More on CLASS

[Arthur Rudnick]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Sebelius: CLASS Program Will Be Implemented Only If It Is Viable.[/FONT]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']3/31[/FONT]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'] "Obama administration officials may have to tell Congress it has to break the health overhaul law by not implementing a long-term care insurance program if it cannot be reworked to become financially sustainable, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Wednesday." During testimony before the Senate Appropriations Health subcommittee, "Sebelius said if her staff can't make the program work financially, 'we won't turn the switch on it.'" HHS actuaries are working to ensure that the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) program will be viable for at 75 years, although "if we can't have a program design we know at the outset is going to be solvent, I think we'll return to Congress and say it won't be solvent and therefore we'll be violating the law," Sebelius said. [/FONT]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']I wonder why it took these fools over a year to finally understand what they were told from the get-go?[/FONT]

 

[Mr_Ed]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Sebelius: CLASS Program Will Be Implemented Only If It Is Viable.[/FONT]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']3/31[/FONT]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'] "Obama administration officials may have to tell Congress it has to break the health overhaul law by not implementing a long-term care insurance program if it cannot be reworked to become financially sustainable, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Wednesday." During testimony before the Senate Appropriations Health subcommittee, "Sebelius said if her staff can't make the program work financially, 'we won't turn the switch on it.'" HHS actuaries are working to ensure that the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) program will be viable for at 75 years, although "if we can't have a program design we know at the outset is going to be solvent, I think we'll return to Congress and say it won't be solvent and therefore we'll be violating the law," Sebelius said. [/FONT]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']I wonder why it took these fools over a year to finally understand what they were told from the get-go?[/FONT]

That is politician speak for:

"Give me the funding I need now, I promise I'll make this program work somehow."


I've said it before and I'll say it again:

The CLASS Act is the best thing to ever happen to the LTC insurance industry.

 

[retread]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']Sebelius: CLASS Program Will Be Implemented Only If It Is Viable.[/font]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']3/31[/font]
[FONT='Arial','sans-serif'] "Obama administration officials may have to tell Congress it has to break the health overhaul law by not implementing a long-term care insurance program if it cannot be reworked to become financially sustainable, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Wednesday." During testimony before the Senate Appropriations Health subcommittee, "Sebelius said if her staff can't make the program work financially, 'we won't turn the switch on it.'" HHS actuaries are working to ensure that the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports (CLASS) program will be viable for at 75 years, although "if we can't have a program design we know at the outset is going to be solvent, I think we'll return to Congress and say it won't be solvent and therefore we'll be violating the law," Sebelius said. [/font]

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']I wonder why it took these fools over a year to finally understand what they were told from the get-go?[/font]

They say "love is blind".... I say politics is blind.

This is not to mention insurance agents that push a hard line stance on the products they sell, too. Anytime one devotes a lot of emphasis on a self-serving cause it will lead to rejection of opposing views.... hence blindness. We all need to be careful of one-sided positions. Sometimes good sense lies somewhere in between. (Not pointing fingers, mind you.. )

 

[Arthur Rudnick]

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

The CLASS Act is the best thing to ever happen to the LTC insurance industry.


I've said it before and I'll say it again........

You're wrong and it will never happen.

 

[Mr_Ed]

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

The CLASS Act is the best thing to ever happen to the LTC insurance industry.


I've said it before and I'll say it again........

You're wrong and it will never happen.

You've never given me one reason why the CLASS Act is bad for LTCi.

(... and please don't quote the CLTCR.)

 

[Arthur Rudnick]

Scott,
I'll give you my reason and it's the exact same one that I've stated to you many, many times.

To make a long story short:
This business is tough enough. I don't need the federal government as my competition.

 

[Mr_Ed]

Scott,
I'll give you my reason and it's the exact same one that I've stated to you many, many times.

To make a long story short:
This business is tough enough. I don't need the federal government as my competition.

The CLASS Act is not competition.

The CLASS Act is primarily designed for the poor, the lower middle class, and those who can't qualify for LTCi anyway.

The CLASS Act is NOT the federal gov't getting into the business of paying for long-term care. It is the federal gov't quietly getting OUT OF the business of paying for long-term care.

The CLASS Act is the federal gov't telling people that they need to prepare for AND pay for their future long-term care needs.

The CLASS Act is the "got milk" campaign we've all been wanting.

And, it's coming to every employer in this country.

I can't wait!

Read this:

http://ltcshop.com/2011/02/02/the-real-message-of-the-class-act/

 

[Arthur Rudnick]

Scott,
I don't have the time nor the patience to debate you again on the pros & cons of CLASS Act and what it means to the industry. We obviously have 2 complete opposite points of few on this.

Bottom line; it won't be part of Health Care Reform, so there's no sense in even having a conversation.

I think everyone on the planet (even you) agrees it's financially unsustainable and after a year of study, even the administration has come to that conclusion.

IF IT'S NOT FINANCIALLY SOUND, IT WON'T BE AROUND!
(Rudnick, circa 2011)

AND........

IF THE GLOVE DON'T FIT, YOU CAN'T COMMIT!
(OJ, circa 1995)​

 

[Mr_Ed]

Scott,
I don't have the time nor the patience to debate you again on the pros & cons of CLASS Act and what it means to the industry. We obviously have 2 complete opposite points of few on this.

Bottom line; it won't be part of Health Care Reform, so there's no sense in even having a conversation.

I think everyone on the planet (even you) agrees it's financially unsustainable and after a year of study, even the administration has come to that conclusion.

IF IT'S NOT FINANCIALLY SOUND, IT WON'T BE AROUND!
(Rudnick, circa 2011)

AND........

IF THE GLOVE DON'T FIT, YOU CAN'T COMMIT!
(OJ, circa 1995)​

It would be unsustainable if they try to get an "average of $75" per day, like they want to get.

But the legislation requires no more than an average of $50 per day.

Here's an explanation of how it can be "sustainable over 75 years". I posted this on the SOA LTCi group on linkein:




How can CLASS be designed so that it's affordable, maximizes enrollment and meets the primary goals of the program--all WITHIN the constraints of the legislation as it is currently written?

Here's one idea. The legislation allows for up to 6 "benefit levels", with the average amount being $50 per day (indexed to the CPI). A lot of people misinterpret the legislation and think that it states that the benefit is "no less than $50". But that's not how the legislation was written.

It states:

‘‘(i) MINIMUM REQUIRED AMOUNT.—The benefit
amount provides an eligible beneficiary with not less
than an average of $50 per day (as determined based
on the reasonably expected distribution of beneficiaries
receiving benefits at various benefit levels).


The final choice for the CLASS Independence Benefit Plan could look something like this:

$20 per day for those who need help with 2 ADL's
$30 per day for those who need help with 3 ADL's
$50 per day for those who need help with 4 ADL's
$100 per day for those who need help with 5 ADL's
$150 per day for those who need help with 6 ADL's

If we assume that the following percentages of claimants need the following levels of assistance (I'm not an actuary--but this is just an example that works mathematically):

30% need help with 2 ADL's
30% need help with 3 ADL's
20% need help with 4 ADL's
10% need help with 5 ADL's
10% need help with 6 ADL's

That would mean that the average benefit amount, distributed throughout the various benefit levels, would be exactly $50 per day in benefits--even though 60% of the beneficiaries would be receiving $30 per day or less in benefits.

Just as many group LTCi policies advertise benefits of "$200 per day" (when in actuality, the group policy may only pay $200 per day for nursing home care, but $100 per day for all other care settings), so, too, this plan design would seem more attractive to participants because it would pay "up to $150 per day" indexed for inflation.

I'm not saying that I would participate in a plan designed like this. I'm saying that it's a way to increase enrollment by making the premiums more affordable than some of the projections we've already seen by CMS and AAA.

I don't see the CLASS Act as a competitor to long-term care insurance. After having read the legislation several times, it's obvious that the writers of the CLASS Act had one goal: REDUCE the growth of the federal Medicaid budget.

Some in my industry think that the CLASS Act is the "political Left's" first step in trying to create a new entitlement. It's not.

The message of the CLASS Act is NOT that the federal gov't is getting into the business of paying for long-term care. The message of the CLASS Act is that the federal gov't is trying to get OUT OF the business of paying for long-term care.

I think that a tiered Benefit Plan, like this, would have premiums that would be low enough to garner a large enough enrollment--well over 10 million.

There are things the Secretary canNOT do without changes to the law.

She canNOT change the very minimal work requirement.
She canNOT have the premiums indexed to inflation.
She canNOT put a cap on the maximum lifetime benefit.

The best choice the Secretary has is the tiered benefit levels I've described above. She can do that without any Congressional approval because she already has the authority to do that in the legislation as it is written.

 

[Arthur Rudnick]

I'm sure Obama and his *** Secretary of Health would just love to hear about your fix.

I think you have way too much time on your hands.
THIS is your fix???

The final choice for the CLASS Independence Benefit Plan could look something like this:

$20 per day for those who need help with 2 ADL's
$30 per day for those who need help with 3 ADL's
$50 per day for those who need help with 4 ADL's
$100 per day for those who need help with 5 ADL's
$150 per day for those who need help with 6 ADL's

I could just imagine some 90 year old lady getting into a pissing contest with the federal governemnt about whether she needs help with 3 or 4 ALDs. She'll be dead by the time she gets a check.

Come on Scott, you can do better than that.

(can't you?)