TPMDC

White House Slams Industry's Audit Of Health Reform Bill

Spread the word and support this article by retweeting it!


White House Spokesperson Linda Douglass

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

The White House is pushing back on the new study commissioned by America's Health Insurance Plans suggesting health care costs would increase under the bill the Senate Finance Committee is voting on this week.

White House spokeswoman Linda Douglass called the report a "self-serving analysis" from an opponent of any kind of health insurance reform.

"It comes on the eve of a vote that will reduce the industry's profits," Douglass told TPMDC. "It is hard to take it seriously. The analysis completely ignores critical policies will lower costs for those who have insurance, expand coverage and provide affordable health insurance options to millions of Americans who are priced out of today's health insurance market or are locked out by unfair insurance company practices."

AHIP is a D.C.-based association representing more than 1,000 insurance companies and has been fighting the administration's efforts all year.

We'll have more on this throughout the day - if you hear members of Congress citing the report, let us know.

Late update: Evan has the Senate Finance Committee Dems' response here.

Later update: An AHIP spokesman responded on Fox this morning and we have the clip.

Comments (23) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (2)

October 12, 2009 9:05 AM   

Of course, this is self-serving pseudo-science bullshit that doesn't deserve the time of day. I could pull numbers out of my ass and they'd be every bit as accurate.

Still, for the sake of argument, let's say that this study was right. The next question would be, how much would premiums be lowered if there was a real, robust public option? Seems to me this could actually be used to strengthen the case for a public option. Though that would require treating this as a valid study, which it's not.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 9:08 AM   

I'd also like to see the fucking idiot(s) in Congress who will cite this report followed by how much money they have received from the insurance industry.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 11:28 AM    in reply to Viva!America!

Does the word, Republican, come to mind?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 10:15 AM   

And why wouldn't insurers be in the best position to know what this plan will do to premiums? I sure as heck don't trust the Dems after they lied to us about backroom deals, kept moving the goal posts, and did a bait-and-switch on the public option. Obamacare is change we can't afford.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 10:45 AM    in reply to bmull

concern troll alert

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 11:01 AM    in reply to bmull

The insurers are in the best position to know one thing and one thing only: How to balance risk to set rates and maximize profit. Insurance companies will not pay up if there is any feasible way to avoid it. They exist solely to make money.

Private insurers and the public health work at cross purposes. If the private insurance industry wants to make money by providing their service to the public, then it must be regulated like a public utility. No more lavish offices and rapacious profiteering by alternately raising premiums and denying coverage. Let them have a reasonable and guaranteed profit in exchange for providing universal health insurance, and nothing more.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 13, 2009 1:52 AM    in reply to Spiffarino

Sounds good to me. I've read a couple interviews with Uwe Reinhardt about the system in Germany and that's what it sounds like. The insurance companies there are like utilities - good analogy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 13, 2009 2:25 AM    in reply to Tanjaoui

Thank you.

I have heard that the German model originated with Bismarck. Private insurers were basically forced to provide health coverage through employers and, over time, many regulations were added to make the coverage universal and less expensive.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 11:33 AM    in reply to bmull

It's the industry that's jacked the cost of insurance up to begin with for no other reason but to increase profits by retaining health people who don't require medicals services, overcharging people over fifty years old 3 to 5 times the normal premium rates and denying insurance to people with pre-existing conditions. They rake in the money and don't pay out a penny. And you don't trust Democrats?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 11:33 AM    in reply to bmull

Idiot, do you really think the insurance companies would fight against a bill that raises premiums? Unless they believed they had something to gain?

come the fuck on man dont be this gullible. Yes the Baucus plan will raise premiums thats what its supposed to do. The insurance companies just dont think they are getting enough from it they want more. They want to be able to drop people based on pre-existing conditions still, they want to get rid of the tax on cadilac plans, they want more stringent penalties and jail time for people who refuse to buy their overpriced insurance.

Them coming out with this report is their strategy to bully members of congress and the president to bend to their will.

The proper response should be to pass a stronger bill like the Kennedy bill which includes a very stong public option. But given the rtrack record so far they are just going to cave into the insurance companies.

Get it out of your head, that these companies have our best interests at heart, they do not. Its all about money for them. This is the problem with our profit based system.

Also, the Baucus bill was the ONLY bill of the 5 being proposed that was written by the former VP of wellpoint insurance, not surprising its the one that fucks us in the ass.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 12:03 PM    in reply to bmull

See, part of the problem is this sort of delusional mindset that the US government has some duty, fiduciary, civic, or otherwise, to protect and cater to the insurance industry.

It doesn't. At all.

The duty of the US government is to the majority of citizens first. The share holders, stake holders, and employees of the insurance company are a tiny, tiny minority and subset of the United States population: the medical well-being of 25,000,000 uninsured is more important than the fiscal well-being of several thousand.

Anyone who argues otherwise is a selfish crank.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

VA1

user-pic

October 12, 2009 10:36 AM   

And why wouldn't insurers be in the best position to know..
Of course they know. Premiums have to rise to keep their profit structure intact. Why are they entitled to 20% returns? Did you get a 20% add on to your salary. You may be so caught up in Obama bashing, you don't see the insurance industry bait and switch. And they count on keeping everyone in the dark.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 10:50 AM    in reply to VA1

You again? How many IDs can one insurance lobbyist have around here?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 11:03 AM    in reply to Spiffarino

Oops...sorry. I actually read through your post and it was terrific.

Embarrassment: The cost of not paying attention.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

VA1

user-pic

October 12, 2009 11:28 AM    in reply to Spiffarino

Not a problem. Done it myself.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 12:49 PM    in reply to VA1

Kind of you to forgive. Thanks.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 10:39 AM   

Of course, it is self-serving. It is commissioned by the insurance lobby. There is a kind of sweet justice that after Baucus & Co. shafted the American People, the insurers are turning on him and his committee. Sadly, the Baucus Bill is garbage and a complete sell out. Apparently, he only sold out 99% and the lobby is trying for 100%.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 11:26 AM   

And in other staggeringly surprising news, the sun was seen rising in the east this morning, and the pope admitted he was Catholic. Stay tuned.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 12:59 PM   

They're running scared

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 2:31 PM    in reply to JohnMcCSF

This is the time when people that truly love America need to bury the enablers of fear with the truth.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 12, 2009 10:14 PM   

Barack Obama is in control. I can see the legislation passing with 3 public options. Who knows exactly what it would look like but check out the website I like to. It's cool. It solves the mystery.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 13, 2009 2:07 AM    in reply to USgreentech

Which website?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 13, 2009 2:05 AM   

So far the insurance industry has lobbied softly for toothless legislation. Now that it looks like the public option has some steam (in political circles, as distinguished from public support, which has been pretty strong across political affiliations on a consistent basis since it was mooted), the private insurers are getting nervous. This industry sponsored audit is actually a good thing. It might encourage Democrats to come back with an even stronger public option. To the extent insurers overplay their rhetorical hand, they give progressive initiatives cover. If that makes any sense. Bring it on. What was it FDR said about welcoming the hatred of his enemies?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on