The one item in particular requiring health insurers to devote 85 percent to medical care is something perhaps we all wonder about, where does the money go? We don't know as consumers, and when faced with a claim, were there funds directed to other areas that could be used to pay claims, big question? All we know is that it seems more prevalent today to expect a battle, find an advocacy to help figure it out, and cross your fingers and hope for the best. There are very large stashes of reserve funds in house by all the insurers that are there "just in case", so is this perhaps a just in case potential solution? BD
Also, it would be nice to have all bills together instead of several, perhaps a general plan that could set the rules under one heading? September 30th is the deadline for signing or for a veto and we still do not have a budget here in California. BD
(09-03) 19:13 PDT -- A significant number of health care bills is headed to the governor's desk, but industry watchers say the changes promised in the proposed legislation are a far cry from comprehensive policy reform.
Health insurers would be required to devote 85 percent of their premium dollars to medical care, as well as provide maternity and broader mental health coverage.
Some elements of the bills echo Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's 2007 broad overhaul proposals, which failed in the Legislature early this year.
"Despite the stalling of health care reform, we have taken some major steps this year. It's pretty clear the governor will sign some and veto others," said Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access, a health care consumer advocacy coalition.
The California Association of Health Plans, which represents the industry, has opposed the bill, saying the standard to prove members willfully lied is impossibly high. While the governor has supported the concept of the bill, Zingale could not say whether he would support the legislation headed to his desk.
0 comments :
Post a Comment