Colorado Division Of Insurance Announces Significant Changes To The Individual Market

  • Thread starter LocalGrowGuy
  • Start date
  • Tagged users None
LocalGrowGuy

LocalGrowGuy

2,497
263
Now see here is the other side of the coin...Who is the Insurance connected to? The pharma companys. What is the largest profit generating sector of the economy? Pharma.
Wrong. On so many levels. If pharmaceuticals were so profitable, then where are the Kaiser Pharmacy Outlet stores? Where are the Humana Drug Companies?

Insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies have different agendas, they do not compete with each other.

Where are you getting your information? How is 'The Insurance' defined? Do you realize how obscure this phrase is? What exactly is 'the insurance'? Are we still talking health insurance?
 
LocalGrowGuy

LocalGrowGuy

2,497
263
heres what happens when you miss that 400 % rule by a dollar.
Losing $13,000 in subsidies
Consider a couple, ages 60 and 63, living in the town of Rifle, in the Colorado mountains. (Rifle is a regular town, not a resort community. The median household income is under $59,000, and the median home value is about $256,000 – far below the nearly $700,000 median home value in Aspen. In short, Rifle is not Aspen.) Health insurance is expensive in all Colorado mountain towns.

For our Rifle couple, the second lowest-cost Silver plan available through the state-run exchange, Connect for Health Colorado, is $1,587 per month. If our Rifle couple earns $62,100 per year, they qualify for a subsidy of $1,095 per month. But if they earn $62,200, they get no subsidy at all.

(Even though this amount is several hundred dollars less than 400 percent of 2014 poverty level, all calculations for the current open enrollment are based on 2013 poverty level, since open enrollment began in 2013. For the 2015 open enrollment that begins November 15, 2014, calculations will be based on 2014 poverty level numbers). An increase of $100 per year in income means the loss of $13,140 in subsidies for the year.

Source: https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/2014/03/15/beware-obamacares-subsidy-cliff/
Follow us: @EyeOnInsurance on Twitter | healthinsurance.org on Facebook
Rifle is not a regular town. Parker or Fort Morgan or Pueblo are regular towns. The mountains bring increased costs to the delivery of health care. That is what is expensive. Health insurance is expensive because the price of the delivery of health care is expensive. It's important to understand what health insurance is, how it works, and how it's changing. It is disingenuous to pick and choose parts to shit on. There are individual policies, large group, small group, self funded, partial self funded, fully insured, medicare and medicaid, chip and wic, subsidies etc.

The 400% of the poverty level also takes into account spending more than 9.5% of your income. You could earn less than 400% and still not qualify.

For those who think a subsidy is the way to go, it's a process. There is a lengthy financial application that you get to complete and send to the IRS. The IRS then checks with HHS, Dept of Social Security, Homeland Security, Veteran Affairs, the Dept of Defense, INS, the Peace Corps, and the Federal Office of Personel Management, everyone gets a copy of your financials, they determine your income stream and your subsidy is a function of that.
 
LocalGrowGuy

LocalGrowGuy

2,497
263
heres what happens when you miss that 400 % rule by a dollar.
Losing $13,000 in subsidies
Counterpoint:
http://www.rockymountainpost.com/he...-of-control-in-colorado-mountain-communities/
http://www.denverpost.com/2016/01/2...sidents-struggle-to-pay-for-health-insurance/

A bipartisan bill to study geographically leveling the playing field for health insurance customers in Colorado’s mountain resort region passed out of the state House Committee on Health, Insurance and Environment last week but faces an uncertain future on the full House floor and in the Republican-controlled Senate.

HB 1336 (pdf) would direct the Colorado Division of Insurance to study the feasibility of changing the current system of creating risk pools based on geographic regions under the Affordable Care Act. The state agency would be required to complete its report by Aug. 1, meaning changes could then be implemented by 2017 and rates then might come down.

Health insurance rates for self-employed workers and people unable to obtain insurance through their employers have skyrocketed in recent years, and Western Slope lawmakers have been grappling with a variety of strategies to combat the problem in a region where healthcare providers can be scarce or they charge inflated rates due to the high cost of living.

Avon mortgage broker Chris Neuswanger started a website called “Equalrates.com” to track the bill’s progress and advocate for its passage. It’s sponsored in the House by Summit County Democrat Millie Hamner and Carbondale Republican Bob Rankin and in the Senate by Durango Republican Ellen Roberts and Vail Democrat Kerry Donovan.

“We need to find out what’s truly driving costs,” Donovan told the Vail Daily last week. “We aren’t all rich second-home owners. We need to overcome those perceptions.”

Roberts told Real Vail in January that she would target the high cost of healthcare on the state’s Western Slope this legislative session. She primarily blames the Affordable Care Act, passed by Congress in 2010. The Denver Post ran a story in January pointing to a variety of factors for the 25 percent increase in health insurance rates between 2015 and 2016.


One factor in the overall increase in health insurance costs may be the runaway spike in the prices of pharmaceutical drugs. Legislative efforts to shed light on those costs were shot down in committee earlier this session.


As for the lack of providers, Eagle County at least should become increasingly competitive with the addition of Kaiser Permanente in Edwards and Centura Health in Avon. Real Vail spoke to those providers and a local health insurance broker for the following story that ran in the winter 2015-16 issue of The Parents Handbook

-----from the post link
Health care challenges
The insurance industry points to the challenges of providing health care services in the mountains to explain the high premiums.

There are “a very limited number of providers” in the mountain counties, said Charlie Sheffield, executive director of the Colorado Association of Health Plans. “Given the lack of population density and the lack of provider options, health care costs in that region are naturally going to be high. Thus, you’ll see higher premiums.”
 
LocalGrowGuy

LocalGrowGuy

2,497
263
We should probably just ask will smith's kid.

http://gizmodo.com/cyber-prophet-jaden-smith-to-elon-musk-water-1787070827

World leader in the making. Curious how he would fare in west Philadelphia.
You're on to something. Who would be VP?
Jadensmith01


Jadensmith1

Jadensmith2
 
LocalGrowGuy

LocalGrowGuy

2,497
263
I'll keep my health insurance crap in this thread so it's more easily ignored.

Meeting this am, rates for individuals in Colorado will surpass small group insurance rates for the first time. With the removal of medical underwriting carriers are forced to increase costs.

One issue is that of rural providers. Those Coloradans who live in rural or mountain communities have the highest insurance premiums in the nation. The reasons for this are many, but the biggest issue is that the cost of healthcare is more expensive in rural areas.

Another issue is medicaid and how to improve that program. As it stands, reimbursement for medicaid is lower than the cost of providers. We are seeing doctors still accepting medicaid patients, but they can only afford to see a limited number since they lose money by seeing those patients. Those who are told that they have to wait but still need care will go to the closest place that will see them, the ER. On average consumers will pay ten times in an ER that they would pay for the same treatment at a family doc. Expanding medicaid coverage is one of the solutions brought on by the ACA.

The fundamental disagreement with the ACA is cost versus access. There are big items that are missing or not addressed in the legislation. I would have thought they could find a spot in a 2,000 page bill but I guess not. Lowering the cost of health care is not mentioned or addressed, reimbursement increases to medicaid providers is also absent, and the biggest reason for these ridiculously high rates is the fact that there are no teeth in the individual mandate. Other troubling trends are insurance companies leaving the market which decreases access, the narrowing of networks in reduce costs, drastically high utilization coupled with adverse risk. There are still unanswered questions, such as how medicaid expansion will affect doctors and how they practice medicine, participation in the individual marketplace, and the potential for executive orders depending on who wins the election (we the people lose no matter what when our choices are a turd sandwich and a giant douche. Thank you south park.

Repealing the ACA is not anywhere near realistic and it's a waste of time. While I am not a fan, I do have to credit 'the system' for reducing the number of uninsured, the popularity and wide acceptance of the ACA, but the fact that there is no agreement on ideology with legislators is a nonstarter, and it is becoming more and more clear that true insurance reform can not happen in a purely voluntary system as it stands.

Amendment 69 will create a pilot program for a single payer system. Funded by a 10% payroll tax (third for employees, 2/3 for employers) On top of that, there would be a ten percent increase across the board on any and all non-payroll income, all streams. This would create the highest tax rate in the country, and the only requirements to be on the 21 member board are that you are over age 18 and a resident of this state. The requirements to vote are more rigorous than those to be on the board, which would not have to answer to anyone and they could impose unlimited tax increases to fund the program.
----------
General Info-
Carriers affected effective 1/1/2017-
Humana
United
Rocky Mountain Health Plans outside Mesa county)
Anthem PPO

Prioritize what matters when you are shopping for a new plan. We ask our clients to rank premium, doctors, hospitals, level of benefit, prescription, and then dental, and medication.

A very important question is, 'Do you have ownership in a business'. As we see individual rates rise, we see small group rates decrease to single digits. There is a lot of potential for creating 'micro-groups', association plans, groups of two with only one enrolling. We are encouraging our self employed clients to hire a non-spouse, pay them minimum wage for two pay periods at 30 hours per week, and then you have a two person group and the high rates for the same benefits become much more affordable. Also keep in mind ancillary benefits, vision, life, dental, STD and LTD etc. Subsidy qualification is also something that should be considered.

Our general agency has decided not to write business on the exchange due to major issues with access, tech support, online enrollment, processing payments, paying claims, missing information as well as a general attitude of laziness. It is unfortunate but we aren't willing to risk any compliance issues or deal with products that our E & O insurance doesn't cover.

Oh what fun it is.
 
GrowGod

GrowGod

BANNED!
Supporter
8,429
313
Quit your job then you get Medicaid and grow the green. Thanks Obamacare
 
LocalGrowGuy

LocalGrowGuy

2,497
263
Quit your job then you get Medicaid and grow the green. Thanks Obamacare
Yes, until you ask someone who has gone from medicaid to non medicaid. But your example is a good one of gaming the system, but gaming the system will have adverse effects, like insurance companies going away. I think you are much too bright to buy into Medicaid being a viable option at any time, let alone your scenario. I think you are safe though, as politicians have been saying forever that they will find and eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse of our federal aid programs. I can't say that with a straight face. If that's correct, then it means 'they' know that there is waste fraud and abuse but they choose to do nothing, instead using it as a bargaining chip to explain away budgets for pet projects and the pork. It's like the pro-A69 crowd, they say they can use the savings created from finding and eliminating waste fraud and abuse to help fund the program, but again, I don't see how they get from here to there.

Once you get tossed (or toss yourself; anyone at anytime can declare themselves indignant and be medicaid eligible) into the medicaid bucket, it is extremely difficult to get out. The problem here is that Medicaid doesn't work with outside producers or agents, so those on medicaid don't have an advocate to support them. Fluctuating earnings can affect benefits as well.

I'm still waiting on the whole 'affordable' part of the ACA to kick in. Man, the view is just pristine from these rose colored glasses.
 
scoop

scoop

422
143
I know quite a few folks playing the "poverty game on paper" by choice so they can avoid paying for their own insurance.

While i don't agree with such practices......I DO understand the draw to an extent. I mean...as someone who is now outside the workforce (voluntarily retired/no longer chasing the rotting carrot) and has no taxable income at this point in time...I'm VERY tempted to vote FOR Amendment 69 and let >everyone else< pay my way vs. the $1500 I am currently shelling out per month for health care...

Very.

Very.

Very.

Why shouldn't I? It seems to be en vogue now to free load...even if i CAN pay my own way. I mean...shouldn't I get mine as well? Fuck everyone else....huh?

Very.
 
M

mendel

2,038
263
Its not insurance, its the asshole tax you have to pay for voting dem in the state elections. Folk vote the liberal wealth re-distributors in, then pay the price.

Their shit is their shit, and your shit is too.
 
chickenman

chickenman

Premium Member
Supporter
10,698
438
Would rather have it spent on health care than endless wars...
 
M

mendel

2,038
263
So now dems are for peace, that doesnt follow the realities of the world today.
 
chickenman

chickenman

Premium Member
Supporter
10,698
438
Someday I do believe all this war, hate, fear will come crashing down and we will live with love in heart and mind...
someday the world will be a place where everyone can dance and sing the fears are all forgotten..
Someday we will learn to love....
In the mean time I will do my best to create my own world free from fear, hate, war.
I speak my mind, some of you think I am full of it.
Think what you may but for me will do my best to enrich my life, share with others just be nice, plant seeds of joy happiness and hope, better than bitching about how fucked we are and doing nothing to make the world a better place. It all starts with you......

So now dems are for peace, that doesnt follow the realities of the world today.

Who wants to see
A black and blue rainbow?
Not you or me
But there are things we should know
Theres a reason for everything
And a season for everything
The total of which is you
So you gotta see everything
Just to be everything
If you dont you�ll never know you

Always youll find
Chaos and confusion
Open your mind
Draw your own conclusions
Theres a reason for insanity
A season for it
All of its happening now
Just contain the insanity, maintain it
With a smile for every frown

If the vibrations arent quite right
And you dont know what to do
Dont inherit the uptight
Dont you know its up to you
Stay above the fuss and the fight
Baby the light will shine through

All things are true
No matter how they feel
Theyre part of you
Just live the part thats real
Theres a reason for living
And a season for giving
Always a light above
We are all of us living
Therefore all of us giving
And the reason for it all is love
 
smokedareefer

smokedareefer

1,773
263
Would rather have it spent on health care than endless wars...
military expenditures are the source of high profits.
healthcare expenditures are a source of high profits.
follow the dollar, isnt corporate America wonderfull?
we may be seeing the shift.
 
LocalGrowGuy

LocalGrowGuy

2,497
263
I know quite a few folks playing the "poverty game on paper" by choice so they can avoid paying for their own insurance.

While i don't agree with such practices......I DO understand the draw to an extent. I mean...as someone who is now outside the workforce (voluntarily retired/no longer chasing the rotting carrot) and has no taxable income at this point in time...I'm VERY tempted to vote FOR Amendment 69 and let >everyone else< pay my way vs. the $1500 I am currently shelling out per month for health care...

Very.

Very.

Very.

Why shouldn't I? It seems to be en vogue now to free load...even if i CAN pay my own way. I mean...shouldn't I get mine as well? Fuck everyone else....huh?

Very.
I have worked cases with clients that have seven figures in the bank but no income. It's frustrating to see stuff like this when it is so difficult for the rest of us to get quality and affordable care.

The fine for not having insurance is low enough that it is not a deterrent to purchasing insurance. Many of my clients have decided to pay the fine, and go without insurance, saving a year's worth of premium which they can then use to self insure for claims. The risk here is a major health event and not having coverage. Colorado doesn't allow retro-active enrollment.

While I would like to continue working this portion of my block of business, this model for individuals is not sustainable in the long term.

Scoop, you are right in your reasoning, but you don't want to see free health care in this state. If you thought recreational rules brought undesirables, what will free health care bring?

If you thought health care was expensive, just wait until it's free. Amendment 69 sounds good on paper, but so did the ACA in 2010, and look where we are.

It's the beginning of the end of private insurance. The ACA will eventually drive insurance carriers away or out of business, and a lot of people would be okay with that, and I can't disagree. However, the result of a failure of privatized healthcare would mean medicaid for all, and I don't see medicaid as a viable option either.

We will find ways around these rules and regs. The ACA did away with self employed people, also called business groups of one or BG1. They also disallowed groups of two where the two owners are husband/wife or male/female. Gay or lesbian marriages are unaffected. I would recommend that person A hire their mid 20's child and pay them minimum wage for 30 hours a week, having the spouse decline coverage, and having the owner enroll as an employee with spouse. This creates a two person or three person group, and the rates for small businesses are now lower than individuals. It used to be the opposite. A group plan is beneficial for person A because they can write off the premiums. Depending on Junior's financial status, those funds paid can be dumped back into the business. All the insurance company needs is payroll for two periods.
 
GrowGod

GrowGod

BANNED!
Supporter
8,429
313
Yes, until you ask someone who has gone from medicaid to non medicaid. But your example is a good one of gaming the system, but gaming the system will have adverse effects, like insurance companies going away. I think you are much too bright to buy into Medicaid being a viable option at any time, let alone your scenario. I think you are safe though, as politicians have been saying forever that they will find and eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse of our federal aid programs. I can't say that with a straight face. If that's correct, then it means 'they' know that there is waste fraud and abuse but they choose to do nothing, instead using it as a bargaining chip to explain away budgets for pet projects and the pork. It's like the pro-A69 crowd, they say they can use the savings created from finding and eliminating waste fraud and abuse to help fund the program, but again, I don't see how they get from here to there.

Once you get tossed (or toss yourself; anyone at anytime can declare themselves indignant and be medicaid eligible) into the medicaid bucket, it is extremely difficult to get out. The problem here is that Medicaid doesn't work with outside producers or agents, so those on medicaid don't have an advocate to support them. Fluctuating earnings can affect benefits as well.

I'm still waiting on the whole 'affordable' part of the ACA to kick in. Man, the view is just pristine from these rose colored glasses.
It's insane I have to have insurance when I don't even use it. And must pay fine for not having it that's where they went wrong!
 
GrowGod

GrowGod

BANNED!
Supporter
8,429
313
And how the hell do they make it so Medicaid pays less then someone paying out of pocket or with united healthcare??? Medicare should be paying what everyone else pays:smoking:
 
Natural

Natural

2,536
263
And how the hell do they make it so Medicaid pays less then someone paying out of pocket or with united healthcare??? Medicare should be paying what everyone else pays:smoking:
Because with medicaid you can only have very little income and very little assets. Say 900/month income and less than 2k in the bank..own a primary home. It's mainly for disabled, pregnant, seniors and children...and especially long term care aka nursing home. The over-sight benefits persons who are able to hide assets/income and also the fact that they only check on those things annually. Obamacare isn't exactly medicaid..it's a subsidiary or medicaid program that helps those just above medicaid requirements. When you apply, your status becomes scrutinized..not as easy as just asking for it.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom