Return to Article: Federal health insurance premiums to rise by 7.9 percent
-
6535
So, if all you Kerry/Edwards supporters are justifying malpractice lawsuits, then why are you whining about the increased rate of health insurance premiums? This "team" wants socialized medicine anyway. Just think, with Big Brother providing your health care, there will be no more lawsuits. What do they care? Edwards has already made his fortune.
-
6324
The insurance industry has fooled us into believing that patients who file medical malpractice lawsuits are being awarded more and more money, leading to unbearably high losses for insurers. Insurers state that to recoup money paid to patients, medical malpractice insurers are being forced to raise insurance rates or, in some cases, pull out of the market altogether. Since insurers say that jury verdicts are the cause for the current "crisis" in affordable malpractice insurance for doctors, the insurance industry insists that the only way to bring down insurance rates is to limit an injured consumer's ability to sue in court.
This is nothing new. Insurance rates for doctors have skyrocketed twice before: in the mid-1970s and in the mid-1980s, each "crisis" occurring during years of a weakened economy and dropping interest rates. Each of these periods were followed by a wave of legislative activity to restrict injured patients' rights to sue for medical malpractice. Medical and insurance lobbyists told legislators that changes in tort law were needed to reduce medical malpractice insurance rates.
One of the first states to react to this third wave of insurance "crisis" for doctors has been Nevada. At the end of July 2002, Nevada enacted a $350,000 cap on non-economic damages for injured patients. Within weeks of the law's enactment, two major insurance companies announced that despite the new law, they would not reduce insurance rates for the foreseeable future. Quite simply, this is because the legal system is largely irrelevant to the problem.
Insurers make most of their profits from investment income. During years of high interest rates and/or excellent insurer profits, insurance companies engage in fierce competition for premium dollars to invest for maximum return. Insurers severely underprice their policies and insure very poor risks just to get premium dollars to invest. But when investment income decreases - because interest rates drop or the stock market plummets or the cumulative price cuts make profits become unbearably low - the industry responds by sharply increasing premiums and reducing coverage, thus creating a "liability insurance crisis."
-
6312
I don't know about anyone else, but I personally know 3 doctors that have left the medical profession over the cost of malpractice insurance - 2 OB/Gyn's and a surgeon. None has ever been sued, but no doctor is perfect and "the worst doctors" are not the only ones that lose a patient. The average cost of malpractice insurance for these was over $100K and it became too much for them to pass on these costs to every patient.
You hear about the healthcare crisis in this nation? It's the blankety-blank trial lawyers convincing juries that the loss of life for a middle-aged, minimum-wage worker through potential oversight of some technical procedure warrants a $15 Million settlement. Loss of life is a tragedy nearly always, loss of life-function is as well. But these ridiculous settlements have led to far more problems.
For those that back the trial-lawyers as supportable entrepreneurs, a question: There are many, many doctors that have been forced out of practice by the lawyers. How many lawyers have you heard of that were forced out of practice by doctors?
-
6303
Let's try this one. Your daughter has cancer in one leg, the doctor amputates the wrong leg. Now the doctor goes back to the operating room and amputates the correct (that would be the one that is really in trouble and should have been taken care of first) leg. Now your daughter doesn't have any legs and you are just elated.
Don't call a lawyer to help correct the problem of malpractice and a lifetime of problems with medical issues just go to WalMart and buy a new lawn mower that way you will have something to do while the doctor continues to make mistakes without any recourse for his/her actions.
If you condone medical malpractice you will get much more of it.
-
6274
How has Edwards and his lawsuits helped with health care? He and his ambulance chasing kind costs us every month in premiums and the cost of health care services. If John Edwards were a Republican he would be demonized for how he made his millions.
-
6273
No ? about it Health Insurance is going up, but I am thankful to have a gov. job and have insurance. For you people who have always worked for the gov. and had a steady income and able to have a budget you are lucky (if you have never worked outside trying to make ends meet for your family you really don't know what it's all about). Ask some folks who work outside the "GATE" how they are making out (these are the folks who pay our salaries and don't get near the benefits we do, and don't see the daily waste of their tax $ by many incompentent "YES SIR TYPES"). Don't you people ever get tired of complaining?
-
6268
RE: the comment about John Edwards, trial lawyers, and malpractice lawsuits. If doctors and the AMA would do a better job of getting the worst doctors out of the profession, the rest of them would not have to pay such high malpractice insurance premiums. Until that happens, if an incompetent doctor kills you or screws you up for life, you'd better hope that your family has a John Edwards on their side.
-
6262
Can't let the Edwards comment stand without some context. He made $39 million over a 10 year period. In that time he also made some major contributions to how doctors do their work. They think about it before just going ahead without thinking. That is a good thing. Here is the rub. Mr. Cheney made $36 million in one year with Halliburton. How did that affect the prices of things?
My best reasoning tells me Mr. Edwards worked a long time for his money and Mr. Cheney did pretty much nothing more than have lunch and dinner with his old friends in the State Department, DOD and who knows what other HOUSE he slipped into. Sometime it is real hard to be fair and balanced.
I spent some time in the insurance business and they have turned down millions of bad applicants for insurance, too bad they don't turn down bad doctors, rather than just increasing the premium and then advertising the high rates to get responses like the one implicating Mr. Edwards for his work over a long period of time.
Enough already.
-
6250
Just like so many other things...the insurance program is not working for federal employees. Not only are the premiums continuing to go up the benefits continue to go down resulting in more out of pocket expense. Cost of living increase? Medical expenses should justify a COL raise of at least 7%. Dental insurance is a joke. And if you are under FERS, you are already having to sock away for your TSP, invest in your failing social security, and look forward to a very small retirement check. I hope I do not owe the government when I can finally retire at 62, and still have to wait 4 years for Medicare to kick in. So, I am buying long term care insurance for my peace of mind. Middle Class America is hurting more and more. Are people without insurance really denied medical treatment in our great country?
-
6244
Assume a salary of $80,000. A 3.5% pay increase is $2,800. Of the $2,800 the federal and state income taxes are about $1,078 that leaves $1,722 for me. But wait, social security tax will take about $550 for retirement and medicare so I get $1,172. However, the property tax on my home increased by $1,000 so that leaves me only $172. But a half of one percent increase in sales tax amounts to about $600 annually for me, which reduces my income, even after the raise by $428. On top of that the increase in my insurance premium amounts to about $32 dollars so I am only $460 worse off than this time last year! What happened to the big tax cuts? Bush lies again, the only tax cut is in federal income tax!
-
6242
THE GOVERNMENT GIVETH AND THE GOVERNMENT TAKETH AWAY!
-
6225
Great, now I do not need to worry what I will do with my cost of living increase. Gee maybe they will make the 7.9 tax deductible (in my dreams maybe)
-
6222
I know it is no consolation, but there are people in far worse shape than us when it comes to health insurance. When I retired in 1990 my side of GEHA was about $100 per month. Today I pay $300 and it continues to go up. On the industry front though, I have friends that can't retire because they can't afford the $1200 a month for their health insurance. That's right, and $1200 doesn't buy nearly the plan I have. While we all know that similar jobs in industry pay better than their government counterpart, there are some benefits that you won't give much thought to until you get there....I'm there, (I opted for early retirement at 44 as a result of a RIF) I can afford health care in retirement, my industry buddies will have to work until they are medicare eligible....
Mike Page
-
6215
My msg is for Rick - yes 7.9 is a lot more than 3.5. This is not a comparison of apples to apples however!
The 7.9 is tacked on to the roughly $200-$300 a month insurance premiums. That is small in comparison to the 3.5 that will be tacked on to salaries that can be upwards of 100K.
-
6211
I am no fan of the current administration, but, let's be fair. Health insurance rates escalated during the Clinton administration. And one of the reasons is malpractice lawsuits. Which is the very reason why John Edwards is a multimillionaire.
-
6210
Now Ms James forgot to tell us what she left out of our health plans, to get down to 8%. Your reader "US" hit it on the head with his three "CLOSER TO THE TRUTH" statements, right on. AS I have said before, Health Insurance providers "lead OPM around by the nose". I called my home state Senator's local office. Wanted to see if they read Gov't Executive...too busy, she said. Asked if I could read it (this article) to her...send it on the Senator's Web site, they (meaning the Washington staff who do nothing, too) will get back to you in six weeks. NEWS FLASH, that's after the election. Folks you all NEED to vote, I don't care who you vote for BUT EVERYBODY PLEASE VOTE! Thanks for a great article Gov't Exec.
-
6207
Raising premiums by 7.9% is shameful. Passing it off as a victory for government employees is worse.
Increases of 10.5%, 13.3%, 11.1%, 10% and 7.9% is equal to a 65% increase compounded over the last 5 years.
-
6204
Two things.
1. 7.9 is a lot more than 3.5.
2. One year where the increase is smaller does not reverse a bad trend.
-
6200
Gee, it's great to see that Ms. James feels that she has done such a wonderful job at 'premium negotiations' the last few years. As self evaluations go, she's giving herself fairly high grades on this one.
My question is how close to 10% average increases per year have we reached since her negotiating tenure began? Let's see, at that rate, 4 years might bring us to a 40% increase total?
Considering this quick estimation, it takes a lot of nerve for Ms. James to claim "Excellent team, excellent policy, tough negotiators,...". Closer to the truth might be:
1. Limited support and training for the negotiating team;
2. Idealogical policy bent towards enriching corporations at the expense of employees;
3. Overworked, whipped negotiators.Thanks for giving away more of our hard earned money.
-
6199
Let's see, a 3.5 % pay increase proposed for 2005, which will be offset by a 7.9 % average increase in health insurance premiums, double digit property, school tax, and college tuition increases, as well as higher prices for gasoline, milk, etc. And next year, pay banding comes to DHS, so if you don't play ball with your managers, you get little or nothing. Of course, if you do play the game, and score well, you may still get nothing when the agency finds no money in its budget for merit pay. Oh well, welcome to the new reality. I can hardly wait for 2005!
-
6194
Thanks for considering us for the 3.5% pay raise this will help offset the 8% increase in our health insurance premiums. Thank you very much!!!!!!
-
6193
This seems to be good news considering the average hike has been more in the last few years, but when many people don't get a cost of living raise at all because the premium hike takes it all, along with the cost of living going up at a higher rate than the cost of living raises, how are people expected to maintain? You say they should save? How? I've seen so many people, especially retirees and low grade current employees keep going backward and backwards. Their take home pay becomes less and less, yet everything goes up more and more. I've seen too many people go back to work after retiring, but with the windfall, social security doesn't do them much good. They just struggle to keep a loaf of bread and a roof over their house.
I believe the cost of the premiums to the worker and retiree should not be raised more than what the cost of living raise is.
-
6188
The time has come for the government to move to one insurance provider. The cost savings would be substantial! Large private sector companies, such as Ford, GM, etc. do not allow their employees to choose from 12 to 14 insurance providers - they provide insurance at a savings to employees and to the company. Of course I don't think our congressional reps have the brains to figure this out - unless it lines their pockets - Oh that's right the insurance companies give them money for campaigns.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.