What Do Scott Brown, Ben Nelson & Mike Pence Have In Commmon?

I am in Washington D.C. at the National Association of Health Underwriters annual "Capitol Conference". With the President making his final (?) push for passage of the Senate reform bill - calling for a House vote March 18th - it is timely to be at 'ground zero'.

Newly elected Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) was one of our first speakers. He was followed by the somewhat infamous (as in "Corn husker Kickback") Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE). Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) rounded out the morning session. Besides all three speaking at our NAHU event, I was struck by how different they seemed from their media portrayals. Frankly, Senator Brown wasn't all that gifted or charismatic as a speaker. (Although the ladies in the room obvioulsy found him to be pretty hot!) No, his message was just straight talk about being sick of politics as usual. It was I think that message that got him elected not some slick style.

Senator Nelson displayed a workable understanding of the complexities of health care reform; I particularly liked his comments about preserving the role of the agent/broker in a revitalized system. (Of course, he was preaching to the choir.) Representative Pence was terrific. I think I'd most enjoy having a beer with him. It seemed interesting that with Congress' approval ratings so low, all three came across as honest sincere guys.

Also, all three shared this assessment of "reconciliation"; don't hold your breath! Here's what they said. The Senate has passed a Bill. The House will be asked to pass the same Bill next week. If they do so - and that is a BIG if - HR 3590 (The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) becomes law when the President signs it. And he surely will.

Those that expect HR 3590 to be changed/fixed after passage are drinking the Kool Aid. Once it is law, it's done.

Just thought you ought to know what the insiders think.

Brother, Can You Spare An Hour?

For all the frustration over double digit premium increases, at least some employers are controlling health care costs. At this link, you can watch a health care panel discussion that was a part of the WMC Business Day in Madison February 23rd. John Torinus from Serigraph is the last of three speakers and the entire discussion is a little over an hour. It's all good stuff but make sure you listen to John. Take notes. I did.

Let me know what you think.

Exposing One Public Servant's Bias

Yesterday I attended the WMC Business Day in Madison. The afternoon session included a panel discussion on health care which was recorded (about 65 minutes). It will be archived on Wisconsin Eye in a few days. John Torinus talked about how he is controlling health care costs at his company and how those same principals can be applied to other businesses and the public sector. It was a compelling presentation; one everyone should watch.

Also on the panel was the Secretary of the Department of Health Services, Karen Timberlake. She talked about steps the state is taking to control costs. Again, I hope you will seek out this presentation and listen to her remarks as there are some very positive steps being taken. Regrettably, she had a few comments on health insurers that showed her great bias against 'my' industry.

A power point slide focused on how in 2009 health insurers profits increased by 56% while over the same period they were "dropping" 2 million people. I don't have access to the industry wide P & L results for 2008 and 2009 but I happen to know 2008 was a terrible year for health insurers. In addition to the usual underwriting losses, their investment portfolios (like everyone's) were hammered by the stock market crash. (Investment returns often offset unexpected claims.) So if insurers collectively had earnings in 2008 of about 1.8% of revenues but in 2009 earnings recovered to about 2.8% (these are estimates but pretty darn close, I'd wager), that would be a 56% increase. By reporting only the % increase, it sounds pretty bad doesn't it? (Now I ask you, what business owner in his/her right mind would be content with earnings of only 3% of revenues?)

As for "dropping" 2 million members, do you suppose the economy had something to do with that? H-m-m-m, haven't I been reading something about unemployment over recent months and don't the majority of Americans get their health insurance through their employer?

At least in this case, Secretary Timberlake - like so many politicians on both sides of the aisle - seems to be distorting the facts to her end; i.e., if you portray health insurers as scheming to drop 2 million (just the sick, of course) customers to pad profits, does a gullible public conclude government might do better?

Well, we're not as gullible as 'they' think. And by distorting the truth so badly, 'their' overall credibility is even lower than the insurers they vilify.

And while I'm thinking of insurers, I'm sure you're hearing a lot from the same political class about recent premium increases. While I'm hardly a lackey for those insurers I represent - and clearly some of their increases seem unnecessarily high - regulators have a lot to do with premiums. Insurers are required to remain solvent. If we applied the same rules to Medicare, the tax increases would make premium hikes seem small! My suggestion is that Medicare's 'Board of Directors' (that would be Congress) get their own house in order before they presume to second guess insurers!

Why Premiums Are So High: Chapter 287

Clients invariably tell me of their own encounters with health care. Here's another anecdote from just the other day.

"I took my wife to the doctor for a varicose vein procedure. We arrived for her appointment at 9:00 in the morning. By 11:30 we were at Panera Bread having lunch. There was no surgeon; no anesthesiologist. Not sure what exactly was done but for the short time she was there, I never expected to see a bill for $13,000!"

Stories like this drive me nuts. Is this a fair price? (Maybe it is.) I imagine a doc doing about a dozen or so procedures a day at $13,000 a pop. Wow. Isn't it just a matter of time until the opening of a "Veins R Us" where you can have sclerotherapy for $1000?

I hope so . . . . .

Sanity Check: Why Don't 'They' Just NOT Answer?

I just made a business call to a vendor's cell phone number. As I usually do, when he answered I asked if I was interrupting. His reply: "Yes! I was in a meeting but stepped out to answer your call. I should probably go back in (to the meeting)."

Now tell me please, why the heck didn't he just turn off his damn phone? I could have left a voice mail message. That would have been far more efficient than the exchange we had. Now he has to call me again just to find out what I want.

We live in goofy times . . . . .