Here's Aetna's Position on Reform

[insurehound]

The Massachusetts election and its aftermath: Aetna's perspective​

Given the results of the Massachusetts Senate election and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's announcement Thursday, the prospects for passage of health care reform legislation, as currently drafted, changed considerably this week. There is ongoing discussion in the media, among government leaders and the public about what it all means, and we would like to provide you with our perspective based on our lengthy involvement in the process.

Decision makers are still trying to determine their next steps. Key members of the House and Senate have been meeting since the Massachusetts election to discuss the status of the health care reform legislation, but it is clear from the Speaker's remarks Thursday that the votes are not there to fast-track the Senate bill by having the House pass it as is.

It will take more time to determine where the health care reform debate goes in the weeks and months ahead. But if this week's election results provide an opportunity for careful reflection and reasoned bipartisan debate, that would be a positive. At Aetna, our hope is that lawmakers will come together, really think about how to create a sustainable public/private partnership, and help consumers by creating a better path to coverage with a credible focus on costs.

As an industry leader, we continue to call for meaningful health care reform, which we define as addressing both health care access and affordability. We continue to believe that the status quo is unacceptable and unsustainable, that reform should cover all Americans, that pre-existing conditions should be a thing of the past, and that reform must make health care more affordable for working families and small businesses. These goals are achievable and should be pursued on a bipartisan basis.



As you know, Aetna has been committed to meaningful reform since first calling for an individual coverage requirement in 2005. Our position has not changed. Throughout the health reform process, we have shown a desire to be constructive, and we will continue to do so by offering responsible solutions.


See Aetna's work to transform Health Care in America.
http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0
http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0
http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0
http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0
http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0
http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0
http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0

 

[Crabcake Johnny]

Laughable. The fix was in and now it's not; GI with the gov't providing tax credits, mandated coverage, etc...and now it's all slipping away.

The only thing Aetna is "for" is Aetna.

 

[insurehound]

Am I missing something? Couldn't they have put GI in place years ago if they really felt that way? How can they make money on GI? Wouldn't that eventually put them out of business and/or cause our premiums to go up even more?

 

[Expat]

The Massachusetts election and its aftermath: Aetna's perspective​

Given the results of the Massachusetts Senate election and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's announcement Thursday, the prospects for passage of health care reform legislation, as currently drafted, changed considerably this week. There is ongoing discussion in the media, among government leaders and the public about what it all means, and we would like to provide you with our perspective based on our lengthy involvement in the process.

Decision makers are still trying to determine their next steps. Key members of the House and Senate have been meeting since the Massachusetts election to discuss the status of the health care reform legislation, but it is clear from the Speaker's remarks Thursday that the votes are not there to fast-track the Senate bill by having the House pass it as is.

It will take more time to determine where the health care reform debate goes in the weeks and months ahead. But if this week's election results provide an opportunity for careful reflection and reasoned bipartisan debate, that would be a positive. At Aetna, our hope is that lawmakers will come together, really think about how to create a sustainable public/private partnership, and help consumers by creating a better path to coverage with a credible focus on costs.

As an industry leader, we continue to call for meaningful health care reform, which we define as addressing both health care access and affordability. We continue to believe that the status quo is unacceptable and unsustainable, that reform should cover all Americans, that pre-existing conditions should be a thing of the past, and that reform must make health care more affordable for working families and small businesses. These goals are achievable and should be pursued on a bipartisan basis.



As you know, Aetna has been committed to meaningful reform since first calling for an individual coverage requirement in 2005. Our position has not changed. Throughout the health reform process, we have shown a desire to be constructive, and we will continue to do so by offering responsible solutions.


See Aetna's work to transform Health Care in America.




Maybe they are going to apply for sainthood.

 

[insurehound]

I sure did miss something, thanks Expat

 

[ins.dave]

http://links.mkt2614.com/ctt?kn=4&m=2741461&r=MTI3NDM3Mzk5ODUS1&b=0&j=MTY5NTc1OTI1S0&mt=1&rt=0
​

Maybe they are going to apply for sainthood.

Yep.
Them and Al.

 

[scagnt83]

I hear that most health companies are pushing for government subsidies for each customer who would normally be uninsurable. Not only initially upon issue, but as a percentage of claims as well. So their loss ratios on claims would not take a big dip.

So not only does the company get a huge increase in customers (uninsurables + mandatory coverage). But the poor customers premiums will be subsidized by the government. And the company losses on high risk clients are subsidized by the government as well.

Apparently this is gaining more clout, and im sure this is what Aetna is speaking of when they say they support a "public/private partnership" and that they support GI....
Not the current or old bills version, but there own.
In my opinion both versions are an atrocity to the tax payers.

 

[Freddie]

Laughable. The fix was in and now it's not; GI with the gov't providing tax credits, mandated coverage, etc...and now it's all slipping away.

The only thing Aetna is "for" is Aetna.

I thought Liberman would stop it because of Aetna. He caved so they must have worked out a side deal for Aetna like Nelson's deal for Neb.

Thank goodness for Scott Brown.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I hear that most health companies are pushing for government subsidies for each customer who would normally be uninsurable. Not only initially upon issue, but as a percentage of claims as well. So their loss ratios on claims would not take a big dip.

So not only does the company get a huge increase in customers (uninsurables + mandatory coverage). But the poor customers premiums will be subsidized by the government. And the company losses on high risk clients are subsidized by the government as well.

Apparently this is gaining more clout, and im sure this is what Aetna is speaking of when they say they support a "public/private partnership" and that they support GI....
Not the current or old bills version, but there own.
In my opinion both versions are an atrocity to the tax payers.

Sounds like BCBS in Dade County, FL where the premiums are about 40% lower even though the county is fraud central and more urban.

 

[scagnt83]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sounds like BCBS in Dade County, FL where the premiums are about 40% lower even though the county is fraud central and more urban.

Yeah. The system is great if you have no morals and know how to work it!!

 

[snowverkill]

+1 to scagnt83