NAMSA and Proposed Legislation for Medicare Supplements

[cadylou]

Additional Note on this: On Craig Ritter's call today, he cited 12 bills in Congress concerning Medicare & Medigap. He also said that there are proposals outlined in the CBO report on various options. He said you can find that at CBO | Change the Cost-Sharing Rules for Medicare and Restrict Medigap Insurance. Thought I'd pass this along if anyone is interested.

 

[azmedsupagent]

The death of the medigap business. I wonder how MAPD plans would be effected by these changes.

 

[midwestbroker]

NAIC came out against some time ago against changing first dollar coverage.

I don't see AARP letting go of all the income they get from UHC and Medicare supplement sales. In 2009, almost 50% of their income came from royalties from insurance carriers (about $650 million), 65% was from UHC.

 

[cadylou]

Well, I would wish that you'd be right Midwest, but I do know that this idea of the combined deductible keeps resurfacing & is now being talked about as if it's a "good" idea, when in reality, overutilization really isn't driven by Medicare supplements. And yes, the NAIC did win the argument about eliminating first dollar coverage when they were asked to review it as a part of Healthcare reform & HHS's request to take a look at it. But, it too is cited again in the CBO material. My fear here is that they'll just "throw this stuff in" as a budget compromise & if they do that, it's a big problem & could mean that the Medicare supplement business might be severely damaged by it.


I'd rather see plans C & F eliminated, than have the deductible combined & have a rule that prevents Med supps from covering it - then, at least, supplements would function the way they do today & we'd still have something to sell.


Combine deductibles & all bets are off, especially since existing supplements would no longer function the way they do now. What happens then? Would the companies be required to break their own contractual arrangements with enrollees for 'guaranteed renewable' policies? They'll really be doing a number on the agent community . . . . . talk about job losses . . . . .I'm just glad they make wine in a box now! :-)

 

[azmedsupagent]

Well I would have to assume that if they combined the deductible we all would have massive policy cancellations and potential charge backs on unsecured advance balances. It would be very very ugly.

 

[cadylou]

Well I would have to assume that if they combined the deductible we all would have massive policy cancellations and potential charge backs on unsecured advance balances. It would be very very ugly.

Agreed - it would potentially change everything going forward. Since the change would be to Medicare itself, it would not allow current supplements to function in the way that they were intended, so . . . .there you go . . . .

 

[moonlightandmargaritas]

NAIC came out against some time ago against changing first dollar coverage.

I don't see AARP letting go of all the income they get from UHC and Medicare supplement sales. In 2009, almost 50% of their income came from royalties from insurance carriers (about $650 million), 65% was from UHC.

Sounds like the argument under 65 health agents were making in 2008 (that was before their comp went from 20% to 4%).

 

[Sam]

Key Issues Surrounding Medicare Today - Insurance Forums

 

[azmedsupagent]

Merge Deductibles? Common Ground on Medicare Emerges - WSJ.com

From last year but its still a good article on the situation.

 

[bpenn9]

Key Issues Surrounding Medicare Today - Insurance Forums

Thanks Sam, signed that petition.

Petition