Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: STOCK MARKET WATCH, Tuesday, December 13, 2011 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)59. Who is Essential? Insurers or Consumers? By Wendell Potter (GRAMMAR CRINGE)
http://www.nationofchange.org/who-essential-insurers-or-consumers-1323708363
...Last week a broad coalition of patient-focused groups launched its I Am Essential campaign in an effort to make sure that when all of us have to buy health insurance in 2014, we will be getting good value....When Congress passed the Affordable Care Act last year, it included a provision requiring that all health insurance plans sold a little more than two years from now must contain essential health benefits. It established 10 categories of required coverage: ambulatory patient services; emergency services; hospitalization; maternity and newborn care; mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management and pediatric services, including oral and vision care. The Department of Health and Human Services has the responsibility of determining, with input from the respected nonprofit Institute of Medicine, just how comprehensive the coverage will have to be in each of those categories.
Insurers and employers who offer coverage to workers have been lobbying both the IOM and HHS to make the coverage requirements as narrow as possible. They want to continue marketing plans with skimpy benefits because they are less costly to employers and potentially more profitable to insurers. The problem with that approach, of course, is that millions of Americans will be forced to the join the ranks of the underinsuredalready estimated at 30 millionif coverage they must buy is inadequate to meet their needs. That would not only be a nightmare for many American citizens but, Im betting, for any politician who is on the record supporting Obamacare. If people find out that the coverage they have to buy is of limited value to them when they get sick, theyre not going to be very inclined to vote for Democrats come 2016, especially if insurance firms continue their long-running streak of record-setting profits.
I wrote last month that an insurance industry-backed group called the Essential Health Benefits Coalition had been formed to persuade Obama administration officials to consider affordability first and foremostnot comprehensivenessas they flesh out the benefit requirements. As is typical of such industry groups, this one was set up and is being run out of a big PR firm, Ogilvy Washington. The budget for it is ample enough to pay the salary of its executive director and spokesman, Brendan Daly, a former aide to former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In contrast, the I Am Essential coalition doesnt have a budget. Oh, no, no, we dont have any money at all, I was told by Carl Schmid, deputy executive director of The Aids Institute, one of the coalition members. This is all pro bono. Other members of the group, which last week sent a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, include the Lupus Foundation of America, the Mens Health Network, Mental Health America, the National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services Programs and the National Minority Quality Forum. The only other action the coalition has taken so far is to send out a news release announcing the group and its letter to Sebelius. The letter pointed out that the organizations comprising I Am Essential serve many of the nations most vulnerable patient groups. There are tens of millions of Americans who, like the people we advocate for, live with chronic disease and disability, they told Sebelius. We are writing to urge you to make certain that the Essential Health Benefits package fully meets the needs of American health care consumers, particularly those who have chronic health conditions A benefit package too narrowly drawn runs the risk of not adequately covering patient needs.
The groups letter came a few days after another group of patient advocatesdoctors and nursessent a letter to Sebelius making the same plea. Sent by Physicians for a National Health Program, a group that supports a single-payer health care system for the U.S., the letter also blasted the IOM panel for siding with the insurers suggesting that HHS consider affordability first. We protest the Institute of Medicines recommendation that cost rather than medical need be the basis for defining the essential benefits that insurance policies must cover, the doctors and nurses wrote. The IOM proposal would base the required coverage on the benefits typical of plans currently offered by small businesses enshrining these skimpy plans as the new standard. These bare-bones policies come with a long list of uncovered services and saddle enrollees with unaffordable co-payments and deductibles If adopted by the Department of Health and Human Services, this recommendation will sacrifice many lives and cause much suffering. We call on Secretary Sebelius and President Obama to reject them....
...Last week a broad coalition of patient-focused groups launched its I Am Essential campaign in an effort to make sure that when all of us have to buy health insurance in 2014, we will be getting good value....When Congress passed the Affordable Care Act last year, it included a provision requiring that all health insurance plans sold a little more than two years from now must contain essential health benefits. It established 10 categories of required coverage: ambulatory patient services; emergency services; hospitalization; maternity and newborn care; mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management and pediatric services, including oral and vision care. The Department of Health and Human Services has the responsibility of determining, with input from the respected nonprofit Institute of Medicine, just how comprehensive the coverage will have to be in each of those categories.
Insurers and employers who offer coverage to workers have been lobbying both the IOM and HHS to make the coverage requirements as narrow as possible. They want to continue marketing plans with skimpy benefits because they are less costly to employers and potentially more profitable to insurers. The problem with that approach, of course, is that millions of Americans will be forced to the join the ranks of the underinsuredalready estimated at 30 millionif coverage they must buy is inadequate to meet their needs. That would not only be a nightmare for many American citizens but, Im betting, for any politician who is on the record supporting Obamacare. If people find out that the coverage they have to buy is of limited value to them when they get sick, theyre not going to be very inclined to vote for Democrats come 2016, especially if insurance firms continue their long-running streak of record-setting profits.
I wrote last month that an insurance industry-backed group called the Essential Health Benefits Coalition had been formed to persuade Obama administration officials to consider affordability first and foremostnot comprehensivenessas they flesh out the benefit requirements. As is typical of such industry groups, this one was set up and is being run out of a big PR firm, Ogilvy Washington. The budget for it is ample enough to pay the salary of its executive director and spokesman, Brendan Daly, a former aide to former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In contrast, the I Am Essential coalition doesnt have a budget. Oh, no, no, we dont have any money at all, I was told by Carl Schmid, deputy executive director of The Aids Institute, one of the coalition members. This is all pro bono. Other members of the group, which last week sent a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, include the Lupus Foundation of America, the Mens Health Network, Mental Health America, the National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services Programs and the National Minority Quality Forum. The only other action the coalition has taken so far is to send out a news release announcing the group and its letter to Sebelius. The letter pointed out that the organizations comprising I Am Essential serve many of the nations most vulnerable patient groups. There are tens of millions of Americans who, like the people we advocate for, live with chronic disease and disability, they told Sebelius. We are writing to urge you to make certain that the Essential Health Benefits package fully meets the needs of American health care consumers, particularly those who have chronic health conditions A benefit package too narrowly drawn runs the risk of not adequately covering patient needs.
The groups letter came a few days after another group of patient advocatesdoctors and nursessent a letter to Sebelius making the same plea. Sent by Physicians for a National Health Program, a group that supports a single-payer health care system for the U.S., the letter also blasted the IOM panel for siding with the insurers suggesting that HHS consider affordability first. We protest the Institute of Medicines recommendation that cost rather than medical need be the basis for defining the essential benefits that insurance policies must cover, the doctors and nurses wrote. The IOM proposal would base the required coverage on the benefits typical of plans currently offered by small businesses enshrining these skimpy plans as the new standard. These bare-bones policies come with a long list of uncovered services and saddle enrollees with unaffordable co-payments and deductibles If adopted by the Department of Health and Human Services, this recommendation will sacrifice many lives and cause much suffering. We call on Secretary Sebelius and President Obama to reject them....
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
88 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Rememeber that London made such a strong deliberate effort to become a huge banking center
dixiegrrrrl
Dec 2011
#54
middle east: Qatar’s Shares Retreat Most in Three Week as Europe Rating-Cut Concerns
xchrom
Dec 2011
#8
aha..so THAT is how it went down. I knew not, and really appreciate seeing the bigger picture.
dixiegrrrrl
Dec 2011
#58
This is about as Meta as I'm going to get here, but, I thought it needed to be said.
Hugin
Dec 2011
#79
whatever opinions I hold about the placement, they are not directed at you
bread_and_roses
Dec 2011
#70
EUR Tumbles To Lows On Report Merkel Rejects Raising Upper Limit On ESM Bailout Mechanism
Roland99
Dec 2011
#44
Mr. President, Stop Protecting Bankers From State Law Enforcement By Richard (RJ) Eskow
Demeter
Dec 2011
#61
Elder Poverty, GOP Sucker Punch - NOW Will Democrats Defend Social Security? By Richard (RJ) Eskow
Demeter
Dec 2011
#64