Why hasn’t there be a constitutional challenge for this as well? Which other industries does the government limit the profit margins for?
Let’s force Apple to only spend 15% on profit and administrative costs. If they can make an iPod for $100 it shouldn’t sell for more than $118.
Personally, I think a better regulation would have simply required health insurance companies to disclose their ratio so customers can make an informed decision about which company makes the best use of their premiums.
Why am I not free to choose which ever company wastes the least or most of my money?
At the risk of hijacking the thread supporters of Obama Care can you please answer a simple question. I truly believe that no person should go without healthcare in this country if there is a way we can do it. However, why is it necessary for the Government to take the entire healthcare insurance sector over? Why can’t the people who have private healthcare continue on the plans that they have and those who are unable to afford health insurance be picked up by the Government?
The reason I ask this is that we have a huge deficit and I quite honestly fail to see how we can remotely afford this without eventually bankrupting our country, not that it isn’t possible we are heading in that direction as it is. Take care of those that are unable to do for themselves and let those who have coverage take care of themselves.
Obamacare is not a “government takeover of the health insurance industry,” despite what Fox News is telling people. Nothing is being done by the government to take your favored health care plan away from you.
What you have come to think of Obamacare – that the government is going to run the health care industry – is patently false.
That is exactly what will happen under Obamacare. Moreover, all the insurance will be through private companies; there is no government health insurance plan. Under Obamacare, the federal government subsidizes the premiums to private health insurance companies for the indigent. Everybody else pays for their own insurance, or they continue receiving insurance from their employer.
I am NOT a supporter of the affordable health act… however, the problem with it is NOT that it is a “government takeover of healthcare,” as others have pointed out. So don’t be afraid of that. The only way the government is getting involved is that it is helping some of the poorest people be able to afford to buy private insurance. The problem with it is that it requires everyone to buy private insurance, broadening their base, and increasing their profits. Yes yes they can’t deny coverage to sick people etc, and it does end some of the most egregious practices that they have been reveling in for decades, but at the end of the day this law is just more money in the pockets of private insurance companies.
It just seemed to me like that was the name of the law to get it passed, but it would have a different name for the actual program. Something more name-like. But if there isn’t one, there isn’t one (or Obamacare is it, or whatever). Just strikes me as an awkward thing to call it.
As Jas09 pointed out, utilities have been regulated for decades. And until the brave new world of Reagan, transportation and communications. Any business or individual company that held a monopoly in a vital activity (as the health insurance business does with the requirement that everyone be insured) is subject to regulation of rates and coverage.
SS
What program? There is no program. It’s not a bill creating a government health care service, it’s just some restrictions on the use and provision of private insurance.
You think they came up with 85% on their own? The number was most likely suggested by the health care insurance industry asan acceptable number. When they reduce underwriting costs (can’t cherrypick anymore) and reduce claim s adjustment costs (can’t deny as much coverage as they used to) I doubt any major insurer is going to have problem with that 85% cap.
Note the medical loss ratio for medicare is over 98%
I agree but with that said the industry is spending a lot of energy to try and massage that 85% number to make the the gross premiums for the 85% test net of things like commissions and taxes.
I doubt it. HHS seems to be drawing a pretty bright line between legitimate health care expenses and operating costs.
Not necessarily. Profits can shrink and still maintain a business case.
electricity, phone service, gas, car inspections…
You can still do that, we are just limiting your choice to those companies that spend at least 85% of every dollar towards medical expenses.
How is the federal government taking over the entire health care sector?
And frankly if youa re OK with then government picking up the tab for those folks who cannot afford their own health care then doesn’t that cost money too?
BTW the federal government does have the power to tax so… there is a way of reducing our deficits besides cutting spending..