« prev   random   next »

1
1

Who does not want Califonria Prop 45 to pass

By anotheraccount following x   2014 Oct 24, 1:35am 11,668 views   35 comments   watch   nsfw   quote     share    


Here is who contributed money against prop 45 as of August 20, 2014.

Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. / KP Financial Services $14,590,350
Wellpoint, Inc. and Affiliated Entities $12,770,000
Blue Shield of California $9,693,200
Anthem Blue Cross $270,000
Health Net, Inc. $135,000
WarnerPacific Insurance Services $50,000
National Association of Health Underwriters $50,000
Word & Brown Insurance Administrators, Inc. $50,000
United Healthcare Insurance Company $30,000
Beere & Purves, Inc. $25,000
California Association of Health Plans $15,000

1   Quigley   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 24, 1:43am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

I'm sure the health insurance companies only have our best interests at heart! All that gouging in the years before Obamacare went into effect is gone forever I'm sure.
To quote an ad: "we don't want some bureaucrat deciding how much our health insurance should cost!"
Yah, that's best left up to vulture capitalists as the Founders intended!

2   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 24, 1:52am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

I am surprised at the number of fliers that I got in mail. I don't think I've seen anything quite like this for any other proposition or candidate.

3   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2014 Oct 24, 5:26am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

Quigley says

I'm sure the health insurance companies only have our best interests at heart! All that gouging in the years before Obamacare went into effect is gone forever I'm sure.

Before? Gone?

4   Ceffer   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 24, 6:54am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The only thing that prop 45 will accomplish is to make government a more corrupt bribe magnet. Maybe that's what they really want. Pay off the commissioner or his puppeteers to get rates raised.

People can't seem to distinguish when politicians pretend that something is in the public interest when it is really in the politicians' interests.

5   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 24, 10:00am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Ceffer says

The only thing that prop 45 will accomplish is to make government a more corrupt bribe magnet. Maybe that's what they really want. Pay off the commissioner or his puppeteers to get rates raised.

I am pretty sure that with prop 45, insurers will have a harder time passing 11% premium increases on small businesses than they do now.

Plus, auto insurance rates in California are some of the best in the nation because the people behind prop 45 (Consumer Watchdog) lobbied for them over 20 years ago. What they are proposing is the same process for health insurance rates as we have for auto insurance rates.

6   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 24, 10:04am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Ceffer says

The only thing that prop 45 will accomplish is to make government a more corrupt bribe magnet.

If insurers thought that they could bribe the commissioner easily, they would not be spending $ against the proposition (this is the latest financials. Generally bribing politicians costs a lot less than $55M.

7   justme   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 24, 11:09am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I have been using the following as source for information about ballot propositions in California and elsewhere

http://ballotpedia.org/California_2014_ballot_propositions

And in particular:

http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_45,_Public_Notice_Required_for_Insurance_Company_Rates_Initiative_%282014%29

Looks like an ok source to me, anyone think it is not? By the way, official California election materials in electronic form can be found at

http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/en/pdf/

8   lostand confused   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 24, 11:18am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tr6 says

Plus, auto insurance rates in California are some of the best in the nation because the people behind prop 45 (Consumer Watchdog) lobbied for them over 20 years ago. W

I not sure about that. I moved to the Midwest and paying just above 1/3rd of my rate in CA for the same coverage. Maybe other areas of the country may be high, but CA ain't cheap.

9   justme   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 24, 11:23am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Getting back to prop. 45 from my previous posting: The Obamacara/ACA law already requires that Health Insurance must spend at least 80% of the premium revenue on medical expenses, or else refund the difference to the insured.

See http://patrick.net/?p=1251121&c=1142338#comment-1142338

My question is, what does prop. 45 do in excess of what ACA already does for consumers? I'm just concerned that prop 45 will throw a wrench in the works of ACA somehow, although all the Democratic bigwigs are endorsing it. What gives? Anyone who knows me know that I am not a "concern troll", I am truly wondering about this.

As for the analogy between prop 45 and the prop 103(1988) regarding auto insurance, I still see wildly differing rates on auto insurance from different companies (Geico always quotes me terrible rates that are 2x as high as what I can get elsewhere, their aggressive advertising non-withstanding). And per the law, all these differing rates have been approved by the insurance commissioner. Come to think of it, why does prop 103 not require the insurers to publish their rate on the web, like CoveredCA does for health insurance? The answer may be that the law is pre-web, being from 1988, and a new law would be reqired to fix that transparency problem.

10   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 24, 12:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

justme says

The Obamacara/ACA law already requires that Health Insurance must spend at least 80% of the premium revenue on medical expenses, or else refund the difference to the insured.

Correct. Our business got 0.2% refund for last year. However, this does not provide any incentive for insurance companies to lower total coast. As the cost grows, so does the 20% that can be used to pay management. Currently it's in management's interest for cost to go up, so they don't really negotiate with the hospitals or other providers to keep the costs down.

I don't think this will affect ACA at all. For example, if the insurer tries to raise rates by 10%, but commissioner says 5%, this might make their ration 85/15 instead of 80/20. The benefit goes to people that pay premiums rather than the insurance company.

11   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 24, 12:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

justme says

As for the analogy between prop 45 and the prop 103(1988) regarding auto insurance

In 2008, the Consumer Federation of America estimated that Proposition 103 had saved consumers over $62 billion since 1988.

Hunter, J. Robert (April 2008). "State Automobile Insurance Regulation: A National Quality Assessment and In-Depth Review of California’s Uniquely Effective Regulatory System". Consumer Federation of America.

12   justme   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 24, 12:50pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tr6 says

Correct. Our business got 0.2% refund for last year. However, this does not provide any incentive for insurance companies to lower total coast. As the cost grows, so does the 20% that can be used to pay management. Currently it's in management's interest for cost to go up, so they don't really negotiate with the hospitals or other providers to keep the costs down.

I hope you are right. There is a problem that the competition in health care is nowhere near the level of competition that exists in the auto repair industry. And the barriers to entry are much lower in auto repair.

Here is a link to a pdf of the report you referred to. I'll take a look later, time permitting

http://www.consumerfed.org/elements/www.consumerfed.org/file/finance/state_auto_insurance_report.pdf

13   Quigley   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 24, 1:01pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Based on past experience with California propositions: this one will fail. The problem is this.
1)most people vote NO on propositions as default.
2)most people vote NO on propositions they don't understand. This one's benefits are not obvious and it seems confusing to the average illegal .. I mean Hispanic voter.

14   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 24, 1:08pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Quigley says

Based on past experience with California propositions: this one will fail.

This proposition had over 60% support before the advertising against started. Now people hear terms such as "special interests", "one politician", and it will affect ACA and they get scared. I would give it 50/50 chance of passing right now. It will be said if it does not.

15   casandra   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 24, 2:21pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

most informed people i know vote NO on all propositions!

16   Ceffer   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 24, 4:29pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Well, because the government just always has your best interests at heart, they are so good!

17   anonymous   ignore (null)   2014 Oct 25, 1:42am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Before voting for this proposition, let Obamacare work for several years first and let the B2B model of healthcare migrate slowly to B2C, which will drive more competition, efficiency, and lower prices in the market. This prop will just create more corruption with individuals in gov't having too much power, but I'm seeing first hand that the migration to a B2C marketplace for healthcare is what's really motivating health plans to cut the fat and improve quality like any other competitive marketplace.

18   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 25, 2:45am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

debyne says

B2B model of healthcare migrate slowly to B2C, which will drive more competition

That's hopeful thinking. For example on North Peninsula, Sutter Health is almost a monopoly. Besides owning the hospitals, they buy up all the practices which end up referring patients to Sutter facilities. I don't see how B2C will help fight monopolies raising prices.

19   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 25, 2:46am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

debyne says

Before voting for this proposition, let Obamacare work for several years first

Most small business don't have this luxury of waiting. Rates have been rising 10%+ every year in the past decade. If you work for a bigger company, you may not pay the premium directly, but you are paying it indirectly in lower wages.

20   Vicente   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 25, 3:02am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

debyne says

Before voting for this proposition, let Obamacare work for several years first

This is the one thing I think business are doing right, if for the wrong reasons.

Dump employer healthcare plans, the sooner that dies the better.

21   anonymous   ignore (null)   2014 Oct 25, 4:54am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tr6 says

I don't see how B2C will help fight monopolies raising prices.

Give it time to work...you might be surprised at how new entrants will storm in now that the move to B2C will foster a new, booming market. Let the free market portion of this work...again, I see how this is changing the marketplace first hand because I work heavily in this sector. Don't let partisan media or ideas contort your thinking to allow them to ram through stupid legislation.

22   anonymous   ignore (null)   2014 Oct 25, 4:56am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tr6 says

debyne says

Before voting for this proposition, let Obamacare work for several years first

Most small business don't have this luxury of waiting. Rates have been rising 10%+ every year in the past decade. If you work for a bigger company, you may not pay the premium directly, but you are paying it indirectly in lower wages.

No one said this would be easy, fast and convenient at first. There's going to be pain, but that's with anything radical on a scale of this magnitude. Don't put in more gov't red tape than is necessary or it'll backfire with more corruption. You have to give it time to work.

23   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 25, 7:35am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

debyne says

Give it time to work

I've been following B2C field since 2008. I will give to you that there was more progress this year than in prior 5, but at the same time healthcare prices increased tremendously. Do you work for Uber Health by any chance?

24   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 25, 7:40am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Vicente says

Dump employer healthcare plans, the sooner that dies the better.

It's hard in our case. Equivalent ACA plan is $1200 more expensive annually and the only difference is pediatric dental.

Next year we will spend on average for a family. $12,780 in premiums for health plan. $6,450 contribution to HSA and about $3,000 for dental. That's 22K which the business gets to write off. If you put this expense on the employees, we would have to pay them 30K for the same benefit assuming they can't write it off.

25   Quigley   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 25, 7:43am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

My union negotiated a 12% rate hike, movif down from the 18% hike offered at first this year. We've also been promised that we'd fall into the "Cadillac" plan status in five years because of rising rates.
When will everyone's plan be a "Cadillac?"

26   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2014 Oct 25, 10:09am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

/?p=1251327&c=1143640#comment-1143640">justme says

I have been using the following as source for information about ballot propositions in California and elsewhere

http://ballotpedia.org/California_2014_ballot_propositions

Thanks justme, interesting.

...

Oh, I bet #47 is loathed by the Thug Unions. #46 must be hated by hospitals.

27   komputodo   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 25, 3:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tr6 says

If insurers thought that they could bribe the commissioner easily, they would not be spending $ against the proposition (this is the latest financials. Generally bribing politicians costs a lot less than $55M.

55 million is the new 1 million.

28   komputodo   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 25, 3:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Quigley says

My union negotiated a 12% rate hike, movif down from the 18% hike offered at first this year. We've also been promised that we'd fall into the "Cadillac" plan status in five years because of rising rates.

When will everyone's plan be a "Cadillac?"

Hopefully it won't be the "Cadillac Escalade" plan.

29   anonymous   ignore (null)   2014 Oct 26, 12:47am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tr6 says

debyne says

Give it time to work

I've been following B2C field since 2008. I will give to you that there was more progress this year than in prior 5, but at the same time healthcare prices increased tremendously. Do you work for Uber Health by any chance?

Who cares about since 2008...ACA wasn't even effective til this year. And, you can't look at the first year of Obamacare as your case study. All of the participating health plans in the Exchanges had no idea at all as to what the prices should be, so many played it conservative to see how things shook out and because they were afraid of getting all the sick people and heading into a death spiral. Again, you have to give it time starting from now.

I won't say where I work, but it's not uber health...however, I'm in the middle of all this in a big way.

30   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 26, 1:02am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

debyne says

I won't say where I work, but it's not uber health...however, I'm in the middle of all this in a big way.

I hope you don't work for Covered California because a couple of years ago a relative of mine talked to someone that worked there who promised "change" and great results. I would say that so far, for small business, Covered California has been a huge failure. I hope that changes.

31   anonymous   ignore (null)   2014 Oct 26, 1:15am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tr6 says

debyne says

I won't say where I work, but it's not uber health...however, I'm in the middle of all this in a big way.

I hope you don't work for Covered California because a couple of years ago a relative of mine talked to someone that worked there who promised "change" and great results. I would say that so far, for small business, Covered California has been a huge failure. I hope that changes.

Nope, I don't. I work in the private sector.

32   Quigley   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 26, 1:33am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Obamacare reclassified health insurance purchasing as mandatory. The insurers do not, then, operate in a purely capitalistic environment, but their consumers are being compelled by the state to purchase their wares. Since they are being protected, we should also enjoy a similar amount of protection from capricious rate raises by greedy CEOs. Having to justify all future rate increases is only fair.
We the people are limited in our choices with regards to this industry. We MUST patronize it. Therefore we should also limit the industry's capacity to set prices based on greed.

33   Robert Sproul   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 26, 1:37am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I wonder what other inane Propositions will be put forward in the next few years in a vain attempt to slow this greed fueled clusterfuck.

"The projections include impacts from the Affordable Care Act"
…..so…I guess it is all fixed up now….

34   anotheraccount   ignore (1)   2014 Oct 26, 1:37am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

debyne says

Nope, I don't. I work in the private sector.

When you can (later) let us know what you working on.

35   Quigley   ignore (0)   2014 Oct 26, 1:53am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Prop 47 looks pretty good. With our prisons full to bursting and the cost of incarceration clocking in at $62,000, reclassifying bad check writing, drug use, and shoplifting as misdemeanors seems like good sense. Plowing that money back into education also makes sense.
Locking petty criminals away with hardened felons for years while ensuring that nobody will hire them upon release doesn't make much sense, unless you're trying to INCREASE your criminal population.
Against it: cops, lawyers, private prisons.


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions