<p>CF, you’re right - I do not know (although I have my suspicions) but this guy Lee should also say he doesn’t know (especially since the numbers aren’t looking good) rather than always trying to put a positive spin on it. He sounds like a run-of-the-mill, double-talk politician who is reading from a script.</p>
<p>Aetna Ceo told the media yesterday that Aetna could be forced out of Obamacare. Here are some quotes:</p>
<p>"Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini told CNBC on Wednesday that Obamacare has failed to attract the uninsured, and he offered a scenario in which the insurance company could be forced to pull out of program. The company will be submitting Obamacare rates for 2015 on May 15. “Are they going to be double-digit [increases] or are we going to get beat up because they’re double-digit or are we just going to have to pull out of the program?”</p>
<p>"He said that so far, Obamacare has just shifted people who were insured in the individual market to the public exchanges where they could get a better deal on a subsidy for coverage. “We see only 11 percent of the population is actually people that were firmly uninsured that are now insured. So [it] didn’t really eat into the uninsured population.”</p>
<p>[Aetna</a> could be forced out of Obamacare: CEO Mark Bertolini](<a href=“http://www.cnbc.com/id/101354183]Aetna”>http://www.cnbc.com/id/101354183)</p>
<p>The govt released documents today which indicates the system is so flawed it could bankrupt insurance companies:</p>
<p>"To justify a no-bid contract with Accenture after firing CGI as the lead contractor, the administration released documents from the Department of Health and Human Services and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services that offered a rare glimpse of its worst fears, saying the problems with the website puts “the entire health insurance industry at risk” … “potentially leading to their default and disrupting continued services and coverage to consumers.”</p>
<p>“But the back end still hasn’t been built, so insurers are dealing with massive confusion, missing information on who’s signed up and what subsidies they get.”</p>
<p>“There’s no way to effectively match policies and people,” says Holtz-Eakin. “And on top of that, you can’t match policies, people, to the federal subsidies and that’s a big problem in terms of just the mechanics of making payments.”</p>
<p>“The administration emphasizes that fixing the site by mid-March is urgent. Otherwise the system could descend into chaos and threaten the future of ObamaCare.”</p>
<p>[Administration</a> fears part of health care system so flawed it could bankrupt insurance companies | Fox News](<a href=“http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/22/administration-fears-part-health-care-system-so-flawed-it-could-bankrupt/]Administration”>Administration fears part of health care system so flawed it could bankrupt insurance companies | Fox News)</p>
<p>The last post is political garbage.</p>
<p>The Aetna post is interesting.</p>
<p>The 11 percent number is going to increase. The 11 percent number will vary across firms but let’s go with it.</p>
<p>If there were 15 million people that had private insurance before Obamcare, what percentage of those 15 million people renewed their policies. Eventually, the percentage is going to be in 90’s, but some people do not have to renew yet. I think conservatively 75 percent is a good number. That would be 11.25 million. I dont care… We will use 10
million. </p>
<p>If that is the case, we are talking about 1.2 million formerly uninsured people that have signed up for health insurance. I am just talking about private health insurance. Not medicaid where there have been additional sign ups. And we are in the second inning. </p>
<p>There are going to be a lot of runs scored in March. ;)</p>
<p>Peter Lee is going to release how many people have signed up for insurance off the exchanges next month. That will give us good info…a score in Calif during the second inning. :)</p>
<p>[Anthem</a> Blue Cross Leading Insurers in Covered California Enrollees - California Healthline](<a href=“http://www.californiahealthline.org/articles/2014/1/23/anthem-blue-cross-leading-insurers-in-covered-california-enrollees]Anthem”>Anthem Blue Cross Leading Insurers in Covered California Enrollees | California Healthline)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not really. Aetna has hasn’t been a fan/player in the individual market for a long time. Every so often they dip their toes in it, only to pull back a few years later.</p>
<p>My guess is that this is a signal that they want out – probably never really wanted in, but did so to be a ‘team player’* – and political posturing for the WH: see, we tried, but…</p>
<p>*Aetna is a Medicare processor in some regions, so they have to look like they are supportive of HHS.</p>
<p>Dstark,
Kuddos for intelleigent suggestions which I decided to use. I hope that you will like your own words that I repeat here.
“The last 2 posts are political garbage.”</p>
<p>Bluebayou, I think you are right. </p>
<p>I just wanted to play with Aetna’s numbers. :)</p>
<p>I do think we have 1 million+ people that are no longer uninsured. I take the Aetna CEO at his word about the 11 percent.</p>
<p>Aetna already pulled out of Maryland’s individual market. That market is small potatoes to them so they were never an important player.</p>
<p>Most of the sign ups on the exchanges during the first 3 months of 2014 are going to be formerly uninsured people. </p>
<p>We are going to end up after the sign up period with 4 to 7 million no longer uninsured people who signed up for private insurance. Those numbers are like the 10 and 90 percentile for average MCAT scores for a medical school. 
I know that is a wide range. I am not a bs artist. I dont want to come up with bs numbers. </p>
<p>The range will narrow over time. March is the biggest month so it is hard to be precise before March. I prefer the 7 million number. I know that is not a surprise. :)</p>
<p>Then there is medicaid.</p>
<p>One of you should send the rest of us a photo from the bench.</p>
<p>GP reports that Douglas Holtz-Eakin said, "“But the back end still hasn’t been built, so insurers are dealing with massive confusion, missing information on who’s signed up and what subsidies they get.”</p>
<p>I don’t know whether the back end is now built; we heard it wasn’t built yet, but that was months ago. OTOH, I’m better off than Holtz-Eakin, because he doesn’t know what the back end IS. It’s the system that pays the insurers the subsidies every month. It has nothing to do with signing up people and sending their information to insurers. In other words, what Holtz-Eakin is saying above doesn’t make sense. The lack of a back end (while, assuredly, a problem) has nothing to do with what Holtz-Eakin claims.</p>
<p>We’ve been talking about how the enrollment period isn’t over, numbers are yet to come in. Thing is, whether or not we hit the 3/31 deadline, enthusiasm for health insurance is going to come in waves. People talk, awareness grows, circumstances change, etc.</p>
<p>I am not sure “previously insured” folks should so easily be dismissed. I was- at a cost more than 4x what I now pay. I find it significant that costs are now, in effect, tailored to income (yup, “affordability,” even if not perfect for all) rather than being shelf pricing. Up to 12/31, I was charged what some millionaire would be, for our plan.</p>
<p>I had a link removed, that reacted to GP’s earlier Malkin ref. McKinsey is big, but some of their studies quoted are out of date or were based on narrow questions, specific situations or sheer what-if. GP, it’s not just whether or not someone you feel is cite-worthy reports something. You really need to vet the info provided and that includes looking at context and perspective.</p>
<p>Btw, if you google the title of the wsj article, you can see it. I think I got the right one.</p>
<p>And a ques: I may have missed or misunderstood: when you add up the number of people who signed up for new policies in CA and the number of new Medicaid enrollments, doesn’t that offer a new and broader picture of the “success” of all this?</p>
<p>Lookingforward, you are asking GP to vet? </p>
<p>You are asking the impossible. :)</p>
<p>I heard GP is busy conpiling the Oct sign up numbers right now. Those numbers dont look to good. Projecting those Oct numbers going forward, there are only going to be 600,000 sign ups on the exchanges. How many sign ups do we have now? 2.5 million? Maybe 90 percent of sign ups wont pay. :)</p>
<p>The bench was bluebayou’s idea. I like it though. I just havent been to the city much lately. :)</p>
<p>Why not just the September picture? Or last summer? All that would certainly shore up the argument this is doomed. That’s how silly much of this is.</p>
<p>Btw, so often, when I go hunting down some reference, it’s a blizzard of conservative anti’s repeating and building-on. Takes pages to find something neutral. Just that excessive jumping on the bandwagon is enough to make me even more suspicious. They all want a chance to be heard; quoting romani: facts be damned.</p>
<p>:)…</p>
<p>Moderator’s Note</p>
<p>I don’t see relevancy of how many people are enrolling as relevant to this thread.</p>
<p>There is absolutely no reason for people to fight about it. If it has to lead to so much trash talking, I will add a rider putting a stop to all such discussions.</p>
<p>Are there any practical implications to Moody’s downgrading of health insurance companies outlooks from stable to negative?</p>
<p>Another major US company has dropped health insurance for their part-time workers.</p>
<p>[Target</a> to Drop Health Insurance for Part-Time Workers - Bloomberg](<a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?)</p>
<p>“While we’ve had industry risks from regulatory changes on our radar for a while, the ongoing unstable and evolving environment is a key factor for our outlook change,” said Stephen Zaharuk, a Moody’s Senior Vice President and author of the report. “The past few months have seen new regulations and announcements that impose operational changes well after product and pricing decisions were finalized.”</p>
<p>Uncertainty over the demographics of those enrolling in individual products through the exchanges is a key factor in Moody’s outlook change, says the rating agency. Enrollment statistics show that only 24% of enrollees so far are aged 18-34, a critical group in ensuring that lower claim costs subsidize the higher claim costs of less healthy, older individuals. This is well short of the original 40% target based on the proportion of eligible people in this cohort, says Moody’s.</p>
<p>In addition, the impact of the industry assessment tax that begins in 2014 is unclear, says Moody’s. The rating agency notes that while some insurers built this tax into their premium calculations, the amounts received may still be insufficient to cover their share of the assessment."</p>
<p><a href=“Moody's - credit ratings, research, and data for global capital markets”>Moody's - credit ratings, research, and data for global capital markets;