Share
Email This Page
add comment

Bust the Health Care Trusts

Print
Wednesday, 24 February 2010 08:53
Protesters block the entrance to WellPoint, a US-based health insurance company and the largest member of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, 10/28/09. (photo: Getty Images)

Protesters block the entrance to WellPoint, a US-based health insurance company and the largest member of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, 10/28/09. (photo: Getty Images)


y health insurer here in California is Anthem Blue Cross. So far, my group policy hasn't been affected by Anthem's planned rate increase of as much as 39 percent for its customers with individual policies - but the trend worries me, as it should everyone. Rates are soaring all over the country. Insurers have been seeking to raise premiums 24 percent in Connecticut, 23 percent in Maine, 20 percent in Oregon and a wallet-popping 56 percent in Michigan. How can insurers raise prices as much as they want without fear of losing customers?

Astonishingly, the health insurance industry is exempt from federal antitrust laws, which is why a handful of insurers have become so dominant in their markets that their customers simply have nowhere else to go. But that protection could soon end: President Obama on Tuesday announced his support of a House bill that would repeal health insurers' antitrust exemption, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaled that she would put it toward an immediate vote.

This is promising news. Forcing insurers to compete for our business would do at least as much good as the president's proposal to give the federal government, working with the states, the power to deny or roll back excessive premiums. The fact is that half of the states already have the power to approve rates and they don't seem to be holding insurers back much.

Health insurers like Anthem claim they have to raise rates (as well as co-payments and deductibles) because of the economic downturn. Employers are reducing coverage and cutting payrolls. As a result, more people are buying individual policies, but they tend to be older and sicker. Younger and healthier Americans are simply going without insurance, and thus not subsidizing their costlier fellow policy-holders.

This can't be the whole story, because big health insurers are making boatloads of money. America's five largest health insurers made a total profit of $12.2 billion last year; that was 56 percent higher than in 2008, according to a report from Health Care for America Now.

It's not as if health insurers have been inventing jazzy software or making jet airplanes. Basically, they just collect money from employers and individuals and give the money to providers. In most markets, consumers wouldn't pay this much for so little. We'd find a competitor that charged less and delivered more. What's stopping us? Not enough choice.

More than 90 percent of insurance markets in more than 300 metropolitan areas are "highly concentrated," as defined by the Federal Trade Commission, according to the American Medical Association. A 2008 survey by the Government Accountability Office found the five largest providers of small group insurance controlled 75 percent or more of the market in 34 states, and 90 percent or more in 23 of those states, a significant increase in concentration since the G.A.O.'s 2002 survey.

Anthem's parent is WellPoint, one of the largest publicly traded health insurers in America, which runs Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in 14 states and Unicare plans in several others. WellPoint, through Anthem, is the largest for-profit health insurer here in California, as it is in Maine, where it controls 78 percent of the market. In Missouri, WellPoint owns 68 percent of the market; in its home state, Indiana, 60 percent. With 35 million customers, WellPoint counts one out of every nine Americans as a member of one of its plans.

Antitrust laws are supposed to prevent this kind of market power. So why are giant health insurers like WellPoint exempt? Chalk it up to an anomaly that began seven decades ago in the quaint old world of regional, nonprofit Blues. They were created in part by hospitals to spread the costs of expensive new equipment and facilities over many policy holders. Collaboration was the point, not competition. The 1945 McCarran-Ferguson Act made it official, exempting insurers from antitrust scrutiny and giving states the power to regulate them, although not necessarily any power to regulate rates.

The system worked fairly well until about two decades ago when insurers began morphing into publicly held, for-profit cash machines. A new breed of medical entrepreneur saw opportunities to profit from a rapidly aging population eager to get every new drug and technology that might extend their lives, and a government committed to doling out hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicare and Medicaid.

With size has come not only market power but political clout. Big for-profit insurers deploy enough campaign money and lobbyists to get their way with state legislators and insurance commissioners. A proposal last year to allow California's Department of Insurance to regulate rates, for example, died in committee. These companies have even been known to press states to limit how many other health insurers they license.

And when they can't get their way, insurers go to court. In Maine - one state that aggressively regulates rates - WellPoint's Anthem subsidiary has sued the insurance superintendent for reducing its requested rate increase.

Political clout can be especially advantageous at the federal level, as the big Wall Street banks have so brazenly demonstrated. Over the past two and a half years, WellPoint's employees and associates have contributed more than $922,000 to federal political campaigns, and the company has spent $7.8 million lobbying Washington policymakers, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. It should not be surprising that WellPoint was one of the leading opponents of the public insurance option, which would have subjected it to competition even where it had sewn up the market.

Antitrust is no substitute for broader health care reform, but it's an important prerequisite. If a handful of giant health insurers are allowed to dominate the industry, many of the other aspects of reform (establishing insurance exchanges, requiring people to have insurance, even allowing consumers to buy insurance across state lines) won't bring down the price of insurance.

Regardless of what happens at the White House's health care meeting on Thursday, we've got to make sure health insurers compete for every one of our dollars. First chance I get I'm going to find another health insurer here in California - unless Anthem has such a lock on the market I can't find a better deal.


Open Article On Originating Site

Robert B. Reich, a professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and a secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton, is the author of "Supercapitalism."

 

Comments  

 
+2 # Guest 2010-02-24 16:58
Dear Mr Reich,
Thank you for this cogent article.
Insurance companies are cutting reimbursements to providers as they raise rates.
Wellpoint does not want to pay for physical therapy services in California unless provided in a physician's office. "Ms Anthem Blue Cross" has offered physical therapists a new contract capping per diem payments at $75 regardless of the services provided. This represents a 30-50% cut and many therapist project that they many have to close their doors. I have been a Blue Cross provider of PT for over 18 years. BC has not increased our fee schedule in over 10 years and now they are cutting us below HMO rates, below what massages and hair treatments cost the public. Diabolically, they announced these rate changes on the date that open enrollment CLOSED. We are hostages! Patient deductibles and copayments have been raised leaving a very small balance for BC to pay out of the $75 max allowed for the expert services of trained and experienced PT's.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-02-24 17:08
While I favor anti-trust laws that apply to health insurers; ultimately, it won't help much. I have examined how health care is provided in many other developed countries. Two things stand out as reasons why they are able to provide quality care at a significantly lower cost: 1) either the government processes claims as in single payer countries such as Canada and Taiwan or claims are processed by non-profit insurance funds as in Germany and France; and 2) prices for all health care services are negotiated as they are in both single payer and "Bismarkian" systems, similar to our own Medicare. None of the countries gives insurance companies the right to decide who lives or dies and none allow medical bills to bankrupt large numbers of their citizens. The provision of affordable health care is seen as a human right. Thanks for staying on this issue Prof. Reich.
 
 
+1 # Guest 2010-02-24 17:44
Here is a suggestion--try Kaiser Permanente. They are a truly not for profit HMO with terrific doctors and facilities, especially in Northern California. You have a full range of providers within their system, and their system is extensive and excellent. Could be a model for the country!
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-02-24 18:51
I have another simple, bipartisan cure for what's ailing health care. I propose Mandatory Reporting of Medical Errors for Health Care Providers and Institutions PAIRED with a $250K Malpractice Lawsuit Cap. Medical error is the 7th leading cause of death in the U.S. With mandatory reporting no longer will bad providers be protected behind a veil of secrecy. In 2007 Senators Clinton & Obama proposed Mandatory Medical Error Reporting but it was blocked by Republicans who wanted a $250K malpractice cap. I say let them have their so-called "torte reform", so long as errors become part of the public record. It will give health care consumers a way to make educated choices and avoid bad doctors and institutions. This will bring down costs and save lives. The cost of this plan is nominal, the benefits are priceless.
 
 
+3 # Guest 2010-02-24 23:37
I was "black balled" from Kaiser even though I had been with them since I was an infant. Four years ago I was kicked out of
Kaiser for slightly elevated blood pressure, slightly elevated cholestoral levels and a knee injury I sustained in 1976 and that Kaiser Hospital had treated. I had to resort to the VA as a VietNam veteran. The best care I've had in years!.
Go public option!!!!
Cheers
Kim
 
 
+2 # Guest 2010-02-25 05:34
I am glad that Dr. Robert Reich cites the non-profit origins of Blue Cross and Blue Shield. When it first came out, it was a reasonable service, as two professors who wrote a book about health care, cited. Now, we have passively sat by as a nation, while the "for profit" insurance companies, have bought their influence through money to politicians. Is our entire country for sale? Where are our values and principles as a collective group of citizenry? Our health care system is a patched up jalopy compared to Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France...It is OK for those who have insurance but what about those without? Those millions?
Nations are evaluated by how they treat and take care of each other, including health, education, and opportunity.
Now we have the most expensive health care, highest education costs, greatest military spending, yet our standing in the world in education has slipped, and in taking care of our sick.
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-02-25 06:04
As they are now for the most part, what little regulation there is placed on Insurance Companies comes from the individual states.
This of course gives us 50 different versions of regulation. If not the premium rates then a list of what has to be covered if you are going to sell your insurance in all states.
So you own an insurance company, then you would move your headquarters to the state that requires the least coverage as a way to reduce your cost.
There is a way that we could buy across state lines that would work. Let all of us get into the same plan that Politicians buy into. When a company tries to raise their rates, it would raise the premiums of our Congressmen as well.
That would get their attention.
 
 
0 # Guest 2010-03-01 14:21
we pay for the politicans insurance they dont care what it costs them?
 
 
-1 # Guest 2010-02-26 10:16
After watching blair house meeting it would seem that the republicans simply distort truths which pelosi has to correct and while some show intelligence in their pursuit of a unified program these people do not seem to want to acknowledge the implications of their basic tax credit approach. Broke the systems will be and these insurance company types once they start loosing money will simply curtail business. To let them become public was a mistake in the first place because people are not profit centers and their mentality about health care pass thru service(see reich above) is outdated. Wellness begins with education in the work place, eliminating the blue cross originated idea of employer providing hea ins is a start. Outrageous? It would force individuals to take a hard look at their priorities. Using buying groups make more sense and those would be non profit. Individuals ned to take responsibility for their lives and health. Having worked as a health provider leads me to this.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.