Today’s WSJ features an article summarizing the results of a WellPoint study estimating that Obamacare will raise health insurance premiums by as high as 200%.
At the request of Congressional delegations worried about their constituents—call it a public service—WellPoint mined its own actuarial data to model ObamaCare in the 14 states where it runs Blue Cross plans. The study therefore takes into account market and demographic differences that other industry studies have not, such as the one from the trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans, which looked at aggregate national trends.
In all of the 14 states WellPoint scrutinized, ObamaCare would drive up premiums for the small businesses and individuals who are most of WellPoint’s customers. (Other big insurers, like Aetna, focus on the market among large businesses.) Young and healthy consumers will see the largest increases—their premiums would more than triple in some states—though average middle-class buyers will pay more too.
….
In fact, what distinguishes the Wellpoint study is its detailed rigor. Take Ohio, where a young, healthy 25-year-old living in Columbus can purchase insurance from WellPoint today for about $52 per month in the individual market. WellPoint’s actuaries calculate the bill will rise to $79 because Democrats are going to require it to issue policies to anyone who applies, even if they’ve waited until they’re sick to buy insurance. Then they’ll also require the company to charge everyone nearly the same rate, bringing the premium to $134. Add in an extra $17, since Democrats will require higher benefit levels, and a share of the new health industry taxes ($6), and monthly premiums have risen to $157, a 199% boost.
The White House’s reaction was predictable:
Not even two hours after Wellpoint had presented its materials on the Hill, Democrats were already trashing it—which, considering that it runs to some 238 pages and took weeks to prepare, must have required remarkable powers of digestion and analysis.
“This is yet another insurance-industry report that twists the facts to produce a skewed result,” averred Linda Douglass, the White House communications director on health care. Said a spokesman for the Senate Finance Committee, “This is akin to the tobacco companies commissioning another study claiming nicotine isn’t addictive and cigarettes don’t cause cancer.” So in its Saul Alinsky fashion, the White House again attacks the messenger so it can avoid rebutting the message.
Ok, so the week’s drama in North Carolina came to a close with Easley’s campaign being fined $100k and the state democratic party fined $9k. The case will be turned over to the Wake County DA for possible prosecution. But more drama awaits in the form of the Federal Grand Jury. As this compelling drama unfolds the next few chapters will be interesting.
What I find absolutely remarkable is that we continued to hear, “I’m not sure” and “I don’t recall” throughout the week from folks talking about flights and donations and favors. That’s all well and good save for the fact that this was documented by Don Carrington over at the Carolina Journal for the past four years.
At the very least. If there were any suspicious activity that wasn’t paid for or reported and there is a reporter letting people know about it, then you must assume that people within the administration saw it as well and should have said, “You know what, we should probably make sure McQueen’s been paid and we get all this cleared up before it becomes a problem.”
But they didn’t do that, they arrogantly ignored the reports and thought the press would as well. They can’t say they didn’t know about it when the public knew about long before it came to a head at the board of election hearings. It also means they intentionally did nothing to make sure they were in compliance even after multiple stories came out. They simply can’t say that they didn’t recall and/or didn’t know. They did and still did nothing. It’s a remarkable lack of leadership that leads to such actions. Ultimately it shows that the same issues that led to the Democratic House Leader Jim Black’s downfall were also well underway during Democratic Governor Mike Easley’s tenure.
What happens when health care officials ignore biological differences between men and women? We have talked about this before, here and here. Now, a recent op-ed by Sarba Klein and Phyllis Greenberger in the NY Times argues that the biological differences between men and women should result in different doses of the H1N1 vaccine.
Their argument is based on the fact that men and women differ in their responses to several viral vaccines. The op-ed uses research found at the Archives of Internal Medicine to show that women’s bodies routinely generate a stronger antibody response than men’s do. This fact should result in different doses for the H1N1 vaccine, yet public health authorities insist that the doses remain equal despite women being overdosed.
The op-ed concludes saying:
“Only a handful of countries have plants to manufacture influenza vaccine, and the world’s wealthiest countries have locked up most of what these plants can produce with signed purchasing contracts.
We could make much more — and potentially save millions of lives — if we stopped giving women larger doses than they need.”
Durham County officials cancelled a vaccination clinic for this afternoon because the clinic is expected to run out of doses by morning’s end. When will health officials wake up and notice that there is a biological difference between men and women? Recognizing these differences, in this case, could actually save lives.
North Carolina taxpayers will be forced to subsidize an “immoral” company reaping “windfall profits.”
That’s the conclusion one could easily make in response to this announcement from the Governor’s office showing Gov. Perdue’s continued commitment to further politicize our economy.
Gov. Bev Perdue today announced that Fiserv Inc., (NASDAQ: FISV), a leading global provider of financial services technology solutions and Fortune 500 company, will expand its presence in the state by opening a new location in Catawba County. The company will create 419 jobs and invest $4.9 million in Hickory during the next three years. The announcement was made possible in part by an $800,000 grant from the One North Carolina Fund.
Translation: taxpayers will foot the bill for an $800,000 bribe to a company raking in nearly $5 billion in revenue last year - a bribe that also serves as a very expensive press release intended to make it appear as though the Governor is “creating jobs.”
The hypocrisy of demonizing the profits of some companies while subsidizing a company earning even higher profit margins is what is truly obscene.
Will anyone ask Gov. Perdue how she justifies doling out taxpayer dollars for corporate welfare to a company earning substantially higher returns than those “immoral” and “obscene” evil-doers in big oil and big health insurance?
Amazing! It appears that the Easley lawyers are trying to prove that Republican candidates took flights that were not reported. I guess Mike Easley’s mother never taught him that just because everybody else is doing something doesn’t make it right! And, this from a former Prosecuter/Attorney General/Governor.
They really should have compared apples to apples and looked at our present Governor’s reports… It appears that she and McQueen Campbell had the same wink and nod agreement as did Campbell and Easley.
McQueen Campbell was reimbursed for all the favors that he did for his good friend Mike Easley – - He was reimbursed when Governor Mike Easley appointed him to the North Carolina State University Board of Trustees.
The Board has adjourned until 3:30. The Chairman has advised the attorneys that he does not believe they will conclude business today. The talk today has concentrated on contributions and different accounts – including federal and non-federal accounts. Falmlen, at times irritable, was adament that the Democratic Party had done no wrong. The Democratic Party’s counsel compared the workings of the Democratic Party’s Combined Campaign with the NC Republican Party’s similar campaign.
It sounds like this will be the last day of hearings into the campaign finance. If this is true, there is a list of 29 subpoenas served (from the State Board of Election’s website), only 12 witnesses will appear and provide testimony. Yesterday, directly after Mike Easley testified, the Board appeared to be satisfied and announced that they were only going to call one more witness.
Scott Falmlen is testifying this morning. He is a political consultant and was Executive Director of the NC Democratic Party from October 1999 – April 2005. Falmlen had been the Executive Director of Florida’s Democratic Party.
According to Falmlen, the Democratic Party’s Coordinated Campaign concept is an effort to provide a service jointly to the whole ticket so that the individual would not have to duplicate the expense and efforts, he agrees with Leake that this is an effort to get voters to vote a straight ticket. Primarily related to GOTV efforts, he states that specific candidate messaging would be very difficult. Falmlen said that if a candidate didn’t meet their goals to the campaign – their names may be left off of campaign material.
He accepted the responsibility of reviewing contributions and making sure that they were permissible under the law.
Falmlen acknowledged that any checks that the Party received that could be attributed to the Governor’s efforts would be given a source code in order to track them. He stated that if an expenditure was made solely for the benefit of the Governor’s campaign an entrywould be made to the Governor’s fund to note that transaction also.
Who wrote Easley’s finance plans? It is a mystery.
Mike Easley and every other witness have danced around this question for some reason. The best Easley could do was say that Dave Horne was much more involved in 2000 than in 2004. Mike Easley does not remember where his campaign headquarters were. Easley never went to the Headquarters in 2004, but in 2000 he did visit the headquarters to make phone calls.
He is sure that he went to the Democratic Party Headquarters for different functions during his campaigns. Easley believed that everyone in his campaigns knew that they had to follow the rules. Kept John Wallace close for campaign finance questions and used the State Board of Elections as a resource.
Easley made it very clear that he was very busy with the business of the State’s Attorney General’s office in 2000 and Governor’s office in 2004 and did not have time to concern himself with the details of the Campaign. He stated that “he wasn’t in the loop on things” and they kept things away from him because he may have made changes. He didn’t get status reports about the campaign – his concern at all times was media and the bottom line.
Easley was asked why Campbell wouldn’t file invoices for all the flights he provided Easley. Easley said he didn’t know
Mr. Cordle was the State Board of Elections member to put everything in perspective on Mike Easley’s behalf. Mr. Cordle said that Easley had been in public life for 30 years ran for US Senate, Attorney General, and Governor and has raised a lot of money over the years. Mr. Cordle reiterated that Easley did like to be involved in fundraising. Cordle said that Easley likes governing and not fundraising and Easley agreed.
Millions of dollars, thousands of contributors, opposition from both Republicans and Democrats – newspapers have brought out things that Easley didn’t know about until Easley read them. Mr. Cordle said that this investigation has come down to leased cars and airplanes and that Easley had tried to correct the wrongs when he found out about them. Mr. Cordle stated Easley knew that only the Democratic Party made decisions on how to use contributions to the Combined Campaign. Mr. Cordle also said that the last issue was the repairs that Campbell did for Easley’s rental home and that Easley knew nothing about Campbell submitting an invoice for travel instead of the home repairs.
The Daily Tar Heel breaks a story today that UNC President Erskine Bowles leads the board of directors of a real estate development company that just won a no-bid contract from a UNC controlled group to redevelop property in downtown Chapel Hill.
UNC-system President Erskine Bowles leads the board of directors of the company that was chosen to develop University Square through a closed process.
But University representatives said his relationship with Cousins Properties did not have any effect on the decision to hire the company to develop the 12-acre space acquired last year by the UNC-Chapel Hill Foundation.
Even if there really is no conflict, isn’t the sheer appearance of one seem like something UNC would want to avoid?
This video is an emotional appeal to viewers and presents an argument that is entirely inaccurate. Children are covered by insurance either through their parent’s employer, as an individual or through Medicaid. In North Carolina, fewer than 12 percent of children are uninsured but can be covered under the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). SCHIP is administered by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and provides funding for uninsured children in states across the U.S., including North Carolina. While the video is touching, using children to manipulate a bottom line that is factually inaccurate is unnecessary and just plain wrong.