MA Man Sues State Over Health Care Fine

Get ready for plenty of stories like Michael Merlina’s.  He can’t afford to buy health insurance as mandated by the state and he can’t afford the $2,000 fine levied on him for not buying a plan.  So he’s suing.

Michael Merlina was fed up, frustrated and seemingly out of options when he walked into Middlesex Superior Court last week and plunked down $275 for court fees.

With help from a few clerks, Merlina became his own lawyer and filed a lawsuit against the Massachusetts Health Insurance Connector Authority.

The 29-year-old North Reading glazier is fighting the $2,000 state fine for not having health insurance. In 2009, the first year penalties were in place, Merlina paid a $400 fine for him and his wife.

This time, he balked

It makes no sense to me,” Merlina told The Pulse. “I’m a hard-working, tax-paying guy who can’t afford $800 a month for health insurance, or the $2,000 penalty for not having it, and nobody seems to get this.

Oh, they get it.  They just don’t care.

You Lie! Obama Admin Will Not Rule Out Denying Insurance Due To Pre-Existing Conditions

You heard it ad nauseum from Barry & Co.:  Under Obamacare, for the first time in the history of the universe, the eeevil health insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage to Americans with pre-existing medical conditions.

As it turns out, it was just another Obama-ism (that would be a lie).

The Obama administration has not ruled out turning sick people away from an insurance program created by the new healthcare law to provide coverage for the uninsured.

Critics of the $5 billion high-risk pool program insist it will run out of money before Jan. 1, 2014. That’s when the program sunsets and health plans can no longer discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.

Administration officials insist they can make changes to the program to ensure it lasts until 2014, and that it may not have to turn away sick people. Officials said the administration could also consider reducing benefits under the program, or redistributing funds between state pools. But they acknowledged turning some people away was also a possibility.

Remember in November.

 

Beautiful. Congress May Be Fined For Lack Of ObamaCare Coverage

I’m shocked that nobody picked up on this when the bill was being scrutinized line by line.

Congress may be fined tens of millions of dollars a year under its own health-care law, in part because the bill dumps members of Congress and their staffs from their current health-care plans.

But no one really knows for sure what the bill does, not even the experts. For instance, exactly who qualifies as an “employer” — and therefore is subject to fines up to $3,000 per employee — is undefined in the bill.

If Congress were subject to a $3,000 fine for each of its employees, it would need to shell out approximately $50 million each year to Uncle Sam. Congress’s research arm, the Congressional Research Service (CRS), informally confirmed the possibility to Republican aides.

Kathleen Sebelius, President Obama’s top health-care cabinet official, will be responsible for establishing most of the details of how the law is implemented. Many Republicans who have raised the issue of Congress’s fining itself believe Sebelius likely will exempt Congress with a regulation narrowly defining “employer,” for instance.

Still, the possibility of the fines, and the uncertainty surrounding them, are drawing heckles from the health-care law’s critics.

“That’s the irony — here we may be the first major employer in the country to be fined for not providing proper health insurance for our employees,” Rep. Dan Lungren, California Republican, told The Daily Caller while laughing. “Isn’t that contrary to the very premise of the bill?”

I say the fine should be paid by each member of Congress who voted for ObamaCare.

MA Judge Denies Rate Injunction To Health Insurers, Defers To Commissioner

In a nutshell:  The judge passed on getting involved, stating that the issue needs to go through the proper channels within the Division of Insurance.   As if the appeals process will yield a different result from the Patrick-backed commissioner.

Judge Stephen E. Neel’s decision against granting the preliminary injunction sought by insurance companies means the state’s rejection of 235 proposed rate increases stands for now. The higher rates would have taken effect April 1.

The judge rejected the companies’ contention that the insurance market would be thrust into chaos if they could not quickly institute the higher rates. But the ruling is not the final chapter in the battle. Insurers are pursuing appeals within the Division of Insurance. If their appeals are turned down, the court would take up the case later this spring.

During the appeals process, last year’s base rates for what is known as the small-group market will remain in effect. Neel also denied the insurers’ request for an expedited trial.

The case has focused a national spotlight on the tug of war between regulators and a health care system over mounting costs for consumers and businesses.

Governor Deval Patrick, who imposed emergency regulations that set the stage for regulators to reject premium increases, hailed Neel’s decision as a victory for small businesses and families that have been burdened by years of rising health care expenses.

The “big victory” for Deval is a huge defeat for the NON PROFIT insurers and the individuals and small businesses who will be shut out as the insurers refuse to sell new policies until the dispute is “settled.”

It’s like having an ObamaCare crystal ball.

Cartoon by Lisa Benson via Townhall

It Begins: MA Insurers Stop Offering New Policies After State Rejects Rate Increases

A glimpse into the future of ObamaCare:

The standoff between Massachusetts regulators and health insurance companies intensified yesterday, as most insurers stopped offering new coverage to small businesses and individuals, and state officials demanded that the insurers post updated rates online and resume offering policies by Friday.

People seeking to buy health insurance for the first time, or customers looking to change policies, found they could not do so, at least temporarily.

“We’re in limbo until the issue gets resolved,’’ said Lora Pellegrini, president of the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans, a trade group representing most of the state’s insurance companies. “There are no approved rates in the market right now. You’re seeing the first sign of the kind of market chaos we were worried about.’’

Insurance Commissioner Joseph G. Murphy said he has asked insurers to quote rates for new coverage through the state’s Health Connector website by week’s end, and reminded them that they are required by law to do so. The new quotes would use base rates set last year, plus additional factors such as the age and size of a company’s workforce, Murphy said.

In other words, offer the same plan as last year with zero increase in the rate – or else.

Health insurers, however, said they could not calculate new rates until a judge rules on their request for an injunction to prevent the state from continuing to block increases for the coverage period that started April 1. Insurance carriers had proposed premium rate increases averaging 8 to 32 percent, which the state found excessive. The case is expected to go before a Superior Court judge in Boston as early as tomorrow.

Insurance industry critics said the inability of new customers to buy insurance, even for a few days, is troubling. “This really is a violation of the fundamental principles of health care reform in Massachusetts, which is the universal availability of insurance,’’ said Brian Rosman, research director at Health Care for All, a Boston consumer advocacy group.

The road to single payer begins in Massachusetts.

Insurance groups to Senate: public option will dismantle employer coverage

The letter came from America’s Health Insurance Plans and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association.

“A government-run plan no matter how it is initially structured would dismantle employer-based coverage, significantly increase costs for those who remain in private coverage, and add additional liabilities to the federal budget,” said the letter from AHIP chief Karen Ignagni and Scott Serota, the head of Blue Cross.

“We do not believe that it is possible to create a government plan that could operate on a level playing field. Regardless of how it is initially structured, a government plan would use its built-in advantages to take over the health insurance market,” added the industry letter.

Obama was asked about this at his presser.  He proclaimed that their statements “defy logic.”

You know what defies logic in my book?  Paying $1 trillion to insure only one third of the uninsured.

(stay tuned for more on the presser)