls.
The reluctance of budding entrepreneurs comes as President Bush promotes entrepreneurship in his vision of an "ownership society," in which the nation would prosper as workers seek self-employment.
"The more people who own something in America means this country is better off," Bush told the Black Expo last month in Indianapolis. "I want more people from all walks of life, including African-Americans, to have a chance to own their own business."
The debate
To be certain, not everybody is convinced health-care costs are depressing entrepreneurship.
Economists who've studied the subject reached different conclusions. Growing competition among insurers might soon lower costs. Congressional legislation, including a bill the House passed last month, could cut prices by letting small firms band together in nationwide groups, boosting buying power.
Enter the Kauffman foundation. It decided this summer to settle the debate by funding research on a subject that's received less attention than the impact of medical costs on existing companies.
"Would we have 100,000 more (business) starts next year if people thought they could go buy affordable health coverage?" Schramm wonders.
Yes — and then some, says a study by Ohio economist Alison Wellington. She estimated in a 2001 study that the USA's self-employment rate would rise by as much as 3.5 percentage points if universal health coverage was available. That would have boosted self-employment last month in the non-farm private sector by about 3.8 million workers, based on July's Labor Department count.
Wellington, a labor and health economist at the College of Wooster, based her estimate on 1993 Census data on more than 30,000 employed husbands and wives for whom one spouse had health insurance that the other spouse could use while starting a business.
Princeton economist Harvey Rosen and other researchers reached the opposite conclusion, however. They did not find a link when they examined the matter more than a decade ago. Their 1994 research noted that entrepreneurs by definition are risk takers. Many are willing to fly without a health safety net, they said.
Since then, health costs have galloped even higher, rising at double-digit rates in recent years. Rosen, who this summer left as chair of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, said in a recent interview that he's not convinced today's higher costs are any more of a deterrent than before.
Trends among employers and insurers also could lessen the impact on entrepreneurs, experts say. Companies are asking workers to pay a bigger share of benefits, making employer plans less attractive, says Gene Fairbrother, a consultant at the 250,000-member National Association for the Self-Employed.
Health savings accounts created under Medicare reform make insurance more portable, keeping workers from feeling locked in jobs. Plus, more insurers are pursuing the self-employed market, Fairbrother says, and competition will lower prices.
Cheaper deals can't come soon enough for Hunt, 32, and Germ, 33, in Cincinnati. They get health insurance from his employer, Procter & Gamble, because its plan is better than what Hunt's advertising agency employer provides.
They would lose P&G's benefits under their start-up scenario, in which Germ would quit to run the business full-time.
Their best option, Hunt says, would be coverage for about $500 monthly in the individual market, where consumers buy direct from insurers without getting the cheaper group rates employers tap. That would be on top of the $6,000 monthly they estimate the business would burn through during its first two money-losing years.
It's not just the $500 extra cost that makes Hunt uneasy. She frets over giving up the security of a big-company plan. Another insurer might boost monthly premiums prohibitively high while cutting benefits — just as they're gambling on a fledgling start-up.
"It really is the fear of not having the strength of that coverage," she says of her husband's plan.
A boomer burden
The reluctance of workers to start companies comes as a rich lode of potential entrepreneurs is about to surface, the 79 million aging baby boomers.
Historically, self-employment rates have been higher among older workers: 17.2% for those 50 and older vs. 10.3% for all workers, a Rand study found last year. But older workers also face higher health insurance premiums and deductibles because they often require more expensive medical care.
Paying for health insurance and other medical expenses has become a bigger burden on entrepreneurs because they now account for a bigger share of start-up expenses. Medical costs have marched higher even as start-up expenses dropped for computers and other gear.
Kushner, who was laid off as a tech marketing manager in June, is buying health benefits under the federal COBRA law. That law lets most workers buy health coverage at company rates for up to 18 months after leaving an employer.
At $1,145 a month, he'll spend more on insurance in five months than the total cost for his start-up. That's for coverage for himself, his wife, Linda, 44, and their kids, 10 and 13.
Underscoring his ambivalence about self-employment, Kushner will keep job hunting while writing a consumer guide to online security, his online start-up's first product. During his job search, he'll have an eye on employer benefits. "A big factor will be health coverage," Kushner says.
He's already shopped for better insurance coverage in the individual market. Kushner found family plans at $500 a month — less than half what he'd pay under COBRA. But some had $5,000 annual deductibles for each family member. "God forbid something happens. You could lay out $20,000," he says.
Kushner's experience isn't unusual. Individual market rates vary widely by insurer and by geography, the Kaiser Family Foundation and eHealthInsurance found in a study last year. The USA is a crazy quilt of plans where each state regulates rates determined by state-mandated benefits, such as psychiatric care.
Overall, rates in the individual market have outpaced those in the employer market, and will continue to do so, says Robert Fahlman, senior vice president and chief operating officer of consumer products at eHealthInsurance.
Plus, availability of plans in the individual market isn't guaranteed: Workers with health problems may be turned down.
That comes as little surprise to Andy Ringsmuth in Lincoln, Neb., where he hires and trains workers at News Link, a publisher of corporate newsletters.
Ringsmuth, 26, wants to start a consumer tech service company that would compete with services like Best Buy's "Geek Squad." His would set up computers and wireless networks in the Lincoln area. Ringsmuth figures start-up costs would range from $5,000 to $10,000.
But he worries about giving up News Link's generous health benefits, fully paid by the company. Ringsmuth figures he'd spend $400 to $500 monthly for comparable benefits on his own. "Tough," he says.
Ringsmuth is young, single, doesn't smoke and rarely sees a doctor. Still, he says, "You never know when something will come up."
Would-be entrepreneurs like Ringsmuth, hemmed in by medical costs, worry Schramm at Kauffman. As big companies cut jobs or shift work overseas, the U.S. depends more on future start-ups.
"We're really watching a shift in the very nature of the economy," he says.
He agrees with economist Rosen, that a successful entrepreneur is a risk taker. "But," Schramm says, "to be a risk taker is not to be crazy."
Demand for the advice he'll sell is soaring as consumers worry about online thieves swiping Social Security numbers and other private data. With start-up costs falling, Kushner, 46, can launch the business for less than $5,000 from his Houston home.
But Kushner, recently laid off from a tech job, is such a reluctant entrepreneur that he's only committing to self-employment for six months while he continues job hunting. Why? It's going to cost him $1,145 a month for health insurance for himself, his wife and two kids.
"A big shock," he says after hunting for better deals.
As health costs soar, more would-be entrepreneurs are reluctant to quit Corporate America and its blue-chip benefits to start businesses, entrepreneurship experts say. That raises alarms about the impact on innovation and job growth, when both are of growing importance to the U.S. economy.
"This is a real problem," says Carl Schramm, CEO of the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, Mo., one of the USA's biggest entrepreneurship advocates.
These concerns come as self-employment rates continue a decades-long slump.
About 8.8% of non-farm, private-sector workers were self-employed last year. That was up slightly from 2002, when rates sank to a record low of 8.5%. Overall, however, rates have fallen in 30 of the last 50 years even as the workforce mushroomed, Labor Department data show.
That's worrisome because start-ups and other small firms have historically created most innovations and as much as 75% of new jobs. In Cincinnati, for example, health costs have slowed Wendy Hunt and her husband, Brian Germ, from starting a dog day care business that would employ up to 10 workers.
That may not sound like much. But multiplied across thousands of start-ups, these new jobs would replace many lost when mature companies such as Eastman Kodak and Hewlett-Packard are slashing payrolls.
The reluctance of budding entrepreneurs comes as President Bush promotes entrepreneurship in his vision of an "ownership society," in which the nation would prosper as workers seek self-employment.
"The more people who own something in America means this country is better off," Bush told the Black Expo last month in Indianapolis. "I want more people from all walks of life, including African-Americans, to have a chance to own their own business."
The debate
To be certain, not everybody is convinced health-care costs are depressing entrepreneurship.
Economists who've studied the subject reached different conclusions. Growing competition among insurers might soon lower costs. Congressional legislation, including a bill the House passed last month, could cut prices by letting small firms band together in nationwide groups, boosting buying power.
Enter the Kauffman foundation. It decided this summer to settle the debate by funding research on a subject that's received less attention than the impact of medical costs on existing companies.
"Would we have 100,000 more (business) starts next year if people thought they could go buy affordable health coverage?" Schramm wonders.
Yes — and then some, says a study by Ohio economist Alison Wellington. She estimated in a 2001 study that the USA's self-employment rate would rise by as much as 3.5 percentage points if universal health coverage was available. That would have boosted self-employment last month in the non-farm private sector by about 3.8 million workers, based on July's Labor Department count.
Wellington, a labor and health economist at the College of Wooster, based her estimate on 1993 Census data on more than 30,000 employed husbands and wives for whom one spouse had health insurance that the other spouse could use while starting a business.
Princeton economist Harvey Rosen and other researchers reached the opposite conclusion, however. They did not find a link when they examined the matter more than a decade ago. Their 1994 research noted that entrepreneurs by definition are risk takers. Many are willing to fly without a health safety net, they said.
Since then, health costs have galloped even higher, rising at double-digit rates in recent years. Rosen, who this summer left as chair of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, said in a recent interview that he's not convinced today's higher costs are any more of a deterrent than before.
Trends among employers and insurers also could lessen the impact on entrepreneurs, experts say. Companies are asking workers to pay a bigger share of benefits, making employer plans less attractive, says Gene Fairbrother, a consultant at the 250,000-member National Association for the Self-Employed.
Health savings accounts created under Medicare reform make insurance more portable, keeping workers from feeling locked in jobs. Plus, more insurers are pursuing the self-employed market, Fairbrother says, and competition will lower prices.
Cheaper deals can't come soon enough for Hunt, 32, and Germ, 33, in Cincinnati. They get health insurance from his employer, Procter & Gamble, because its plan is better than what Hunt's advertising agency employer provides.
They would lose P&G's benefits under their start-up scenario, in which Germ would quit to run the business full-time.
Their best option, Hunt says, would be coverage for about $500 monthly in the individual market, where consumers buy direct from insurers without getting the cheaper group rates employers tap. That would be on top of the $6,000 monthly they estimate the business would burn through during its first two money-losing years.
It's not just the $500 extra cost that makes Hunt uneasy. She frets over giving up the security of a big-company plan. Another insurer might boost monthly premiums prohibitively high while cutting benefits — just as they're gambling on a fledgling start-up.
"It really is the fear of not having the strength of that coverage," she says of her husband's plan.
A boomer burden
The reluctance of workers to start companies comes as a rich lode of potential entrepreneurs is about to surface, the 79 million aging baby boomers.
Historically, self-employment rates have been higher among older workers: 17.2% for those 50 and older vs. 10.3% for all workers, a Rand study found last year. But older workers also face higher health insurance premiums and deductibles because they often require more expensive medical care.
Paying for health insurance and other medical expenses has become a bigger burden on entrepreneurs because they now account for a bigger share of start-up expenses. Medical costs have marched higher even as start-up expenses dropped for computers and other gear.
Kushner, who was laid off as a tech marketing manager in June, is buying health benefits under the federal COBRA law. That law lets most workers buy health coverage at company rates for up to 18 months after leaving an employer.
At $1,145 a month, he'll spend more on insurance in five months than the total cost for his start-up. That's for coverage for himself, his wife, Linda, 44, and their kids, 10 and 13.
Underscoring his ambivalence about self-employment, Kushner will keep job hunting while writing a consumer guide to online security, his online start-up's first product. During his job search, he'll have an eye on employer benefits. "A big factor will be health coverage," Kushner says.
He's already shopped for better insurance coverage in the individual market. Kushner found family plans at $500 a month — less than half what he'd pay under COBRA. But some had $5,000 annual deductibles for each family member. "God forbid something happens. You could lay out $20,000," he says.
Kushner's experience isn't unusual. Individual market rates vary widely by insurer and by geography, the Kaiser Family Foundation and eHealthInsurance found in a study last year. The USA is a crazy quilt of plans where each state regulates rates determined by state-mandated benefits, such as psychiatric care.
Overall, rates in the individual market have outpaced those in the employer market, and will continue to do so, says Robert Fahlman, senior vice president and chief operating officer of consumer products at eHealthInsurance.
Plus, availability of plans in the individual market isn't guaranteed: Workers with health problems may be turned down.
That comes as little surprise to Andy Ringsmuth in Lincoln, Neb., where he hires and trains workers at News Link, a publisher of corporate newsletters.
Ringsmuth, 26, wants to start a consumer tech service company that would compete with services like Best Buy's "Geek Squad." His would set up computers and wireless networks in the Lincoln area. Ringsmuth figures start-up costs would range from $5,000 to $10,000.
But he worries about giving up News Link's generous health benefits, fully paid by the company. Ringsmuth figures he'd spend $400 to $500 monthly for comparable benefits on his own. "Tough," he says.
Ringsmuth is young, single, doesn't smoke and rarely sees a doctor. Still, he says, "You never know when something will come up."
Would-be entrepreneurs like Ringsmuth, hemmed in by medical costs, worry Schramm at Kauffman. As big companies cut jobs or shift work overseas, the U.S. depends more on future start-ups.
"We're really watching a shift in the very nature of the economy," he says.
He agrees with economist Rosen, that a successful entrepreneur is a risk taker. "But," Schramm says, "to be a risk taker is not to be crazy."
WSJ Examines Health Insurance Coverage for Preventive Care
The Wall Street Journal on Thursday examined discrepancies among patients, doctors and insurers in defining preventive health care services and how that affects reimbursement. The issue "has become particularly important for high-deductible plans," many of which will pay for preventive care before a patient has hit the deductible -- "but different insurers sometimes have different views on what constitutes preventive care," according to the Journal. The issue can be further complicated by doctors, who often do not identify certain services as preventive care when billing insurers. Andrew Baskin, senior medical director at Connecticut-based Aetna, attributes the problem to the lack of universality among insurers. He said, "There is no industrywide definition here, so each insurer has the ability really to define preventive services for themselves." The Journal reports that patients can have a particularly difficult time determining what prescription drugs are covered by their insurers as preventive treatments (Rubenstein, Wall Street Journal, 8/18).
Thursday, August 18, 2005
ING says auto insurance revenues will remain high
ING Canada stated in its second quarter earnings release that "industry returns in automobile insurance are likely to exceed historical levels for the coming twelve months." The company notes that potential rate reductions and the positive impact of the reforms adopted by various governments will contribute to these high rates of return.
The December acquisition of Allianz Canada bolstered ING Canada Inc.'s second quarter profits by 30% to reach $223.6 million compared with $172.4 million for the same period last year.
"Our personal automobile insurance business performed strongly during the quarter as a result of continuing low claims frequencies, favourable reserve developments and the positive contribution of industry pools," explained ING Canada's president and CEO, Charles Dussault. He added that consumers have benefited from lower automobile premiums with an average 8.4% rate reduction so far this year.
The December acquisition of Allianz Canada bolstered ING Canada Inc.'s second quarter profits by 30% to reach $223.6 million compared with $172.4 million for the same period last year.
"Our personal automobile insurance business performed strongly during the quarter as a result of continuing low claims frequencies, favourable reserve developments and the positive contribution of industry pools," explained ING Canada's president and CEO, Charles Dussault. He added that consumers have benefited from lower automobile premiums with an average 8.4% rate reduction so far this year.
Global Student Plan Provides Student Health Insurance Worldwide
Press Release
Boston, MA (PRWEB) August 18, 2005 --With the world becoming an ever more uncertain a place to travel safely, students, parents, and families need comprehensive student health insurance coverage no matter where a student lives. With this in mind, plus concerns about terrorism due to recent events in London, Madrid, and New York City, InternationalStudentInsurance.com has launched the Global Student plans just in time for the new school year.
The Global Student plan is one of the most innovative individual international insurance plans available to date, offering high quality and extensive benefits. These include a high $250,000 policy maximum with options for 100% medical coverage and 80% medical coverage, mental health coverage, maternity, sports coverage, terrorism coverage as standard and much more. With prices also starting at just $39, they are one of the most competitively priced international student health insurance plans on the market.
Ross Mason, head insurance agent for InternationalStudentInsurance.com, comments,” Students do have a choice when selecting their international student health insurance provider. They don't have to always go with what their school or program tells them. Very often, we can provide plans that are more comprehensive and affordable such as the new Global Student option. We do have to be vigilant about traveling, but it’s our goal to provide students with the plans and tools to make sure they can still travel in this changing world."
Students, parents, and families can apply for the Global Student Health Insurance Plan and other annual major medical insurance, emergency evacuation, trip cancellation insurance plans at www.InternationalStudentInsurance.com or by calling toll-free (877) 328-1565.
Boston, MA (PRWEB) August 18, 2005 --With the world becoming an ever more uncertain a place to travel safely, students, parents, and families need comprehensive student health insurance coverage no matter where a student lives. With this in mind, plus concerns about terrorism due to recent events in London, Madrid, and New York City, InternationalStudentInsurance.com has launched the Global Student plans just in time for the new school year.
The Global Student plan is one of the most innovative individual international insurance plans available to date, offering high quality and extensive benefits. These include a high $250,000 policy maximum with options for 100% medical coverage and 80% medical coverage, mental health coverage, maternity, sports coverage, terrorism coverage as standard and much more. With prices also starting at just $39, they are one of the most competitively priced international student health insurance plans on the market.
Ross Mason, head insurance agent for InternationalStudentInsurance.com, comments,” Students do have a choice when selecting their international student health insurance provider. They don't have to always go with what their school or program tells them. Very often, we can provide plans that are more comprehensive and affordable such as the new Global Student option. We do have to be vigilant about traveling, but it’s our goal to provide students with the plans and tools to make sure they can still travel in this changing world."
Students, parents, and families can apply for the Global Student Health Insurance Plan and other annual major medical insurance, emergency evacuation, trip cancellation insurance plans at www.InternationalStudentInsurance.com or by calling toll-free (877) 328-1565.
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Slamming brakes on auto insurance scams
BY FRANK LOMBARDI
DAILY NEWS CITY HALL BUREAU
Blaming fraud by "medical mills" for the city's sky-high car insurance rates, some Council members are introducing a bill today to help the city fight back.
The measure would require health care providers who receive more than half of their income from no-fault auto insurance claims to obtain special licenses from the city Health Department.
The licenses would be accompanied by rigorous reporting requirements and with stiff fines and a possible one-year jail sentence for violations.
"I'm trying to drive the bad guys out of business so the good providers can continue to operate," said Councilman David Yassky (D-Brooklyn), the bill's chief sponsor.
Yassky credited a study by Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz for spotlighting the role medical mills play in driving up auto insurance rates.
Joining Yassky at a City Hall press conference, Markowitz said the bill is "a major step forward in saying we're not going to take it anymore."
Auto insurance rates may be higher in Brooklyn than anywhere in the world, Markowitz said, adding that a 35-year-old Brooklyn man with a good driving record has to pay $4,500 a year for basic coverage.
According to Yassky, the same coverage costs an average of $800 elsewhere in the country and $1,161 throughout New York State.
It's not that Brooklyn drivers are more accident-prone, Yassky said, it's because of "medical mills that exist solely to milk the no-fault insurance system."
As explained by Yassky, the mills seek out accident victims and encourage them to have unnecessary and costly examinations and treatments and then submit the inflated bills to insurance companies.
"And you know who gets [left] holding these bills - average Brooklynites and New Yorkers who have outrageous insurance premiums," added Markowitz.
Assemblyman James Brennan (D-Brooklyn), who helped spotlight the role medical mills play in high auto insurance rates, said of Yassky's bill, "This legislation brings the city government into the fight against auto insurance fraud."
Also on hand to lend their support to the measure were Brooklyn Councilmen Charles Barron and Michael Nelson. Barron called the fraud-fueled high auto insurance rates "a crime against working-class families."
DAILY NEWS CITY HALL BUREAU
Blaming fraud by "medical mills" for the city's sky-high car insurance rates, some Council members are introducing a bill today to help the city fight back.
The measure would require health care providers who receive more than half of their income from no-fault auto insurance claims to obtain special licenses from the city Health Department.
The licenses would be accompanied by rigorous reporting requirements and with stiff fines and a possible one-year jail sentence for violations.
"I'm trying to drive the bad guys out of business so the good providers can continue to operate," said Councilman David Yassky (D-Brooklyn), the bill's chief sponsor.
Yassky credited a study by Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz for spotlighting the role medical mills play in driving up auto insurance rates.
Joining Yassky at a City Hall press conference, Markowitz said the bill is "a major step forward in saying we're not going to take it anymore."
Auto insurance rates may be higher in Brooklyn than anywhere in the world, Markowitz said, adding that a 35-year-old Brooklyn man with a good driving record has to pay $4,500 a year for basic coverage.
According to Yassky, the same coverage costs an average of $800 elsewhere in the country and $1,161 throughout New York State.
It's not that Brooklyn drivers are more accident-prone, Yassky said, it's because of "medical mills that exist solely to milk the no-fault insurance system."
As explained by Yassky, the mills seek out accident victims and encourage them to have unnecessary and costly examinations and treatments and then submit the inflated bills to insurance companies.
"And you know who gets [left] holding these bills - average Brooklynites and New Yorkers who have outrageous insurance premiums," added Markowitz.
Assemblyman James Brennan (D-Brooklyn), who helped spotlight the role medical mills play in high auto insurance rates, said of Yassky's bill, "This legislation brings the city government into the fight against auto insurance fraud."
Also on hand to lend their support to the measure were Brooklyn Councilmen Charles Barron and Michael Nelson. Barron called the fraud-fueled high auto insurance rates "a crime against working-class families."
Big retailers face health insurance proposal
BY CHAU LAM AND ZACHARY DOWDY
STAFF WRITERS
Suffolk legislators tomorrow will begin considering a novel law aimed at forcing large retailers such as Wal-Mart to provide higher quality health insurance for their workers to ease the financial burden borne by taxpayers.
The bill, introduced last week by Minority Leader William Lindsay (D-Holbrook) and backed by Majority Leader Peter O'Leary (R-Moriches), resembles proposals nationwide.
Lawmakers say the bill, if passed, would prevent taxpayers from subsidizing coverage for some of the "working poor" who rely on government health programs such as Medicaid.
"The box stores come to our area and compete against a lot of local mom-and-pop stores and chain stores that have good health care benefits," Lindsay said. "This bill is trying to level the playing field a little bit."
Today, the New York City Council is expected to adopt the Health Care Security Act with enough votes to override a possible veto by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. If that's the case, New York would become the first municipality in the country to impose such a law.
The Suffolk legislation, which will be considered tomorrow by the Ways and Means Committee, does not name specific retailers, setting revenue and square footage criteria for businesses.
But sponsors said it would affect such large retailers as Wal-Mart, Walgreens, Kmart, CVS, Target and BJ's Wholesale Club.
Mia Masten, a spokeswoman for Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart, which has five stores in Suffolk County, said the company offers health benefits to its workers. "These benefits are competitive with other retailers," Masten said. One of the plans Wal-Mart offers costs an employee less than $155 a month in a premium for family coverage, with a deductible of $1,000.
"Employers that pay a competitive wage and pay excellent health benefits shouldn't be subject to government-run health care," said spokeswoman Tiffani Bruce of Walgreens, which has seven Suffolk stores. "We think that we do that." A CVS spokesman declined to comment. Target, BJs and Kmart did not return calls.
The Suffolk bill would require large retail stores to set aside a minimum of $3 per hour for every hour an employee works to cover health insurance costs. The bill bars retailers from deducting that money from wages, salaries or other compensation.
The proposal targets grocery stores that are 25,000 square feet or larger and stores that earned more than a $1 billion in revenue and 20 percent of the revenue come from selling groceries. Stores that are 75,000 square feet or larger where 5 percent of the space is used to sell groceries are singled out.
Given its bipartisan support, the bill is likely to pass the Suffolk Legislature. County Executive Steve Levy said he is conducting a review to determine whether the county could legally implement such a measure. But he said the "the spirit of the legislation is noble." A spokesman said the Nassau Legislature is not considering a similar law.
The city bill requires grocery retailers with more than 35 employees to contribute to their workers' health care at "the prevailing industry level" -- currently about $2.50 per hour or $5,000 per year for full-time employees.
Yesterday, Wal-Mart workers filed into and out of the Islandia store and spoke about their own health woes -- that they can't afford the plans provided by their employer. Fearing reprisal from Wal-Mart, they agreed to be interviewed provided their names were not published.
"Ninety-five percent of us don't have it," said one 21-year-old man who has worked for the company for more than three years, adding that he has been with the Islandia store since it opened. "And the other five percent are managers," a 19-year-old employee chimed in.
The men said the most desirable health plan offered by the company would cost them $136 per two-week pay period, far too much to pay on their $8 an hour wages, they said. Good thing, said the 21-year-old employee, his girlfriend has insurance to support their child. "But I don't have anything for myself," he said, adding that his salary is among the highest in the store, where most employees' wages hover at $7.50 per hour.
Staff writers Lauren Weber and Hilary Russ contributed to this story.
STAFF WRITERS
Suffolk legislators tomorrow will begin considering a novel law aimed at forcing large retailers such as Wal-Mart to provide higher quality health insurance for their workers to ease the financial burden borne by taxpayers.
The bill, introduced last week by Minority Leader William Lindsay (D-Holbrook) and backed by Majority Leader Peter O'Leary (R-Moriches), resembles proposals nationwide.
Lawmakers say the bill, if passed, would prevent taxpayers from subsidizing coverage for some of the "working poor" who rely on government health programs such as Medicaid.
"The box stores come to our area and compete against a lot of local mom-and-pop stores and chain stores that have good health care benefits," Lindsay said. "This bill is trying to level the playing field a little bit."
Today, the New York City Council is expected to adopt the Health Care Security Act with enough votes to override a possible veto by Mayor Michael Bloomberg. If that's the case, New York would become the first municipality in the country to impose such a law.
The Suffolk legislation, which will be considered tomorrow by the Ways and Means Committee, does not name specific retailers, setting revenue and square footage criteria for businesses.
But sponsors said it would affect such large retailers as Wal-Mart, Walgreens, Kmart, CVS, Target and BJ's Wholesale Club.
Mia Masten, a spokeswoman for Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart, which has five stores in Suffolk County, said the company offers health benefits to its workers. "These benefits are competitive with other retailers," Masten said. One of the plans Wal-Mart offers costs an employee less than $155 a month in a premium for family coverage, with a deductible of $1,000.
"Employers that pay a competitive wage and pay excellent health benefits shouldn't be subject to government-run health care," said spokeswoman Tiffani Bruce of Walgreens, which has seven Suffolk stores. "We think that we do that." A CVS spokesman declined to comment. Target, BJs and Kmart did not return calls.
The Suffolk bill would require large retail stores to set aside a minimum of $3 per hour for every hour an employee works to cover health insurance costs. The bill bars retailers from deducting that money from wages, salaries or other compensation.
The proposal targets grocery stores that are 25,000 square feet or larger and stores that earned more than a $1 billion in revenue and 20 percent of the revenue come from selling groceries. Stores that are 75,000 square feet or larger where 5 percent of the space is used to sell groceries are singled out.
Given its bipartisan support, the bill is likely to pass the Suffolk Legislature. County Executive Steve Levy said he is conducting a review to determine whether the county could legally implement such a measure. But he said the "the spirit of the legislation is noble." A spokesman said the Nassau Legislature is not considering a similar law.
The city bill requires grocery retailers with more than 35 employees to contribute to their workers' health care at "the prevailing industry level" -- currently about $2.50 per hour or $5,000 per year for full-time employees.
Yesterday, Wal-Mart workers filed into and out of the Islandia store and spoke about their own health woes -- that they can't afford the plans provided by their employer. Fearing reprisal from Wal-Mart, they agreed to be interviewed provided their names were not published.
"Ninety-five percent of us don't have it," said one 21-year-old man who has worked for the company for more than three years, adding that he has been with the Islandia store since it opened. "And the other five percent are managers," a 19-year-old employee chimed in.
The men said the most desirable health plan offered by the company would cost them $136 per two-week pay period, far too much to pay on their $8 an hour wages, they said. Good thing, said the 21-year-old employee, his girlfriend has insurance to support their child. "But I don't have anything for myself," he said, adding that his salary is among the highest in the store, where most employees' wages hover at $7.50 per hour.
Staff writers Lauren Weber and Hilary Russ contributed to this story.
National health insurance bill backed
By Paul Wilson
pawilson@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal
The director of the Louisville Metro Health Department and others called last night for single-payer health insurance -- described as Medicare for everyone -- to ensure quality medical care for all Americans.
"Health care is about life and death, and it should not be driven by market factors," said Dr. Adewale Troutman, speaking to about 15 people at a community forum at the Braden Center, 3208 W. Broadway.
"This is an issue of human rights and social justice," he added.
Troutman said that more than 40 million Americans have no health insurance -- and that millions more are underinsured.
Troutman was joined by Dr. Garrett Adams, president of Kentucky's Physicians for a National Health Care Program, and Kay Tillow, coordinator of Kentuckians for Single Payer Health Insurance, in support of legislation introduced this year by U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., that would make health care "publicly financed but privately delivered."
Under Conyers' bill, health care would be administered by the federal government, not by insurance companies, which Adams described as parasites on U.S. health care.
"As the number of uninsured grows, the number of administrators grow," Adams said. "Is that right?"
About 50 House members joined Conyers in co-sponsoring the bill.
But U.S. Rep. Anne Northup of Louisville, who represents Kentucky's 3rd District, said a nationalized health system would bankrupt the country and lower the quality of care.
Critics also say that countries with national health care, such as Canada, drive doctors away, and sometimes require patients to wait years for some procedures.
Troutman dismissed both concerns as unfounded.
After hearing the presentation, Ruth Weathers of western Louisville called the single-payer idea "superb."
She said her husband died when she was 40 -- 25 years before she was eligible for health insurance from Medicare.
No longer covered by her husband's insurance, Weathers worked two part-time jobs to pay for medical coverage.
But she wondered about the chances of Conyers' legislation passing.
"It's possible, but probable?" Weathers asked.
"We've got a long way to go, especially with this government that's more concerned with haves than have-nots."
pawilson@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal
The director of the Louisville Metro Health Department and others called last night for single-payer health insurance -- described as Medicare for everyone -- to ensure quality medical care for all Americans.
"Health care is about life and death, and it should not be driven by market factors," said Dr. Adewale Troutman, speaking to about 15 people at a community forum at the Braden Center, 3208 W. Broadway.
"This is an issue of human rights and social justice," he added.
Troutman said that more than 40 million Americans have no health insurance -- and that millions more are underinsured.
Troutman was joined by Dr. Garrett Adams, president of Kentucky's Physicians for a National Health Care Program, and Kay Tillow, coordinator of Kentuckians for Single Payer Health Insurance, in support of legislation introduced this year by U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., that would make health care "publicly financed but privately delivered."
Under Conyers' bill, health care would be administered by the federal government, not by insurance companies, which Adams described as parasites on U.S. health care.
"As the number of uninsured grows, the number of administrators grow," Adams said. "Is that right?"
About 50 House members joined Conyers in co-sponsoring the bill.
But U.S. Rep. Anne Northup of Louisville, who represents Kentucky's 3rd District, said a nationalized health system would bankrupt the country and lower the quality of care.
Critics also say that countries with national health care, such as Canada, drive doctors away, and sometimes require patients to wait years for some procedures.
Troutman dismissed both concerns as unfounded.
After hearing the presentation, Ruth Weathers of western Louisville called the single-payer idea "superb."
She said her husband died when she was 40 -- 25 years before she was eligible for health insurance from Medicare.
No longer covered by her husband's insurance, Weathers worked two part-time jobs to pay for medical coverage.
But she wondered about the chances of Conyers' legislation passing.
"It's possible, but probable?" Weathers asked.
"We've got a long way to go, especially with this government that's more concerned with haves than have-nots."
Monday, August 15, 2005
Under Insurance problem in Maine
AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) -- The study released by USM's Muskie School of Public Service focuses on Mainers who have signed up with the DirigoChoice program, a private-public partnership that provides comprehensive health care coverage at discounted rates.
The study says nearly 40 percent of those who enrolled in DirigoChoice were uninsured, had been uninsured some time during the year or had only temporary coverage.
It also says their dependents were more likely to have coverage, possibly through MaineCare and the state Children's Health Insurance Program.
Currently, 8,100 Mainers receive coverage through DirigoChoice. Doctor Robert McAfee is chairman of the Dirigo Health Agency Board of Directors. He says that before DirigoChoice, most enrollees with incomes below 18-thousand, 620 dollars had been paying about 25 percent of their annual incomes for health care coverage. He says those people would have been hard pressed to pay deductibles if they were hospitalized.
The study says nearly 40 percent of those who enrolled in DirigoChoice were uninsured, had been uninsured some time during the year or had only temporary coverage.
It also says their dependents were more likely to have coverage, possibly through MaineCare and the state Children's Health Insurance Program.
Currently, 8,100 Mainers receive coverage through DirigoChoice. Doctor Robert McAfee is chairman of the Dirigo Health Agency Board of Directors. He says that before DirigoChoice, most enrollees with incomes below 18-thousand, 620 dollars had been paying about 25 percent of their annual incomes for health care coverage. He says those people would have been hard pressed to pay deductibles if they were hospitalized.
Shortchanged on auto insurance
August 15, 2005
REFORMING AUTO insurance in Massachusetts requires a lot more than simply reducing rates. Believing that there are enough auto insurers already here, or that we can attract insurers by fixing only part of the problem, is a disservice to consumers statewide. To increase choice, lower rates for good drivers, and infuse needed capital, we need to move to a competitive marketplace.
You don't have to look further than your television to realize how little choice Bay Staters have for auto insurance. During a Red Sox/Yankees game earlier this season, the ads made it very clear: If you want to find out how to save $200, the ''gecko" can't help you in this state, and neither can the many other insurers who won't come here.
Most of the ads we see are actually national marketing campaigns, because insurers compete for consumers in 49 other states. Here, most of our 18 insurers don't actively pursue us because they don't need to. They know a fair amount of us will end up with them anyway.
Recently, another small auto insurer announced it was leaving Massachusetts, another victim of our system's failings. Some 22,000 drivers will be forced to switch insurers next year. This has happened to hundreds of thousands of drivers in our state in recent years, and it wasn't their choice.
In the last year and a half, almost 30,000 Massachusetts consumers have also lost choice in their home insurer. This frustration may have been averted if we didn't have a system that repels national insurers who offer a full menu of products.
How bad is it? Most of us get our insurance through our neighborhood insurance agency. About 55 percent of the state's insurance agents have a business relationship with only one auto insurer. Very few have contracts with a variety of insurers. So when you walk through the door, you aren't greeted with a range of options. And where we once had substantial discounts for clean driving records, now we have virtually none, and our insurers spend their capital pursuing the best of the worst drivers, because that's what the system encourages.
Massachusetts consumers have long been able to shop for competitive home insurance and mortgage rates. They should be allowed to do the same for auto insurance. But with only one policy and one state-set rate, our consumers cannot tailor coverage to their needs or shop their good driving records around for the best rates .
Worse yet, the vast majority pays more than it should while a small percentage of drivers, some with very bad driving records, pay less than they should. Not to mention the $300 million passed on to all of us every year resulting from the accidents and claims filed by those worst drivers.
Governor Romney's auto insurance reform plan will provide drivers with greater choice in product and price, something that consumers expect and already have in most markets and every other state in the nation. It will reduce the costs of fraud that are passed on to policyholders by making insurers individually responsible for those costs.
Equally important is the personal responsibility that drivers who fuel our highest-in-the-nation accident rate will have to accept. In a competitive market, the financial incentive will finally exist for those drivers to improve their driving, because the vast majority of us deserve a better rate and some real choices.
To kick-start that, the governor's 5 percent rate rollback for drivers with clean records would be applied in addition to any rate decrease the insurance commissioner might approve.
Our system is not benefiting consumers. These changes will not happen without your voice being heard. The very few insurers who benefit under this system and claim to have our interests at heart are spending a great deal of time and money to maintain the status quo by generating fear and uncertainty. An effective government remedies problems before they affect citizens. Our elected state officials need to know that Massachusetts drivers want the same choices that drivers in every other state already have.
REFORMING AUTO insurance in Massachusetts requires a lot more than simply reducing rates. Believing that there are enough auto insurers already here, or that we can attract insurers by fixing only part of the problem, is a disservice to consumers statewide. To increase choice, lower rates for good drivers, and infuse needed capital, we need to move to a competitive marketplace.
You don't have to look further than your television to realize how little choice Bay Staters have for auto insurance. During a Red Sox/Yankees game earlier this season, the ads made it very clear: If you want to find out how to save $200, the ''gecko" can't help you in this state, and neither can the many other insurers who won't come here.
Most of the ads we see are actually national marketing campaigns, because insurers compete for consumers in 49 other states. Here, most of our 18 insurers don't actively pursue us because they don't need to. They know a fair amount of us will end up with them anyway.
Recently, another small auto insurer announced it was leaving Massachusetts, another victim of our system's failings. Some 22,000 drivers will be forced to switch insurers next year. This has happened to hundreds of thousands of drivers in our state in recent years, and it wasn't their choice.
In the last year and a half, almost 30,000 Massachusetts consumers have also lost choice in their home insurer. This frustration may have been averted if we didn't have a system that repels national insurers who offer a full menu of products.
How bad is it? Most of us get our insurance through our neighborhood insurance agency. About 55 percent of the state's insurance agents have a business relationship with only one auto insurer. Very few have contracts with a variety of insurers. So when you walk through the door, you aren't greeted with a range of options. And where we once had substantial discounts for clean driving records, now we have virtually none, and our insurers spend their capital pursuing the best of the worst drivers, because that's what the system encourages.
Massachusetts consumers have long been able to shop for competitive home insurance and mortgage rates. They should be allowed to do the same for auto insurance. But with only one policy and one state-set rate, our consumers cannot tailor coverage to their needs or shop their good driving records around for the best rates .
Worse yet, the vast majority pays more than it should while a small percentage of drivers, some with very bad driving records, pay less than they should. Not to mention the $300 million passed on to all of us every year resulting from the accidents and claims filed by those worst drivers.
Governor Romney's auto insurance reform plan will provide drivers with greater choice in product and price, something that consumers expect and already have in most markets and every other state in the nation. It will reduce the costs of fraud that are passed on to policyholders by making insurers individually responsible for those costs.
Equally important is the personal responsibility that drivers who fuel our highest-in-the-nation accident rate will have to accept. In a competitive market, the financial incentive will finally exist for those drivers to improve their driving, because the vast majority of us deserve a better rate and some real choices.
To kick-start that, the governor's 5 percent rate rollback for drivers with clean records would be applied in addition to any rate decrease the insurance commissioner might approve.
Our system is not benefiting consumers. These changes will not happen without your voice being heard. The very few insurers who benefit under this system and claim to have our interests at heart are spending a great deal of time and money to maintain the status quo by generating fear and uncertainty. An effective government remedies problems before they affect citizens. Our elected state officials need to know that Massachusetts drivers want the same choices that drivers in every other state already have.
75,000 here lack health insurance
The Courier-Journal
Michele Wemes, resting her chin on her fist, waited patiently in a Family Health Centers lobby for a blood-pressure checkup.
The 39-year-old lost her health insurance two years ago when she divorced, and knee problems forced her to leave her greenhouse job in March.
A few chairs ahead, Angeline Robinson thumbed through a magazine, waiting for a doctor to see her. At 25, she works at Twinbrook Nursing Home, pursues a pharmacy technician career at Jefferson Community College and is about five weeks pregnant.
Biding their time in a Family Health Centers lobby for discounted health care has become routine for both women -- and for dozens of others.
That's because more than 75,000 Jefferson County residents -- and more than 530,000 Kentuckians -- have no health insurance, according to new figures from the U.S. Census Bureau.
For the first time, the bureau pulled together estimates on the numbers of people with -- and without -- health insurance, and broke them down by county.
Kentucky ranks 27th, with 13 percent of its residents lacking health insurance. More than 95,000 of them are younger than 18.
Indiana's ranking is higher -- No. 14 -- with 11.5 percent, or almost 695,000 uninsured residents.
Both have smaller percentages of uninsured residents than the national average -- 14 percent. That's almost 40 million people.
The bureau's estimates have a margin of error that varies by state -- Kentucky's number of uninsured could be as much as 27,000 higher or lower. Indiana's number could be about 31,500 people.
The Census Bureau compiled the data from five sources, including Medicaid and food stamp records and federal tax returns.
Demand on the rise
Until now, precise numbers have been "elusive, to say the least," said Bill Wagner, executive director of Family Health Centers in Louisville.
But the demand is real, and growing, he said.
"Every day, we turn patients away," Wagner said. "The growing numbers are putting a strain on our system."
State and local agencies will use the new numbers in planning how to care for the uninsured, who place a burden on the health-care system by driving up costs and overwhelming some facilities, such as emergency rooms.
But Wagner and other health-care officials say the Census estimates understate the problem with uninsured residents, since the most recent data was from 2000.
"We've certainly seen a sizable jump since then," he said.
Judy Owens, director of the University of Kentucky Center for Rural Health in Hazard also thinks the statewide figure of 13 percent seems too small.
"We see our workload increasing, and we see the circumstances that people are in are more complicated," Owens said. "The demand for our services (has) never declined."
According to the center's data, the three Kentucky counties with the greatest proportion of uninsured citizens are Clay, McCreary and Owsley. The Census Bureau generally agrees, but reverses their order, reporting that fully 25 percent of Owsley County has no health insurance.
"There are more uninsured or underinsured people than a lot of the data seems to suggest," Owens said.
But the state's figures line up pretty well with the Census Bureau's numbers, said Mark Birdwhistell, undersecretary for health in the Cabinet for Health and Family Services.
Hospitals suffer
Regardless, health-care officials agree that the problem of uninsured patients is a large drain on clinics and hospitals.
Kentucky doesn't track the cost of uninsured patients to taxpayers. But a June study published by Families USA, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit organization that lobbies for health-care consumers, estimates that it cost Kentucky $679 million this year to cover unpaid medical costs for the uninsured.
In Indiana, the cost this year to the state is estimated at $934 million, the study said.
It also said the cost will drive up health-insurance premiums by more than $1,000 for a Kentucky family with employer-sponsored coverage, and more than $900 for an Indiana family.
Last year, Family Health Centers served 43,000 people, charging them on a sliding scale based on their income and family size. Nearly 60 percent had no insurance.
Family Health Centers needs almost $8 million each year to operate, funding that comes from grants or appropriations from all levels of government, Wagner said. More than $2 million comes from an appropriation from Louisville Metro Government.
Without that funding, the centers can't help people like Wemes with her blood pressure. Even so, it doesn't cover all her needs. Wemes can't get help for her knee, for instance, because the clinic isn't equipped to handle her orthopedic needs.
"It stinks," she said. "Unless I go somewhere and have outrageous out-of-pocket expenses, I can't really afford to have it looked at."
Robinson, who can't afford the health insurance offered through her Twinbrook job, said her pregnancy complicates matters.
"I'll be stuck with hospital and doctor's bills that I can't afford," she said -- and she'll have to pay those bills with money that she doesn't have.
Tracking the uninsured
To better help people like Wemes and Robinson in the area, getCare, a Louisville organization that connects uninsured patients with doctors, is working on a database to better track people without insurance.
Logging claims from the uninsured -- which currently doesn't happen -- would give organizations such as getCare a firmer grasp on patients without insurance and how much health care they use, executive director Wendy Ward said.
"For the uninsured, there's no single database," Ward said. "We've had no real way of knowing how many people there are."
The indigent poor -- those living at or below the poverty line -- "are the sickest," Ward said. They are also "the most difficult group to figure out how to get them health-care coverage, and yet they're the ones who need it the most."
Charles Brown knows what that's like. His last steady job ended in October. In April, he worked a few weeks with a home improvement company before a six-week case of pneumonia knocked him out of his job.
"It's hard for me to get the medicine I need," said Brown, 49, a borderline diabetic, who has had hip-replacement surgery. "Not having insurance, I get the minimum amount of medical attention that I really need."
Pamela Greenwell lost her health insurance when she quit her job as a food server about a year ago because of an illness, but she could barely afford the insurance when she had a steady income.
She went months without her blood-pressure medicine. Now, she's in a program that gets her some prescriptions for free, but her lack of health insurance frustrates her each time she changes medicine.
"She has to look at the list to see what's free, to treat me that way," Greenwell said of her doctor. "She has to give me something I can afford."
"It's either that or I take nothin'."
Michele Wemes, resting her chin on her fist, waited patiently in a Family Health Centers lobby for a blood-pressure checkup.
The 39-year-old lost her health insurance two years ago when she divorced, and knee problems forced her to leave her greenhouse job in March.
A few chairs ahead, Angeline Robinson thumbed through a magazine, waiting for a doctor to see her. At 25, she works at Twinbrook Nursing Home, pursues a pharmacy technician career at Jefferson Community College and is about five weeks pregnant.
Biding their time in a Family Health Centers lobby for discounted health care has become routine for both women -- and for dozens of others.
That's because more than 75,000 Jefferson County residents -- and more than 530,000 Kentuckians -- have no health insurance, according to new figures from the U.S. Census Bureau.
For the first time, the bureau pulled together estimates on the numbers of people with -- and without -- health insurance, and broke them down by county.
Kentucky ranks 27th, with 13 percent of its residents lacking health insurance. More than 95,000 of them are younger than 18.
Indiana's ranking is higher -- No. 14 -- with 11.5 percent, or almost 695,000 uninsured residents.
Both have smaller percentages of uninsured residents than the national average -- 14 percent. That's almost 40 million people.
The bureau's estimates have a margin of error that varies by state -- Kentucky's number of uninsured could be as much as 27,000 higher or lower. Indiana's number could be about 31,500 people.
The Census Bureau compiled the data from five sources, including Medicaid and food stamp records and federal tax returns.
Demand on the rise
Until now, precise numbers have been "elusive, to say the least," said Bill Wagner, executive director of Family Health Centers in Louisville.
But the demand is real, and growing, he said.
"Every day, we turn patients away," Wagner said. "The growing numbers are putting a strain on our system."
State and local agencies will use the new numbers in planning how to care for the uninsured, who place a burden on the health-care system by driving up costs and overwhelming some facilities, such as emergency rooms.
But Wagner and other health-care officials say the Census estimates understate the problem with uninsured residents, since the most recent data was from 2000.
"We've certainly seen a sizable jump since then," he said.
Judy Owens, director of the University of Kentucky Center for Rural Health in Hazard also thinks the statewide figure of 13 percent seems too small.
"We see our workload increasing, and we see the circumstances that people are in are more complicated," Owens said. "The demand for our services (has) never declined."
According to the center's data, the three Kentucky counties with the greatest proportion of uninsured citizens are Clay, McCreary and Owsley. The Census Bureau generally agrees, but reverses their order, reporting that fully 25 percent of Owsley County has no health insurance.
"There are more uninsured or underinsured people than a lot of the data seems to suggest," Owens said.
But the state's figures line up pretty well with the Census Bureau's numbers, said Mark Birdwhistell, undersecretary for health in the Cabinet for Health and Family Services.
Hospitals suffer
Regardless, health-care officials agree that the problem of uninsured patients is a large drain on clinics and hospitals.
Kentucky doesn't track the cost of uninsured patients to taxpayers. But a June study published by Families USA, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit organization that lobbies for health-care consumers, estimates that it cost Kentucky $679 million this year to cover unpaid medical costs for the uninsured.
In Indiana, the cost this year to the state is estimated at $934 million, the study said.
It also said the cost will drive up health-insurance premiums by more than $1,000 for a Kentucky family with employer-sponsored coverage, and more than $900 for an Indiana family.
Last year, Family Health Centers served 43,000 people, charging them on a sliding scale based on their income and family size. Nearly 60 percent had no insurance.
Family Health Centers needs almost $8 million each year to operate, funding that comes from grants or appropriations from all levels of government, Wagner said. More than $2 million comes from an appropriation from Louisville Metro Government.
Without that funding, the centers can't help people like Wemes with her blood pressure. Even so, it doesn't cover all her needs. Wemes can't get help for her knee, for instance, because the clinic isn't equipped to handle her orthopedic needs.
"It stinks," she said. "Unless I go somewhere and have outrageous out-of-pocket expenses, I can't really afford to have it looked at."
Robinson, who can't afford the health insurance offered through her Twinbrook job, said her pregnancy complicates matters.
"I'll be stuck with hospital and doctor's bills that I can't afford," she said -- and she'll have to pay those bills with money that she doesn't have.
Tracking the uninsured
To better help people like Wemes and Robinson in the area, getCare, a Louisville organization that connects uninsured patients with doctors, is working on a database to better track people without insurance.
Logging claims from the uninsured -- which currently doesn't happen -- would give organizations such as getCare a firmer grasp on patients without insurance and how much health care they use, executive director Wendy Ward said.
"For the uninsured, there's no single database," Ward said. "We've had no real way of knowing how many people there are."
The indigent poor -- those living at or below the poverty line -- "are the sickest," Ward said. They are also "the most difficult group to figure out how to get them health-care coverage, and yet they're the ones who need it the most."
Charles Brown knows what that's like. His last steady job ended in October. In April, he worked a few weeks with a home improvement company before a six-week case of pneumonia knocked him out of his job.
"It's hard for me to get the medicine I need," said Brown, 49, a borderline diabetic, who has had hip-replacement surgery. "Not having insurance, I get the minimum amount of medical attention that I really need."
Pamela Greenwell lost her health insurance when she quit her job as a food server about a year ago because of an illness, but she could barely afford the insurance when she had a steady income.
She went months without her blood-pressure medicine. Now, she's in a program that gets her some prescriptions for free, but her lack of health insurance frustrates her each time she changes medicine.
"She has to look at the list to see what's free, to treat me that way," Greenwell said of her doctor. "She has to give me something I can afford."
"It's either that or I take nothin'."
Sunday, August 14, 2005
Long life insurance
Billy Ballinger says she's bought her and her family some peace of mind – a long-term care insurance policy.
The 64-year-old Burleson woman doesn't want her two sons to worry if she ever can't care for herself.
So she purchased a policy two years ago that will pay $174 a day for up to 5 ½ years of care in a nursing home, an assisted-living facility or her home. The monthly premium is $163.
"People don't think anything will happen to them when they grow older, but it can and does," she says.
Ms. Ballinger is one of 7 million Americans who have made long-term care insurance part of their retirement planning.
They're buying policies to lighten the caregiving burden on their families, to give themselves more say in where they'll receive care, and to preserve assets for their spouse or heirs.
Despite what many people think, ordinary health insurance and Medicare generally don't pay for long-term care.
But the insurance isn't for everyone. If you have plenty of money, you may decide you can pay for your own long-term care. And if you don't have any assets to protect, then Medicaid, the insurance program for the needy, will cover you.
The 64-year-old Burleson woman doesn't want her two sons to worry if she ever can't care for herself.
So she purchased a policy two years ago that will pay $174 a day for up to 5 ½ years of care in a nursing home, an assisted-living facility or her home. The monthly premium is $163.
"People don't think anything will happen to them when they grow older, but it can and does," she says.
Ms. Ballinger is one of 7 million Americans who have made long-term care insurance part of their retirement planning.
They're buying policies to lighten the caregiving burden on their families, to give themselves more say in where they'll receive care, and to preserve assets for their spouse or heirs.
Despite what many people think, ordinary health insurance and Medicare generally don't pay for long-term care.
But the insurance isn't for everyone. If you have plenty of money, you may decide you can pay for your own long-term care. And if you don't have any assets to protect, then Medicaid, the insurance program for the needy, will cover you.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
:.
