Washington (AP) - After working for months behind the scenes to help shape health care reform, the insurance industry is now sharply attacking the emerging plan with a report that maintains Senate legislation would increase the cost of a typical policy by hundreds, or even thousands, of dollars a year.

A spokesman for Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., whose 10-year, $829 billion overhaul plan faces a final Finance Committee vote Tuesday, was quick to react Sunday, questioning the credibility of the industry's late-in-coming cost estimate.

"It's a health insurance company hatchet job, plain and simple," said the spokesman, Scott Mulhauser.

The health insurance industry has been working until recently to help draft legislation, while publicly endorsing President Barack Obama's goal of affordable coverage for all Americans. The alliance has grown strained as legislation advances toward votes in Congress.

Late Sunday, the industry trade group America's Health Insurance Plans sent its member companies a new accounting firm study that projects the legislation would add $1,700 a year to the cost of family coverage in 2013, when most of the major provisions in the bill would be in effect.

Premiums for a single person would go up by $600 more than would be the case without the legislation, the PricewaterhouseCoopers analysis concluded in the study commissioned by the insurance group.

"Several major provisions in the current legislative proposal will cause health care costs to increase far faster and higher than they would under the current system," Karen Ignagni, the top industry lobbyist in Washington, wrote in a memo to insurance company CEOs.

The study projected that in 2019, family premiums could be $4,000 higher and individual premiums could be $1,500 higher.

Baucus spokesman Mulhauser said the study is "seriously flawed" because it doesn't take into account provisions in the legislation that would lower the cost of coverage, such as tax credits to help people buy private insurance, protections for current policies and administrative savings from a revamped marketplace.

White House health care spokeswoman Linda Douglass concurred. "This is an insurance industry analysis that is designed to reach a conclusion which benefits the industry, and does not represent what the bill does," she said.

The Baucus plan faces a final committee vote on Tuesday. It got a boost last week when the Congressional Budget Office estimated it would cover 94 percent of eligible Americans while reducing the federal deficit.

But the PricewaterhouseCoopers analysis attempted to get at a different issue -- costs for privately insured individuals.

It concluded that a combination of factors in the bill -- and decisions by lawmakers as they amended it -- would raise costs.

The chief reason, said the report, is a decision by lawmakers to weaken proposed penalties for failing to get health insurance. The bill would require insurers to take all applicants, doing away with denials for pre-existing health problems. In return, all Americans would be required to carry coverage, either through an employer or a government program, or by buying it themselves.

But the CBO estimated that even with new federal subsidies, some 17 million Americans would still be unable to afford health insurance. Faced with that affordability problem, senators opted to ease the fines for going without coverage from the levels Baucus originally proposed. The industry says that will only let people postpone getting coverage until they get sick.

Other factors leading to higher costs include a new tax on high-cost health insurance plans, cuts in Medicare payments to hospitals and doctors, and a series of new taxes on insurers and other health care industries, the report said.

"Health reform could have a significant impact on the cost of private health insurance coverage," it concluded.

Insurers played a major role in defeating then-President Bill Clinton's health care plan in the 1990s. Sunday, the industry stopped short of signaling all-out opposition. "We will continue to work with policymakers in support of workable bipartisan reform," Ignagni said in her memo.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55311

Insurance is high enough and once everyone is hit in the pocketbook they will be motivated to vote the Democrats out.

I think there needs to be something done about the health care in this country...I just don't believe we are going about it the right way

What does voting out Democrats have to do with the cost of insurance being to high?

bring on single-payer

Is it not their reform the insurance companies are reacting to???

Figures.

At least they are putting on the show of continuing to work with them.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>At least they are not saying this
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

LOL

Right

if you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it's free..

Yep, nothing is free my friend. There is an exicse tax on insurance companies in the proposed bill. That is going to be passed off to the consumer. They are going to get the money from the middle class. It always works that way. I'm in the middle of changing jobs and my previous employer was already cutting benefits.

FRANCE has the best healthcare in the world and pays ~40% LESS per person for it!!

BRING IT ON NOW

aren't they going to fine those without it???? unless it's REALLY cheap...how are people going to afford it if they live pay check to paycheck without benefits now?

What did they say.
Sinle pays 1,500 a year
family of 4 pays 4,000 a year
if you don't the fine is only 400


hello 400 is a lot less than 1,500
But then again I'm no mathmatitian

true and $400 is a lot of money still to some people

maybe you should check this link:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article6869646.ece

it was a screw up in care in england. deplorable. worse happens everyday here in the goood ole USA...

ok -

now you check out this one!

http://mingle2.com/topic/show/238331

I wanna play too

watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bFw8XG-2WU

White House blasts insurance sector report
Reuters
By Steve Holland and David Alexander Steve Holland And David Alexander – Mon Oct 12, 5:13 pm ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The White House on Monday blasted a report from the health insurance industry that said Senate healthcare legislation would lead to increases in annual insurance premiums of as much as $4,000 by 2019.

The report for the industry trade group America's Health Insurance Plans represented a shot across the bow at Democratic plans to overhaul the $2.5 trillion healthcare system as President Barack Obama has been gaining momentum on the issue.

A top goal of Obama in seeking to revamp healthcare is to rein in costs that have soared in recent decades. The report, prepared by consultants PricewaterhouseCoopers and posted on the industry group's website over the weekend, said costs would increase for Americans rather than decline.

"Health reform could have a significant impact on the cost of private health insurance coverage," the report concluded.

The report's release comes as the Senate Finance Committee plans to vote on Tuesday on its healthcare bill after budget analysts gave it a rosy report card, saying it would meet Obama's goal of reducing the budget deficit over 10 years.

A Finance Committee aide called the report "blatantly false and misleading."

The finance panel bill calls for sweeping insurance market reforms, requires most individuals to obtain medical policies and provides tax subsidies to help people afford coverage. The bill also would tax high-cost insurance plans and would place a $500,000 limit on the amount of executive pay that health insurance companies could deduct from taxable income.

The insurance industry group, which represents Aetna Inc, Cigna Corp, UnitedHealth Group Inc, WellPoint Inc and others, defended the report, saying lawmakers have abandoned any effort to slow healthcare costs.

Instead, the bill looks to raise money from insurance companies and, ultimately consumers and employers, to help pay for healthcare costs that outpace wages each year, the group's president Karen Ignagni told reporters.

"Because we don't see comprehensive cost control in any piece of legislation, we're looking at continuing those projected 6.2 percentage point increases ... I think it's time to bring that back," she said.

A spokesman for Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said the report "excludes all the provisions that will actually lower the cost of coverage," including tax credits and an increased enrollment.

The Obama White House had sought to work with the industry but the report was a clear indication that this strategy was no longer operative. It has brokered deals with drugmakers and hospitals, but no such deal has been struck with insurers.

"This is a self-serving analysis from the insurance industry, one of the major opponents of health insurance reform," White House spokesman Reid Cherlin said. "It comes on the eve of a vote that will reduce the industry's profits. It is hard to take it seriously," he added.

Ignagni, asked about whether the group was changing tactics, said its strategy is consistent and that the group was committed to working with Congress to pass reforms.

But she added that other sectors need to play a greater role in reducing healthcare spending rather than imposing taxes and fees.

"We need now to have a broader discussion about how all the other stakeholders fit into this ... conversation," she said.

HIGHER COSTS?

The industry group's report identifies four key factors in the Senate Finance Committee bill it says will drive up the cost of health insurance premiums, including a weak mandate that could result in many young people opting not to buy insurance.

A weak mandate coupled with measures preventing insurers from barring people with pre-existing conditions will fuel rapidly rising costs, as will other factors like taxes on high-cost healthcare plans and new taxes on some healthcare sectors, the report said.

A family of four under current law could expect to pay $15,500 by 2013, but that would rise to $17,200 if the new measures were adopted, the report found. The cost would be $21,900 by 2019 under the current system or $25,900 if the changes are implemented, it said.

"Efforts to increase coverage and promote quality could lead to a more efficient healthcare sector, but they could also lead to increased growth in costs if implemented without a full appreciation of the downstream impact on cost of health insurance coverage," the report said.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office last week put the cost at $829 billion, below Obama's $900 billion goal.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said the industry group's report should not be ignored.

"Higher premiums, higher taxes, and more government -- that's not reform. But that's precisely what the American people, the Congressional Budget Office and now outside experts have identified with this $1 trillion experiment that cuts Medicare, raises taxes and premiums, and threatens the health care options that millions of Americans enjoy."

A number of consumer advocacy groups that back reform echoed the White House's criticism, calling the report a scare tactic meant to derail Tuesday's Senate vote. They also pointed to insurers as a main driver in ratcheting up healthcare costs over the years.

Recent data shows premiums for health plans sponsored by employers, who provide coverage for most non-elderly adults with insurance, have more than doubled in the last decade.

"The insurance lobby now claims that health care reform will cause significant premium increases, conveniently forgetting that they imposed significant premium increases during the past decade that are making health coverage unaffordable for families and businesses," said Ron Pollack, head of the consumer health group Families USA.

(Additional reporting by Donna Smith and Susan Heavey; Editing by Eric Walsh)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091012/pl_nm/us_usa_healthcare

It already costs us now. The uninsured people already cost us now too.

True.

But the senates plan still leaves 25 million uninsured. That comes from the CBO.
So why even have it up for a vote if it doesn't do what is wanted health insurance for ALL.