Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Blue Cross Blue Shield franchises may become co-ops...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 02:42 PM
Original message
Blue Cross Blue Shield franchises may become co-ops...
...if co-ops are in the final bill.

So much for finding a way to compete with Blue Cross Blue Shield.


Mr. Conrad’s own state demonstrates the uncertainties surrounding cooperatives. Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota dominates the state’s private insurance market, collecting nearly 90 percent of premiums. As a nonprofit owned by its members, the company would hope to qualify as a co-op under federal legislation, said Paul von Ebers, its incoming president and chief executive.


http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/8/18/768740/-Blue-Cross-Blue-Shield-Wants-To-Become-A-Co-Op!

slinkerwink writes that the the Blue Cross Blue Shield in North Dakota...
... is NON-PROFIT and yet it pays its executives very generously. Blue Cross Blue Shield is planning to change its status to a "non-profit co-operative" and it'll still pay its own executives so generously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. Fuck co-ops. No public option, no bill. that is all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. That explains conrads position. Fucking whore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dgibby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. Yep! Just follow the money! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. I haven't noticed Blue Cross cooperation on anything.
In the midst of the health care discussion, they jacked my rates up again this year, and not because I had hit a new age break. I can't wait for Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
medeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. yep...us as well
and see post below...paying premiums and no coverage...what's the point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
medeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
5. just called state ins commissioner on them
as they denied husband's prescriptions for Parkinsons and told me I have to drive 300 miles for care. This is all new apparently as they have always covered our care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. Got the pie pre-sliced, do they?
No public option, no bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
8. 'Amazing that Conrad's plan and the dominant insurer in his state match up almost perfectly', huh?
That one observation cuts to the chase.


Nevermind that Kent Conrad admits that co-ops WON'T drive down costs of health care.


From dday at digby's blog:


ROBERTS: What would (co-ops) do to reduce costs? Because that is one of the central issues of health care reform.

CONRAD: Well, the important thing is they’d provide more competition. … Beyond that, I think it’s very important not to over-promise here. <...>

ROBERTS: So nothing really in driving down the costs of service then?

CONRAD: Uhhh, no. If you believe competition helps drive down costs, then they would certainly contribute to holding down costs.




So, should we take from that exchange that *fiscal conservatism* is a nothing more than a ConservaDem/Blue Dog straw man for papering-over this public ripoff called "co-ops"?



A note on how these would affect "competition" - in Conrad's home state of North Dakota, Blue Cross Blue Shield encompasses almost 90% of the health insurance market. And they're a non-profit that thinks they can qualify as a co-op, under Conrad's rules, making them eligible for some of the $6 billion in seed money, I presume. Amazing that Conrad's plan and the dominant insurer in his state match up almost perfectly, ain't it?

The co-op model should be seen for what it is, protection of the insurance industry. Which makes sense, considering how many Senators are in bed with those interests, in some cases quite literally. And given that the industry and their Republican representatives in Congress will STILL oppose co-ops, learning from the lesson that making a ruckus will cause Democrats like Kent Conrad to give up whatever benefit to the people can be managed in exchange for nothing, you can pretty easily see an outcome where even the weak co-ops are given no ability to come into existence, the way it happened in Iowa:

In the 1990s, Iowa adopted a law to encourage the development of health care co-ops. One was created, and it died within two years. Although the law is still on the books, the state does not have a co-op now, said Susan E. Voss, the Iowa insurance commissioner.

Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield collects about 70 percent of the premiums paid in the private insurance market in Iowa and South Dakota.




Conrad keeps saying that there aren't the votes for anything but his favored idea, but no Senator has come out and said they would join a Republican filibuster of health care reform under any circumstances. Until we reach that point, 60 votes - and maybe some combination of the Maine two - remain in play. Sounds like a better scenario to me than one where 60 House progressives have already said they won't vote for anything without a public option. Mr. Emanuel, are you paying attention? Are you doing the math? Or are you reading the LA Times?





Funny how Conrad insists that "there aren't the votes". He's not the Senate whip, so he has no idea how many votes there are for anything. So, it would be folly to take his assertion seriously. Now, if the real Senate whip, Dick Durbin, makes the same statement, then we'll listen.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-19-09 07:44 AM
Response to Original message
9. some think that Rahm Emmanual and his brother are behind this coop idea . . .
and have opined that their ultimate goal is to have Medicare absorbed by these coops, which will be under control of the very same entities that control our current dysfunctional system -- the insurance companies . . . rather than expanding Medicare to cover everyone, so the theory goes, they're looking to kill it . . .

anyone know more about Emmanual's brother and his role in this whole healthcare fiasco? . . . I know I read something about it recently on DU, but can't recall precisely where . . .

the bottom line in the healthcare debate is the bottom line, i.e. the profits of the insurance and pharmaceutical industries . . . as long as they are the central players in healthcare, the entire system will be geared toward maintaining and increasing those profits rather than providing quality affordable healthcare for all . . . their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders mandates, by law, that generating profits is their sole objective . . . providing quality healthcare to all isn't even a minor consideration . . .

and therein lies the entirety of the "healthcare problem" in this country . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC