Headlines about "Health plan costs - misc"
Gathered from the web by the editors at BenefitsLink.com.
HELP Committee Democrats Draft New Bill with Public Plan and Employer Mandate They Say Is Cheaper
Excerpt: "Democrats on a key Senate committee are readying a plan that has a government-run insurance option and a $750-per-worker annual fee on larger companies that do not offer coverage to its employees, The Associated Press reports. 'In a letter outlining the details, Sens. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., and Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said their revised plan would cost dramatically less than an earlier, incomplete proposal, and help show the way toward coverage for 97 percent of all Americans." (Kaiser Family Foundation)
Hidden Costs of Health Care: Why Americans Are Paying MORE but Getting LESS (PDF)
3 pages. Excerpt: "With each passing year, Americans are paying more for health care coverage. Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have nearly doubled since 2000, a rate three times faster than wages. In 2008, the average premium for a family plan purchased through an employer was $12,680, nearly the annual earnings of a full-time minimum wage job. Americans pay more than ever for health insurance, but get less coverage." (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services)
West Virginia Considering Alternatives to Dropping Retiree Health Care for New State Employees
Excerpt: "Newly hired state employees in West Virginia would have to pay the entire cost for their health insurance after retirement under a current proposal by the state Retiree Health Benefit Trust and Public Employees Insurance Association Finance Board. West Virginia's share of Other Post-Employee Pension debt, affecting state employees, is estimated at $7 billion, and the RHBT and PEIA Finance Board is seeking alternative suggestions to eliminating retiree health insurance benefits for new hires." (The Intelligencer / Wheeling News-Register)
San Francisco Aims for Universal Health Coverage
Excerpt: "Three years ago, this city turned itself into a laboratory for remaking the country's health care system with a bold experiment to expand services to the uninsured, working poor and medically underserved. Mayor Gavin Newsom touts Healthy San Francisco as a signature accomplishment ? worthy as a model for the nation. It's too early to tell whether he is right, with researchers only beginning to evaluate the program's early successes and longer-term limitations." (The Sacramento Bee)
Putting Benefit Plans Out to Bid May Reap Savings
Excerpt: "Scouting for a way to rein in health benefit costs, Florida Power & Light, the state's largest electric utility, decided to start using a more open, competitive bidding process for its health and benefit plans. FPL kicked off its new bidding system in late 2004 and promptly struck gold. By forcing providers of plans for vision, dental and other benefit components to openly compete for its business through an auction-style process where players can see one another's offers, FPL figures it has saved $1.1 million annually in benefit costs." (Workforce Management; free registration required)
Three Out of Four Public Employers Consider Increasing Employee Deductibles, Co-Pays or Premiums
Excerpt: "Public employers nationwide are modifying their employee health care benefits to include more cost-saving measures, according to a recent survey conducted by the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans. The financial crisis and escalating health care costs are motivating public plan sponsors to change both their plan design and plan funding. The survey found that 72 percent of public employers are increasing or considering an increase in their employees' deductibles, coinsurance or co-pays. In addition, 74 percent of public employers are increasing or considering an increase in employee premiums." (Wolters Kluwer)
[Opinion] ERISA Preemption, Health Care Pay or Play, and the Supreme Court
Excerpt: "I have said it time and time again on this blog, that ERISA preemption serves the admirable, even if perhaps inadvertent, role of forcing health care to be tackled at the only level it can be adequately addressed, the federal one, and not at the level of state governments, which simply don't have the resources to pull it off . . . ." (Stephen Rosenberg of The McCormack Firm, LLC)
Recent Health Care Contracts Show How Performance Guarantees Have Evolved
Excerpt: "Employers have long bemoaned the fact that they pay more each year for health care services regardless of whether those services improve the health of employees. [Aligning] incentives represents the evolution of performance guarantees in health care contracts. Pioneered by employers, these contracts are helping to refocus the culture of health care so that instead of paying for a service, employers pay to improve a person's health. While overall costs may not go down, these kinds of guarantees mean employers will be spending their health care dollars more effectively. Rather than paying for health care services, employers will be paying vendors only if they can show they've improved the health of employees." (Workforce Management; free registration required)
Tracking the Money in the Health Care Debate
Excerpt: "Three huge bills are bubbling on Capitol Hill right now: financial regulation, a new energy policy and health care reform. It's a historic confluence of issues that, as a consequence, has the Capitol swarming with lobbyists and awash with money. NPR is launching a new investigative series to report on these Dollar Politics." (Morning Edition via National Public Radio)
Health Care Reform Legislation Could Bring Changes in the Way Employers Structure Group Health Plans
Excerpt: "[With a public plan,] Large employers would be subject to a pay-or-play mandate. They could choose to continue their existing plans, adjusting the benefit design and eligibility if needed to satisfy federal standards as well as subsidizing a portion of the cost of coverage to be determined by Congress. Employers failing to offer this minimum coverage and to adequately subsidize it would be required to make a per-employee payment to the government. Amounts currently under consideration are $6,000 per year or possibly 6% of payroll. One of the lead proposals under consideration in Congress provides that the employer would still be required to send the 'normal contribution' to the exchange for employees who declined to enroll in the employer's plan and instead obtained private coverage." (Towers Perrin)
Comparing the Impact of Selected Policy Options for Financing Health Reform
Excerpt: "A number of policies have been proposed to expand health insurance coverage and improve health system performance in a financially sustainable way. To illustrate how the potential impact of such reforms depends heavily on the details and structure of the reforms, the authors examine estimates from three sources: a recent Commonwealth Fund report containing projections prepared by The Lewin Group; the Office of Management and Budget; and the Congressional Budget Office. Estimates from all three sources indicate that early investments in reform could yield significant reductions in total health care spending over time through gains in the quality and efficiency of care." (The Commonwealth Fund)
Senators Worry That Health Overhaul Could Erode Employer Insurance Plans
Excerpt: "As part of an ambitious plan to overhaul the health care system, Democrats in both houses of Congress want to require people to carry insurance. They would offer subsidies to low- and moderate-income people who buy coverage through a new regulated market known as a health insurance exchange. Employers who do not provide coverage might have to pay penalties or contribute to a government fund. Higher penalties are more effective in preventing the erosion of employer-sponsored coverage, the bedrock of insurance for more than 150 million Americans, the Congressional Budget Office told lawmakers." (The New York Times; free registration required)
Alternative Paths to a High Performance U.S. Health System
Excerpt: "A controversial part of the health reform debate is whether a new public insurance plan choice should be offered to the under-65 population. This report analyzes alternative paths to reform and presents estimates of impacts on health spending. The approaches include: 1) a public health plan paying providers at Medicare rates, offered alongside private plans in a national health insurance exchange; 2) a public plan paying providers at rates set midway between Medicare and private plan rates, offered alongside private plans in an insurance exchange; and 3) no public plan, with only private plans offered to employers and individuals through an insurance exchange. All three approaches, if combined with Medicare payment and system reform, would produce substantial savings over time, but option 1 would yield the most -- $3.0 trillion in cumulative health system savings over 2010 to 2020, compared with $2.0 trillion (option 2) and $1.2 trillion (option 3)." (The Commonwealth Fund)
[Guidance Overview] Supreme Court Review of San Francisco Health Insurance Mandate Sought by Restaurateurs
Excerpt: "The case involves San Francisco's 'fair share' ordinance, which requires employers with at least 20 employees to provide health coverage for their San Francisco workers. If they do not comply, employers must pay a fee to support city health clinics." (Law.com)
Senator Baucus Reportedly Considering Ways to Tax Health Benefits
Excerpt: "FOX Business claims to have obtained a five-page presentation, prepared by the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Max Baucus (D-Montana), that proposes 'options to limit allowable tax free health benefits.' According to FOX Business the document lists four ways to tax benefits starting in 2013, when many reform proposals would take full effect . . . ." (PLANSPONSOR.com; free registration required)
Senate Finance Committee Might Revise Its Health Care Bill
Excerpt: "Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said on Sunday that the panel would consider revisiting its version of health-care legislation to gain more support." (The New York Times; free registration required)
[Guidance Overview] Options to Remove Liabilities for High Retiree Medical Costs from a Company's Balance Sheet: VEBAs (PDF)
2 pages. Excerpt: "The creation and structuring of the VEBA must fulfill a number of legal requirements all of which are normally manageable. Depending upon how the retiree medical VEBA is to be funded, there are a number of other approvals that may be required and SEC filings that must be made for companies with registered securities if the settlement agreement is a 'material agreement.' Further, the VEBA will allow for different accounting treatments of the change. If the company has securities registered with the Securities Exchange Commission, the company's accounting treatment can be verified by obtaining approval of the proposed accounting treatment through the office of the Chief Accountant at the SEC and the appropriate Counsel's office." (Haynes & Boone)
Factsheet: Investing in Health Coverage Makes Sense for Everyone (PDF)
4 pages. Excerpt: "Insured employees are healthier and more productive on the job. Therefore, investing in health coverage will make the workforce healthier and more productive. Higher productivity, in turn, will make the United States more competitive in the global economy. In addition, expanding coverage and making coverage more affordable will increase job mobility and make the labor market work more efficiently." (Families USA)
Health Care Cuts Could Shift Costs to Private Sector
Excerpt: "Unless doctors and hospitals are able to respond to the government cuts by becoming more efficient, the result could be higher costs for insurers, employers, and people with private medical coverage, [economists] say. Historically, health-care spending has been a bit like a balloon: If it is squeezed in one place, it tends to bulge in another. 'I think there's definitely risk that a portion of the reduction in hospital payments from Medicare will wind up as increased payments by private insurers,' said Paul B. Ginsburg, president of the Center for Studying Health System Change." (The Washington Post; free registration required)
CalPERS Plan To Raise Health Care Premiums Receives Final Approval
Excerpt: "On Wednesday, the CalPERS Board of Administration voted to give final approval to a proposal to raise public workers' and retirees' health insurance premiums by an average of 2.9%, the lowest rate increase in 14 years, the Sacramento Business Journal reports . . . ." (California HealthCare Foundation)
Report Says Healthcare Costs to Rise 9% in 2010
Excerpt: "Employers who offer health insurance coverage could see a 9% cost increase next year, and their workers may face an even bigger hit, according to a report from consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers. Costs will rise in part because workers worried about losing their jobs are using their healthcare more while they still have it, the firm said in the report. The report also said rising unemployment is driving up medical costs." (HealthLeaders Media)
Obama's Health Plan Needs Spending Controls, CBO Says
Excerpt: "President Obama's plan to expand health coverage to the uninsured is likely to dig the nation deeper into debt unless policymakers adopt politically painful controls on spending, such as sharp reductions in payments to doctors, hospitals and other providers, congressional budget analysts said . . . ." (The Washington Post; free registration required)
Some Media Reports Mischaracterize CBO Estimate of Senate 'HELP' Health Reform Bill Cost
Excerpt: "The news media are widely reporting that, according to a partial and preliminary Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analysis, health reform legislation that the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) is developing would cut the number of uninsured by only 16 million people while costing $1 trillion over ten years. That conclusion, however, is incorrect. The CBO analysis covers only a part of the HELP plan (the parts for which the Committee gave CBO detailed specifications) and does not include major elements of the plan that would further substantially reduce the number of uninsured." (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities)
CBO Response to Questions About Health Care Industry Stakeholders' Proposals (PDF)
3 page letter to Rep. Dave Camp. Excerpt: "You asked the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to review the documents accompanying a letter to the President in which a group of health care industry stakeholders describe their commitments to reduce health care costs, strengthen quality, and improve access. In particular, you asked CBO to determine the level of savings that their proposals would yield for the federal government. The industry leaders' attention to these goals and agreement that significant savings can be obtained are no doubt welcome. However, most of the proposals are steps that do not require the involvement of the federal government or are not specified at a level of detail that would enable CBO to estimate budgetary savings." (U.S. Congressional Budget Office)
Cost Concerns Rise as Obama Pushes Health Reform Issue
Excerpt: "Congress is wrestling with how to pay for Mr. Obama's vision to extend health care to all Americans, and some lawmakers are considering tax increases and spending cuts different from the ones he has proposed. House Democrats, for example, are weighing a tax on soft drinks and a value-added tax, a broad-based consumption tax similar to the sales taxes many states levy." (The New York Times; free registration required)
Understanding Healthcare Plan Costs and Complexities (PDF)
5 pages. (Milliman)
Preliminary Analysis of Major Provisions Related to Health Insurance Coverage Under the Affordable Health Choices Act (PDF)
10 pages. Excerpt: "The attached table summarizes our preliminary assessment of the proposal's budgetary effects and its likely impact on insurance coverage. According to that assessment, enacting the proposal would result in a net increase in federal budget deficits of about $1.0 trillion over the 2010?2019 period. Once the proposal was fully implemented, about 39 million individuals would obtain coverage through the new insurance exchanges. At the same time, the number of people who had coverage through an employer would decline by about 15 million (or roughly 10 percent), and coverage from other sources would fall by about 8 million, so the net decrease in the number of people uninsured would be about 16 million." (U.S. Congressional Budget Office)
Following the Money in the Health Care Debate
Excerpt: "Roughly $2.5 trillion is at stake, the amount the nation spends each year on health care, nearly a fifth of the American economy. How that money is divided up -- or prevented from rising at its current pace -- is at the center of the debate. Many doctors, insurance companies and drug companies say they fear that their revenues could shrink significantly and patient care could be threatened. Their arguments may prove to have merit." (The New York Times; free registration required)
Congressional Budget Office Set to Roll Out Cost Estimates for Health Reform Proposals
Excerpt: "The CBO's estimates, the first set of which are due next week, carry a lot of weight because Congress uses them in making legislative decisions. In an age of trillion-dollar budget deficits, the numbers will carry even more weight than usual. 'Strictly speaking, the CBO advises the budget committees, and the committees can override what CBO recommends. But they rarely do,' said Robert Reischauer, who headed the CBO during the infamous health care debate during the Clinton administration." (CNNMoney.com)
Self-Insured Employers Are Particularly Concerned the Mental Health Parity Act May Increase Their Healthcare Costs
Excerpt: "On an employer-by-employer basis, the financial impact of the act can be evaluated by considering two factors: the current level of mental-health and substance-abuse coverage; and the percentage of covered members reaching the current treatment limits. Plans that have comprehensive mental-health and substance-abuse benefits in place already will be less likely to experience an increase in costs than plans that offer limited services or have high co-pays and deductibles." (Human Resource Executive Online)
Loopholes in Massachusetts Health Care Law Leave Room for Limits on Coverage
Excerpt: "The state's pioneering healthcare law requires residents to have insurance that meets minimum standards, but regulators are discovering many employers' plans test the limits by exploiting loopholes in the rules. Regulators yesterday said that reviews of scores of health plans show many cap the benefits insurers pay each year on prescription drug coverage, exclude maternity coverage for dependents, or place an annual overall dollar limit on benefits. Jamie Katz, general counsel for the Connector Authority, which oversees the state's health initiative, said the gaps raise 'difficult issues' because companies are assuming their plans are adequate in the absence of specific regulations that say otherwise." (The Boston Globe)
How Congress Might Tax Your Health Benefits
Excerpt: "Lawmakers are considering taxing [health benefits] to help pay for ambitious plans to overhaul the U.S. health system, estimated to cost more than $1 trillion over 10 years. There's a lot of money at stake: Because health benefits are excluded from payroll and income taxes, the U.S. Treasury lost out on $226 billion in 2008, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. In an estimate circulating this week, the committee says taxing workers' health benefits above a certain threshold could bring in $418.5 billion over 10 years." (Kaiser Family Foundation)
FSAs Could Be Sacrificed in Hunt for Health Overhaul Money
Excerpt: "FSAs, which allow consumers to put aside before-tax dollars to pay for medical expenses, are getting close scrutiny as Congress scours the health system for money to finance an ambitious expansion of insurance. The Joint Committee on Taxation told Senate leaders recently they could collect $68.6 billion over 10 years by abolishing the accounts, along with separate ones in which employers contribute money for workers to use for health care expenses. Eliminating both types of accounts would pay for four percent or more of the estimated $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion cost of expanding coverage to the 46 million uninsured." (Kaiser Family Foundation)
Why Does U.S. Healthcare Reform Founder?
Excerpt: "A recent study by the McKinsey Global Institute found that the US spends $650 billion more on healthcare than might be expected given its wealth and the experience of comparable well-to-do nations. Roughly two-thirds of that excess pays for outpatient care, including visits to physicians, same-day hospital treatment, and emergency-room care, often expensive tasks relying primarily on paid individuals and not medical machines. The lead author of that study, Diana Farrell, has gone to the White House to work for Lawrence Summers, head of the National Economic Council. Of course, many reformers hope to squeeze costly inefficiencies out of the US healthcare system. For instance, a new study published in Health Affairs, an academic journal, finds the time cost to physicians of dealing with health plans runs $23 billion to $31 billion each year. Reformers also point to the use of costly medical procedures when less expensive ones work as well or better." (The Christian Science Monitor)
Interest Groups Rebel at the Idea That New Healthcare Coverage Costs Will Fall on Them
Excerpt: "[T]he prospect of new taxes, new fees for businesses and cutbacks in other government spending has set off a furious behind-the-scenes struggle that is reviving the old maxim attributed to the late Sen. Russell Long of Louisiana: 'Don't tax you, don't tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree.' Faced with a proposal to increase the tax on liquor and soft drinks, for instance, the liquor lobby sent Anchor Brewing Co. of San Francisco to see House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco). The milk industry objected too, saying it would have to raise the price of chocolate milk. And when congressional Democrats started warming up to the idea of curbing the tax break for employer-provided health benefits, the labor movement attacked one of the idea's leading champions, liberal Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)." (Los Angeles Times)
[Guidance Overview] Are Stop Loss Carriers Subject to Prompt Pay Statutes?
Excerpt: "Stop loss insurance is frequently the subject of inquiry that borders on the metaphysical. Is it a form of accident and health insurance? Property and casualty insurance? Is it 'reinsurance'? This recent legal opinion from the New York Insurance Department is interesting. It required classification of stop loss insurance in the first instance. The ultimate question was whether stop loss carriers are subject to New York's prompt pay laws." (Roy Harmon III via Health Plan Law)
Public Employers Respond to Financial 'Crisis' and Rising Health Care Costs by Raising Employee Cost Sharing, Premiums
Excerpt: "Nearly three-fourths of public employers are increasing or considering increasing their employees' cost sharing for health insurance, according to a recent survey conducted by the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans (IFEBP)." (Wolters Kluwer)
Savings Needed for Health Expenses in Retirement: An Examination of Persons Ages 55 and 65 in 2009 (PDF)
Pages of 20 pages. Excerpt: "This report updates earlier EBRI research on estimated savings needed to cover health insurance to supplement Medicare and out-of-pocket expenses for health care services in retirement. It finds that men age 65 in 2009 retiring this year will need anywhere from $68,000?$173,000 in savings to cover health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket expenses in retirement if they want a 50?50 chance of being able to have enough money, and $134,000?$378,000 if they prefer a 90 percent chance. With their greater longevity, women will need more: a women retiring at age 65 in 2009 will need anywhere from $98,000?$242,000 in savings to cover health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket expenses inretirement for a 50?50 chance of having enough money, and $164,000?$450,000 for a 90 percent chance." (Employee Benefit Research Institute)
Health Care Reform: The Devil Is in the Details
Excerpt: "Two pressure points are emerging in Congress's rush to pass health-care legislation by the August break: how to pay for the package and whether to create a new public health-insurance plan. Douglas Elmendorf, director of the Congressional Budget Office, said Monday his office has given lawmakers a 'tremendous quantity of numbers' as they weigh how much it will cost to extend coverage to millions of uninsured Americans and how much revenue will be raised by proposed tax increases." (The Wall Street Journal)
Limiting Employer Tax Exclusion May Help Pay for Health Reform
Excerpt: "The current exclusion is poorly designed, which gives a greatest benefit to those with higher incomes, according to the report. The higher exclusion can provide an incentive for employers and individuals to select more generous or costly coverage, which in turn could lead to an increase in healthcare service demand that pushes up prices. In a way, limiting tax exclusions could push in the direction of greater efficiency in the healthcare system. . . . Those with higher benefits might end up seeking more economical plans that use resources more effectively." (HealthLeaders Media via HCPro, Inc.)
[Opinion] An Employee Benefit Consultant's Perspective on Health Care Reform: The Fundamental Problem
Excerpt: "EBS believes in the need to reform our health care delivery and financing system. We believe that the fundamental problem with the current system is that the rate of increase in cost is not controlled in any effective manner. America will not have true health care reform if it does not address all of the cost drivers in a meaningful way." (Employee Benefit Solutions)
Supreme Court Asked to Decide Legality of San Francisco Health Care Rule
Excerpt: "The Golden Gate Restaurant Association filed a petition v on Monday asking the U.S. Supreme Court to make the final decision on whether San Francisco's mandate that employers pay for health care coverage is legal. The city's first-of-its-kind universal health care program, dubbed Healthy San Francisco, began two years ago and requires that employers with at least 20 employees provide health insurance, set up health care spending accounts or pay into the city's fund." (San Francisco Chronicle)
Taxing Health Benefits
Excerpt: "[T]oday employers are Americans' primary and most affordable source for health insurance. But in myriad ways, the system is far from perfect. For starters, tax and health experts say, it's inequitable. High-income workers and those with the most expensive health insurance plans enjoy the biggest break as a result of the tax exclusion. Not that anyone's really aware of that, though, which is part of the problem, experts say. Workers don't know how much their health benefits really cost because they only pay a portion of the bill." (CNNMoney.com)
Audio and Text: The Risks and Rewards of Taxing Health Benefits
Excerpt: "For lawmakers looking for a way to fund a health care overhaul, employee benefits are a juicy target. Taxing those benefits could raise as much as $150 billion a year. But that's not what excites heath care economists: They say taxing benefits also could make the system work better." (Morning Edition via National Public Radio)
[Opinion] The President's Main Case for Reform Is Rooted in False Claims and Little Evidence
Excerpt: "The main White House argument for health-care reform goes something like this: If we spend now on a hugely expensive new insurance program for the middle class, we can save later by reducing overall U.S. health spending. This 'tastes great, less filling' theory could stand some scrutiny, not least because it is being used to rush through the greatest social spending program in American history. What if this particular theory turns out to be a political illusion? What if the speculative cost savings never report for duty, while the federal balance sheet is still swamped with new social obligations that will be impossible to repeal? The only possible outcome will be the nationalization of U.S. health markets, which will mean that almost all care will be rationed by politics." (The Wall Street Journal)
Restaurant Owners' Group to Ask Supreme Court to Review San Francisco Health Care Spending Law
Excerpt: "A San Francisco-area restaurant trade association intends to file a petition next week with the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to review a 2008 federal appeals court decision upholding the legality of San Francisco's health care spending law." (Workforce Management; free registration required)
Finding Resources for Health Reform and Bending the Health Care Cost Curve
Excerpt: "In addition to the initial investments enacted in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the president has included a $634 billion health reform reserve fund in his 2010 budget as a downpayment on health reform, leaving the legislative details to Congress. Comprehensive reform will likely require an investment of $1 trillion or more over the 2010?19 period to achieve coverage for all and implement critical system reforms. This report examines policy options that could slow growth in health spending, improve health outcomes, and provide additional revenues to finance comprehensive reform. It also illustrates how widely estimates of policy options can vary based on underlying assumptions. The rich menu of options presented here, along with impact estimates, should help policy leaders identify the resources required to make health coverage for all and improved health system performance a reality." (The Commonwealth Fund)
The Economic Case for Health Care Reform (PDF)
56 pages. Excerpt: "The Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) has undertaken a comprehensive analysis of the economic impacts of health care reform. The report provides an overview of current economic impacts of health care in the United States and a forecast of where we are headed in the absence of reform; an analysis of inefficiencies and market failures in the current health care system; a discussion of the key components of health care reform; and an analysis of the economic effects of slowing health care cost growth and expanding coverage. The findings in the report point to large economic impacts of genuine health care reform . . . ." (Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers)
[Opinion] Paying for Universal Health Coverage
Excerpt: "For Congress and the administration to keep the promise of comprehensive health care reform, they will have to find the political will to pay for universal coverage and other investments that are needed right away but will not produce quick savings. The cost could reach $1.5 trillion over the next decade. President Obama, who had already proposed some $634 billion in new taxes and spending cuts, endorsed additional ideas last week. But Congressional Democrats will almost certainly need to come up with a lot more money -- and that is likely to mean new taxes." (The New York Times; free registration required)
How The White House Hopes to Control Health Care Costs
Excerpt: "Senate sources confirm that the president argued in favor of a genuinely major Medicare reform -- a reform that could make Medicare the nation's most important laboratory for health care reforms." (Washington Post; free registration required)
[Opinion] Obama's Voodoo Health Economics
Excerpt: "It's true that premiums are increasing rapidly. But the White House report incorrectly blames health costs. The real cause is the declining share of care paid for out of pocket (down to 15% today from 33% in 1975). Auto-insurance premiums would also skyrocket if coverage suddenly included oil changes and tune-ups." (The Wall Street Journal)
Debate Over Taxing Health Benefits Picks Up
Excerpt: "Meanwhile, the idea of a cap on employer-provided health benefits is gaining traction on Capitol Hill. Ways and Means Chairman Charles B. Rangel, D-NY, has opposed the tax cap, but CQ reports that Democrats on the committee 'hold a thin line of resistance.'" (Kaiser Health News)
[Guidance Overview] Untapped Opportunities for Actuaries in the Health Industry
Excerpt: "In 2006 and 2007, two separate surveys, as well as interviews with actuaries in senior level positions in the health industry, pointed out a significant risk to our profession: actuaries with health actuarial technical skills, and especially those with comprehensive health care knowledge, are in short supply." (Society of Actuaries)
[Opinion] Health, Life Insurers Hold Billions in Tobacco Stocks
Excerpt: "A new article on insurance company holdings, published in today's New England Journal of Medicine, shows that U.S., Canadian and U.K.-based insurance firms hold at least $4.4 billion of investments in companies whose subsidiaries manufacture cigarettes, cigars, chewing tobacco and related products. . . . 'These data raise a red flag about the prospects of opening up vast new markets for private insurers at public expense, as has happened in our state of Massachusetts, whose recent health care reform is often cited as a model for national reform.'" (Physicians for a National Health Program)
[Guidance Overview] Arizona Lawmakers Move to End Domestic Partner Benefits
Excerpt: "Senate President Bob Burns, R-Peoria, said legislative oversight is particularly important this year, with the state running a deficit, and given there is a cost involved. Department of Administration spokesman Alan Ecker said domestic partner coverage costs the state about $3 million a year on top of the $625 million Arizona spent on health insurance for other employees." (Bloomberg News via Arizona Daily Star)
Putting Healthcare Plans Out to Bid Can Reap Savings
Excerpt: "Forcing vendors to aggressively bid against one another in an open, eBay-like platform such as the one that HighRoads operates invariably drives down prices, she says. The trick is to demystify the health plan shopping process and treat it more like a straightforward procurement effort similar to the way companies buy office supplies. The result is usually a reduction in costs, Dustin says." (Workforce.com)
Court of Appeals Hearing is Friday on Treatment of Indiana Pension Fund as Bondholder in Chrysler Deal
Excerpt: "A U.S. Court of Appeals agreed on Tuesday [June 2] to hear a challenge to Chrysler LLC's sale of most of its assets to a group led by Italian automaker Fiat . . . . A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will hear arguments in the appeal on Friday at 2 p.m. EDT (1800 GMT) in New York, according to a court order on Tuesday." (New York Times)
New York City Labor Unions Agree to Reductions in Health Benefits
Excerpt: "The agreement imposes the $50 to $100 co-payments for about one-fifth of current and retired city employees, and eliminates coverage for preventive dental care at certain offices. For most other city employees, the plan would restrict certain hospital, ambulatory and hemodialysis coverage to network providers and would implement several other administrative cost-saving measures." (New York Times)
Trends In the Affordability of Employer-Provided Healthcare Coverage, 2004-2007
Excerpt: "Health plans covered slightly fewer expenses in 2007 than in 2004, but out-of-pocket spending grew more than one-third because of growth in overall health spending. For people at 200 percent of poverty, the percentage spending more than 10 percent of their income out of pocket on premiums plus services increased from 13 percent to 18 percent." (Health Affairs)
[Opinion] How Certain Healthcare Reforms Would Raise Premiums (PDF)
2 pages. Excerpt: "Members of Congress are considering universal coverage, guaranteed issue and community rating. These reforms could increase the cost of health insurance 75 to 95 percent for most Americans who buy their own coverage, according to a new study by the Council for Affordable Health Insurance (CAHI) and health insurance actuary Mark Litow." (Council for Affordable Health Insurance)
The links shown above have been gathered from the web by the editors at BenefitsLink.com. Each article's publisher is shown above in parentheses. Opinions expressed in each article are those of the article's publisher, not necessarily those of BenefitsLink.com, Inc. or any web site that displays these headlines in a "frame." You should contact the listed publisher for copyright information about any particular article or to inquire into the right to use the article in any manner.