OBAMACARE THREATENED BY FOR-PROFITS: Twist some arms, read them The Act
As I said in a previous post, surrendering the Affordable Care Act (ACA) a.k.a. Ombamacare, to for-profit insurers could be the kiss of death for health care reform. Now, we have blatant in-your-face evidence of that:
Aetna, one of America's largest insurers, has decided to roll back much of its health-insurance plans offered through the Affordable Care Act (ACA), aka Obamacare.
[....] In a letter to the US Department of Justice uncovered by Huffington Post reporters Jonathan Cohn and Jeffrey Young, Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini outlined the company's plans to roll back much of its Obamacare business if the DOJ blocked a proposed merger with rival Humana.
In late July, the DOJ decided to file a lawsuit to stop the merger of Aetna and Humana, which contributed to the decision to roll back its ACA offerings.
According to an Aetna representative, the DOJ ruling has affected business, since there will be costs involved in fighting the lawsuit and synergies from the deal would not be realized.
But only in April, Aetna's CEO was praising the ACA as a "good investment." Then, the lawsuit happened and he wants to take his marbles and go home. How obvious can one be.
For-profit insurers have no real incentive to provide affordable care
Even a novice in economics will tell you that giant corporations, especially in an age of rampant deregulation and government guarantees that any corporate mishap gets covered by tax payer's money, feel free to push the world around. Why should Aetna et.al. feel restricted by "social responsibility" in such a privileged environment? As we have been told a million times before, CEOs carry responsibility ONLY towards stock holders. High and low in government repeat the mantra with religious regularity so that we can internalize the lesson. Aetna et.al., therefore, are free to determine their "costs" and "synergies" at will and the hell with lives! It's a free market, isn't it?
If the government insists on the ACA being run by for-profit insurers, it needs to "incentivise" them more "creatively"
For-profit insurers should be treated as they deserve, i.e. with less finesse and A LOT more brawn. As one commentator put it, "Before the ACA, the individual insurance market was a playground for profiteering insurers who did their best to exclude risky customers; now they have to serve all comers, and the right price and conditions for managing that mandate are still being worked out." It is the government's job to keep the ball rolling--and that can be accomplished "...faster and more effectively if large blocs in Congress and the state weren't still determined to see Obamacare fail."
Return the nonprofit counterweight to the table
Medicaid/Medicare continues to work with for-profits trying to smooth out the market--with whiners like UnitedHealth doing "fabulously" in enrollments thanks to Medicaid expansion under the ACA. Similarly, Aetna projects exchange losses of $300 million for 2016 when the total of its first quarter premiums reached $6.5 BILLION. Since everything boils down to politics, the complainers should be given briefings on how ACA adjustments can augment Medicaid/Medicare-supported nonprofit schemes and sustain measures opposing cherry picking by the insurance companies.
Who's kidding who?