Age Rating Under New Bill

[Winter_123]

I was reading somewhere that under one of the bills (versions anyway) being proposed by the house that carriers and the public option will be able to increase rates based on age (duh) but that the highest rate cannot be more than twice the lowest.

Hmmm... it is going to be hard enough getting the twenty year olds into the system, and it could get a whole lot harder if they are subsidizing the older folks to that degree. I would think anyway.

 

[somarco]

I believe the 2x limit is on those who are rated up for health conditions. But that only applies under a community rating model under one of the bills.

There is so much to read and all of it will probably not survive.

 

[Winter_123]

I believe the 2x limit is on those who are rated up for health conditions. But that only applies under a community rating model under one of the bills.

There is so much to read and all of it will probably not survive.

Yep. If Obama had laid out a plan we could be focusing on that. Instead, he just told Congress to develop a plan and he will entertain signing what looks good.

Right now "rated up under for health conditions" and guaranteed issue don't compute for me. Of course, as we know, there are ten forms of guaranteed issue. You have the Maine form which just means if you apply you are in based on whatever your age and tobacco status are and after that you pay the same as everyone else. Doesnt matter what your health is. And then there other forms of GI, such as Washington State, which just say that you are guaranteed to get a policy issued but you may have to go to the public pool and may have to rob a bank to pay for it. It certainly would be nice, at this late stage in the game, for someone to explain just what version Obama has in mind. Would that be asking too much? And does Obama know what his plan is or will he know it when he sees some legislation that looks good?

 

[somarco]

Rating loads and GI are what happens in the small group market. (See earlier thread). Same principle can apply in the individual market.

You are guaranteed to get a policy and here is the most the carrier can charge you.

 

[Winter_123]

Rating loads and GI are what happens in the small group market. (See earlier thread). Same principle can apply in the individual market.

You are guaranteed to get a policy and here is the most the carrier can charge you.

Yep. But you are describing groups and rates in Georgia, right? Now, I am asking what does Obama mean by guaranteed issue under his plan? Do we have rating loads for small group and rating up but GI for individual plans with his plan or we don't know. And does he know and or is he just waiting to see if Congress comes up with something good.

Obama insists that guaranteed issue with no denial for pre-x is fundamental to his plan. Okay fine. What does that mean. Does it mean guaranteed issue like Maine or like Washington State or some new system or what. This is what I am trying to figure out. I know we have to be patient and wait for developments but considering the fact that some zambonis want to pass a bill right now, it would seem that we should be able to know what the bill says about that.

 

[TXINSURANCE]

It means you only buy it when you need it because the penalty is far lower than the premiums in many cases anyhow.

It means further encouraging irresponsibility and over utilization.

 

[Winter_123]

It means you only buy it when you need it because the penalty is far lower than the premiums in many cases anyhow.

It means further encouraging irresponsibility and over utilization.

Right. I've got that piece. What I dont have is an understanding of whether by GI he is proposing a system wherein there will be underwritten ratings but you are guaranteed a plan somewhere even if you have to go to a public option and pay very high rates (Washington State model), or whether guraranteed issue means that every carrier must take you regardless of health status and there is no rating up for health conditions other than age and smoking (Maine model). Or one of the other five models or something new altogether.

If anyone knows what the house bill proposes, I would be eager to know. If Obama or the house have not clarified which of the ten scenarios that GI could be referring to, then just when the frig are we supposed to find out so that the legislators to make an informed decision and the public to comment.

Still looking for info here. Unfortuantely, I suspect Obama is still making it up as we go along so it does not exist. Nevermind that it is one of the pillars of his reform plan.

The dems are fond of saying that they have a plan and the repubs don't. That is fine in theory. In reality no one knows that the goddarn plan is other than a set of goals to be accomplished somehow in whatever form sticks when they sling it against the wall.

Obama is beginning to piss me off.

 

[TXINSURANCE]

What I dont have is an understanding of whether by GI he is proposing a system wherein there will be underwritten ratings but you are guaranteed a plan somewhere even if you have to go to a public option and pay very high rates (Washington State model), or whether guraranteed issue means that every carrier must take you regardless of health status and there is no rating up for health conditions other than age and smoking (Maine model). Or one of the other five models or something new altogether.

I read the bill as everyone must take you without rate up based on health OR smoking status. So even worse than Maine model.

I can't wait until this passes so I can go back on my pack of cigarette and 2 whopper a day diet.

 

[somarco]

I am asking what does Obama mean by guaranteed issue under his plan?

Why ask me? Even Mr. Fixit can't answer the question.

 

[Winter_123]

I read the bill as everyone must take you without rate up based on health OR smoking status. So even worse than Maine model.

As I mentioned earlier, I read somewhere that the bill said that the highest rate can be no more than twice the lowest. And, if it appears, as you are saying, that the higher rate is not based on health status or smoking then it presumably is on age alone.

Hence, my earlier comment that it would really hit the younger folks hard who are going to be hard enough to force into the plan as it is. Otherwise, if you charge the 20 year old a low premium you will go broke right off if you can only charge a 60 year old smoker twice that. Or if you work it backwards and charge the 20 year old half of what you are charging the 60 year old, you drive the young innvicibles out, more easily than they are already.

If the plan called for community based rates but allowed doubling up on the rates where certain health factors applied it might be different but that does not appear to be the case as we know it so far- but of course no one knows anything- even the ones sponsoring the bill.

What a frigging mess. Obama has a lot of splaining to do. Ideally he would do that before we passed a bill but based on TARP and Stimulus we know that that is not a requirement in this new world of transparency.

What a mess. I hope the voters butcher everyone and everything when congress is home for recess. Republicans, democrats, libertarians, the whole bunch of em. After this week, a real bloodbath would be helpful. No one knows where TARP went. No one knows what good if any stimulus has done and no one knows anything about a health reform bill that Obama wants/wanted passed by August 1. Obama says it will reduce the deficit. The CBO says it will put us in the poor house.

What a mess. As they in Quebec, I am piss.