• CREATE AN ACCOUNT
  • LOG.IN
  • CONTENTS
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • ARCHIVE
  • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US

  • Home
  • News
    • News Main Page
    • NewsFlash
  • A&E
    • A&E Main Page
    • Movie Times
    • TV Listings
    • A&E Blog
    • Art Galleries
    • Best Bets
  • Opinion
    • Opinion Main Page
    • Endorsements
    • Blogs
    • Columns
    • Voices
    • Letters
    • In Memoriam
    • Obituaries
  • Events
    • Today
    • Search
    • Submit
    • Best Bets
  • Living
    • Living Main Page
    • Outdoors
    • Travel
    • Sports
    • Peeps
  • Food & Drink
    • Food & Drink Main Page
    • All Restaurants
    • Delivery
    • All Bars & Clubs
    • Drink Specials
    • Open Now
  • Sports
  • Outdoors
    • Outdoors Main Page
    • Outside Insider
    • Spotlight On
    • Features
  • Classifieds
    • Real Estate
    • Jobs
    • Autos
  • Obits

    Health Insurers Confer

    Industry Professionals Focus on Employer-Provided Plans


    Friday, September 25, 2009
    By Ben Preston (Contact)
    Article Tools
    Print friendly
    E-mail story
    Tip Us Off
    iPod friendly
    Comments
    Bookmark This
    del.icio.us. del.icio.us.
    Digg! Digg!
    furl furl
    google google
    newsvine newsvine
    reddit reddit
    technorati technorati
    Facebook Facebook
    Yahoo! My Web 2.0 Yahoo!

    As the national healthcare reform debate rages, insurance industry professionals are contemplating their role in the changing landscape of health insurance. At the Bacara Resort & Spa, on September 22, about 30 insurance company representatives, human resource professionals, health insurance brokers, and healthcare advisors met for the 2009 Tri-County Health Summit, tackling the difficult question of how to get spiraling healthcare costs under control.

    "It seems like health insurance is pushing more cost to the employee, but there's only so much the employee can bear," said Debbie Horne, the human resources director for CenCal Health, which administers MediCal for the state. One option they discussed was raising employee deductibles but also offering supplemental insurance policies, called gap insurance. This was posited as a way to keep employees covered and at the same time reduce employers’ health insurance costs—which currently account for 30 to 40 percent of many payroll budgets.

    Many of the insurance providers at the meeting questioned the role of the public insurance option that President Barack Obama and many Democratic congressmembers have touted as a viable way to provide healthy competition to private insurance companies. "There's a propensity to have the same concerns and pitfalls as exist in Medicare," said Jim McCabe, vice president of business development for Neovia Integrated Insurance Services. "I think there's an opportunity to better align the business model with the healthcare model."

    Although McCabe asserted that a public healthcare option, based upon Medicare's track record, is likely to be inefficient, he acknowledged a need for serious change within the private insurance industry as well. Traditional healthcare spending is focused on critical conditions and their expensive treatments, he said, but overall wellness and encouragement of healthy lifestyle choices should be the goals for the healthcare industry to reach for.

    In its current state, HR 3200—America’s Affordable Health Choices Act, the controversial federal legislation now wending its way through Congressional debate—was viewed skeptically by several conference participants, but McCabe expressed excitement over the prospect of having so many more people to work with if everyone is required by law to have some form of health insurance. "30 million people will need help navigating the system. That's awesome for us," he said.

    Story Help (Click-ability)
    Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.

    Comments

    Discussion Guidelines

    No good can come from any meeting held at the BigCaca. It is and will always be a thorn in the side of Goleta and bad karma hangs over it like a perpetual fog. This sounds like a meeting of rich and greedy insurance executives trying to figure out how best to screw the American people.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0

    Noletaman (anonymous profile)
    September 25, 2009 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    Yeah, I don't trust that meeting one bit.

    Also, it is CenCal not CentCal.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0

    Num1UofAn (anonymous profile)
    September 25, 2009 at 3:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    Riiiight. They're meeting at the Bacara Resort & Spa to get costs under control. I guess Motel 6 was booked.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0

    SezMe (anonymous profile)
    September 28, 2009 at 1:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    Increasing competition in the private insurance industry will only lead to one thing: crappier insurance "products". Let's for once and for all accept the fact that private insurers aren't in business to provide healthcare but rather to provide the client with some comfort that healthcare will be accessible when they need it (even though that may not be the case as policies are rife with claim denials and outright rescission once a client becomes seriously ill). The private insurance business model should be removed from the healthcare arena as quickly as possible.
    It is interesting that Mr. McCabe faults Medicare for being inefficient, when it is demonstrably far more efficient than the private insurers. In fact, when one compares the privatized Medicare Advantage plans to traditional Medicare, it is immediately made clear how inefficient they are since the government has to pay the privatized plans an additional 12 to 17% over and above what they pay for the exact same thing in a traditional Medicare plan. On top of that, the privatized plans are "managed care" plans that trap the client in an HMO or PPO network unlike traditional Medicare where the user can access anyone they want.
    The whole intent behind the "public option" as originally envisioned was to crowd out the private insurers with 100 million plus enrollees - this is the only reason it was supported by some on the left. What scraps of the PO survive the legislative process will be nowhere near this vision, that is certain.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0

    tegrat (anonymous profile)
    September 28, 2009 at 8:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    The irony of meeting at the Bacara is heavy indeed; a family of four could be fed and housed for a month or more for the cost of one attendee's daily fare. And it's OUR health insurance premiums that paid for this insult.

    Over the weekend I wrote the following in response to an editorial in the L.A. Times:

    The Times editors would have everyone be subject to a federal mandate to buy private insurance, but this merely would increase the numbers of prey in the shark pools of the insurance companies, state-by-state, with significant individual costs for compliance and significant individual penalties for non-compliance. Thanks, but no thanks.

    I agree that everyone should go "into the pool," but into one big USA risk pool, from birth until death. This would mean that all states would have to give up individual regulation of health insurance. However, this wouldn't necessarily mean "socialized medicine." As many employers do for their own coverages, the "one big USA risk pool" health insurance contract would be put out to bid, with strictly enforced contact stipulations and performance measures that ensure benefits to patients, providers, and the contractor(s). Contracts could be regionalized to different administrators, if this makes financial and business sense, subject to the "one big USA risk pool" fundamental. If private administrators are unwilling or unable to meet these contract criteria, either initially or over time, then yes, the program could and should be run by the federal government.

    How to pay? The same ways we do now: employer premiums; individual premiums; and taxpayer subsidies for the destitute. However, the results would be greater fairness, lower per capita costs, and universal patient coverage under universally equitable terms. Should anyone of ample means want to buy supplemental coverage, then by all means, they'd be free to do so.

    "One big USA risk pool" would be the best way to control costs and maximize fairness.

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0

    GregMohr (anonymous profile)
    September 28, 2009 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

    Since when has a legislator purchased a bandaid or an aspirin after taking office? Yet they seem to get the very best of health care. That's good enough for me, since we're paying for it, I'll have what they're having ! And NOTHING LESS !

    Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0

    wheelswill (anonymous profile)
    September 28, 2009 at 3:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

    Post a comment

    Username:
    Password: (Forgotten your password?)

    Comment:

    EVENT CALENDAR

    Previous Month | Next Month

    Today's Events Best Bets Submit an Event

    Local Weather

    Currently:
    Clear Sky
    Temperature:
    61.0°
    Wind:
    6 WSW

    Surf Report
    • Specials
    • InPrint
    • Top Emails
    • Best Of 2009
    • 2009 Election Coverage
    • Wedding Guide 2009
    • Blue Green Guide 2009
    • SBIFF 2009
    • Tea Fire 2008
    • Local Heroes 2008
    • Calendar of Fundraisers
    • Local Bands
    • High Noon in the Garden of Controversy
    • CAMA Presents the Shanghai Symphony
    • Elings Park Expansion Shot Down
    • Before I Be Your Dog …
    • Flobots Return with New Record, New Vision
    • Autism Attacked Alternatively
    1. Eating Animals
    2. Producer Must Pay Landscaper
    3. Montecito Pet Shop to Sell Only Rescued Dogs
    4. High Noon in the Garden of Controversy
    5. My Swine Flu Experience
    6. Teacher in Trouble
    • CREATE AN ACCOUNT
    • LOG.IN
    • CONTENTS
    • CLASSIFIEDS
    • ARCHIVE
    • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US
    Google
     
    Independent.com Web
    Copyright ©2009 Santa Barbara Independent, Inc. Reproduction of material from any Independent.com pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. If you believe an Independent.com user or any material appearing on Independent.com is copyrighted material used without proper permission, please click here.
    This is our Privacy Policy.