Back in June, 2008, when George Bush was still president, Barack Obama was nothing but a junior in-the-minority-party Senator from Illinois who thought he could get away with challenging Hillary Clinton for the nomination, Denise Grady of The New York Times wrote
When the Golden Rule Insurance Company rejected her application for health coverage last year, Peggy Robertson was mystified.
“It made no sense,” said Ms. Robertson, 39, who lives in Centennial, Colo. “I’m in perfect health.”
She was turned down because she had given birth by Caesarean section. Having the operation once increases the odds that it will be performed again, and if she became pregnant and needed another Caesarean, Golden Rule did not want to pay for it. A letter from the company explained that if she had been sterilized after the Caesarean, or if she were over 40 and had given birth two or more years before applying, she might have qualified.
I admit the impression I got when I read the write-up at DailyKos was that this had all happened just a day or two ago and just around the corner. But just a little bit of Googling demonstrated it’s not actually topical at all…
...or wouldn’t be if…
...it wasn’t a perfect snapshot of the kind of jackass crap that drove the initiative for healthcare reform in the first place!
And why didn’t we hear howls from various and assorted right-wing psycho teabaggers, tenthers, and deathers with travel and sign-making expense accounts from Fox “News?” Well, you could say it was because Golden Rule is a private corporation and therefore more Infallable in Every Decision than the pope. But it could also be because Golden Rule’s founder was a major right-wing moneybags. But I digress.
The fact of the matter is that (going perhaps against common progressive wisdom) the environment private insurance operates into is aggressively stacked against it — yeah, they make money… and for that matter yeah, they can only make money by fucking sick people over — and it’s bull-whiz like telling healthy women they have to get sterilized before they can get insurance is a perfect example of why they’re not up to the task.
Golden Rule, a relatively small insurer (however pretentious its erstwhile pretentions of grandeur might have been) didn’t have the clout to negotiate efficiently with major medical centers that provide things like, oh, say, birthing centers and obstetrics surgeries. So they did what by the “logic” of the marketplace made the second-most sense: they refused to insure someone with FHPS (fecund healthy person syndrome.)
The idea behind healthcare reform, even the really watered-down versions, is in classic (Teddy) Roosevelt style, to create big enough markets for medical services to rebalance the market clout of service providers.
The reason people keep talking about a public option (and why, by the way, we need one) is that insurance-industry assholes like the little pencil-pecker at Golden Rule who cooked up the get-sterilized-first exception are still there pecking away with their pencils. A public option will help keep them in check as well. Not so much by increasing their profitability as giving people an alternative when their private insurer of choice starts making out-of-control demands.
But seriously? Get a caesarian before you get Healthcare? That might have been fine for George Bush and what was left of his party in 2008. But this is America and that kind of crap… from a pro-life private company, by the way, was and is intolerable.
Exactly. But take it further. Say that she had some ongoing condition that required lots of expensive medical care, but with that care, she is a perfectly functioning member of society. Why should a private company take on not just a risk of losing money, but a guarantee of losing money? We don’t expect companies in other industries to do things that are guaranteed to lose money. Or they could set the premiums so high that they might as well have rejected the person.
This is one reason I think the public option is critical.
Aside from whether you can or can’t get insurance if you’re not employed by a larger company, I would like to get rid of employer-based coverage because it is so unequal and muddies the waters. It is very difficult to compare salary and benefits packages because health insurance plans vary so widely. Also, in my experience, companies large enough to self-ensure have much better plans than those where the insurance company funds the payout. It just doesn’t make sense that not only whether you’re employed, but where you’re employed has a significant impact on the kind of health care you receive.
I have a friend whose husband has an ongoing condition that can be quite expensive. She will never be an entrepreneur, simply because she needs to be employed at a company with good health insurance coverage. What’s the cost to our country’s innovation to keep this private health care system alive?
The REALLY stupid part about this is that doctors in this country push cesarians like CRAZY – they’re done lots and lots of times when it is completely unnecessary just because it is convenient for the doctors. So she may very well be being denied converage due to having had a procedure SHE DID NOT NEED IN THE FIRST PLACE. AHHHHHHHH! Brain hurts.
The thing is that while it’s a free country yet, anyone can start his own insurance company and run it his owwn way – you can too, set the rules that cover absolutely everyone, should it be your wish, even with a free for all policy, why don’t you?
When the country gets not so free any more, you still will not start your company, those who are now running theirs would not bother either, who will pay for those who need medical aid then?
[Hi Me. As I evidently didn’t say clearly enough in my post, Golden Rule remains too small to compete with the already-existing and much larger insurers. Which is one of the reasons they thought they have to act like such giant fucking dickwads. By which I don’t just mean screwing over perfectly healthy women because they might get pregnant. They also poured gazillions of dollars at the height of the Gingrich revolution buying access and promoting (ironically, their “pro-life,” anti-contraception agenda.) And still couldn’t get big enough to cut deals with the large healthcare suppliers. So… what’s your point then? That today you could go out and try the same things Golden Rule has? And tomorrow you won’t? Sorry, but there’s nothing in the bill, even with a public option, that will stop you from starting your own insurance company any time you like. —fl]
The reason why nobody does is because the realities of the current marketplace is such that any new company which tried to provide service in a humane manner would not survive long enough to compete with the existing ones without a massive influx of donations. (They’d get the worst cases first, those who take out many times more than what they pay in, and it would take several years to get enough relatively healthy people to switch over to them to make up for it.)
And as for the existing ones… the most likely result would be doing about the same in the very long term and taking a considerable pay cut for a good while. (they lose at lot of money, then very slowly gain it back as they steal customers away from other companies, then their surviving competitors adjust to the new higher cost but larger customer pool reality, and things go back to normal aside from the fact that there are now only a few mega-corporations left). Since wealthy shareholders and high-level management aren’t known for their lack of greed, why would they bother?
Sometimes the system that wins out is not the best way of doing what it’s supposed to do, but the one which is best at preventing people from doing things any other way.
My point is that business is suppossed to make money, if it does not – it gets broke. Nothing can as effectively stop any business as the lack of profit.
Healthcare – yeah, you can possibly say that it’s a right, but health insurance is not a part of the Healthcare system, like bonds agencies are not any part of the penitentiary system, it’s a business. Trying to correct problems in Healthcare by demanding changes in insurance is just an attempt to spread a blame where it does not belong.
The story really shows outrageous inequality! If health insurance became compulsary as auto insurance is in most states, such a situation would be impossible …
Post new comment