<p>“If Hobby Lobby were not such a bastion of wage slaves to begin with”</p>
<p>What? They start cashiers at $9.50 per hour. Store managers make over 50K per year. That is pretty good in retail. Facts matter. </p>
<p>Pre-ACA, our plan included bc for my girls- I was thinking way back to my own youth and as much referring to how long the arguments about devices that interrupt or disrupt implantation have been going on. The morning after pill can prevent ovulation, but also " irritate the lining of the uterus (endometrium) so as to inhibit implantation." This talks about some of that point:</p>
<p><a href=“What's So Controversial About the Contraceptives in Hobby Lobby - The Atlantic”>What's So Controversial About the Contraceptives in Hobby Lobby - The Atlantic;
<p>People can speculate how far this ruling could go, but I personally first want to separate just what they did say, from what some feel it could lead to. </p>
<p>Yeah, pre-ACA ours did not, which is probably why I can’t really understand why this is such a crisis. </p>
<p>Flossy, if you think about it, follow the conflict, it’s clear. Which trumps? The right to reproductive control or the right not to be responsible for the next person’s choices, when you can slide that under religious beliefs under the RFRA? For advocates that birth control be made available to all, any block means it’s going to hit the segment of the population least able to just go pay for their own.</p>
<p>Then it gets all wrapped up in not just personal freedoms, but the cost to society. I find myself looking at this just the same as ACA- let’s try understand it, not just go with the first things you hear. Or don’t hear.</p>
<p>Well, firstly I don’t see this as having anything to do with reproductive control. It’s only about 4 forms of contraception. There are at least 16 others and even those 4 are not being prohibited they are just not covered by this insurance plan. So what? Insurance doesn’t cover 100-percent of a lot of drugs. According to PP costs vary from $30 to $65 for the morning-after pill and $500 to $900 for an IUD insertion. This is not a crisis. Also, this whole right to free BC doesn’t make a lot of sense to me and it’s not the same thing as prohibition, at all. Or even close. That’s my problem. Along with the government telling a business that they have to buy something for their employees from another business. It’s just weird.</p>
<p>And, all of that is without the religious issues which are not insignificant either. But, I do think they went in that direction to win. Free BC probably wouldn’t trump religious freedom since there are lots of other ways to deliver free BC. </p>
<p>Pricing will become more transparent in Calif…</p>
<p><a href=“California Department of Insurance”>http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/2014/release054-14.cfm</a></p>
<p>Very few people chose catastrophic plans…20 percent chose bronze plans. Copper plans won’t be too popular…however…if copper plans exist…I will look at them.</p>
<p><a href=“Proposal To Add Skimpier ‘Copper’ Plans To Marketplace Raises Concerns | KFF Health News”>http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2014/July/01/Michelle-Andrews-questions-about-copper-plans.aspx</a></p>
<p>Then we have Georgia…quite a few insurance companies are interested in joining Georgia’s market. That is good.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.georgiahealthnews.com/2014/06/insurers-seek-join-2015-ga-exchange/”>http://www.georgiahealthnews.com/2014/06/insurers-seek-join-2015-ga-exchange/</a></p>
<p>New Hampshire is expanding medicaid…other states will too…</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/and8216a-uniquely-new-hampshire-approach-to-medicaid-expansion/2014/07/01/4e2db260-0108-11e4-9a6a-955ebcaa3334_story.html”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/and8216a-uniquely-new-hampshire-approach-to-medicaid-expansion/2014/07/01/4e2db260-0108-11e4-9a6a-955ebcaa3334_story.html</a></p>
<p>Following the link in one of dstark’s articles, an Avalere analysis says that premiums for Silver plans are rising an average of 8% in the eight states they looked at:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.avalerehealth.net/expertise/managed-care/insights/avalere-analysis-average-exchange-premiums-rise-modestly-in-2015-and-variat”>http://www.avalerehealth.net/expertise/managed-care/insights/avalere-analysis-average-exchange-premiums-rise-modestly-in-2015-and-variat</a></p>
<p>Yes…no death spiral. </p>
<p>I believe every state that has talked about 2015 sees more insurance companies competing on the exchanges.</p>
<p>Calif hasnt talked about 2015 yet. There is one insurance company with 1,000 customers dropping out. </p>
<p>My like buttons seem to have disappeared but I like eb’s definition of sincerely held belief. </p>
<p>I am hoping this bodes well for Kaiser’s rates in Calif for 2015. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.avalerehealth.net/expertise/managed-care/insights/washington-state-rate-analysis-carriers-with-low-2014-market-share-hold-dow”>http://www.avalerehealth.net/expertise/managed-care/insights/washington-state-rate-analysis-carriers-with-low-2014-market-share-hold-dow</a></p>
<p>"Molina, which captured only 1 percent of 2014 exchange enrollment in the state, proposed a nearly 7 percent average rate decrease for 2015. In addition, other low enrollment carriers, Kaiser Permanente and BridgeSpan Health, each proposed average increases of less than 2 percent. Washington state is the first to release both 2015 rate filings and carrier-specific enrollment offering early insights into how enrollment drives the pricing strategy of plans in the exchange market.</p>
<p>“Consumers enrolling through the exchange are extremely price sensitive and tend to focus primarily on premiums,” said Dan Mendelson, CEO at Avalere Health. “In this vibrant market, plans that gained a minimal share in 2014 will naturally want to price their products more competitively in 2015.”</p>
<p>Dstark, calpers came out with numbers which usually predicts the state. IIRC it was somewhere around 8% as well. Yeah, whatever happened to that death spiral everyone was talking about? </p>
<p>I doubt that the Hobby Lobby decision is going to save Hobby Lobby any noticeable amount of money.</p>
<p>8 percent? </p>
<p>Then Kaiser should end up with very small increases, if any. </p>
<p>I told SamaraiLandshark…we were eventually going to end up with increases of 7.5 percent a year… :). </p>
<p>Do you have a calpers link handy, CF? </p>
<p>If not, I will search.</p>
<p>I read rumors last year that Kaiser intentionally priced their premiums a little high. Because of the way they operate, they can’t easily handle a large influx of subscribers, so they (allegedly) priced higher so as not to get too many buyers.</p>
<p>Ok…I found this which I like…</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.sacbee.com/2014/06/17/6490833/calpers-health-premiums-for-2015.html”>http://www.sacbee.com/2014/06/17/6490833/calpers-health-premiums-for-2015.html</a></p>
<p>"CalPERS’ health care premiums are going up again for hundreds of thousands of public employees and their families, although 40 percent of CalPERS members will see their rates decline.</p>
<p>The 2015 CalPERS premiums, closely watched in the health care industry because of the pension fund’s size and clout, will be a decidedly mixed bag. Blue Shield of California HMO subscribers will be hit with rate hikes of 9.6 percent to 16.4 percent, depending on the specific plan. But Kaiser HMO members’ rates will fall 4.3 percent.</p>
<p>“Some are cutting, some are increasing. That’s really interesting,” said Joanne Spetz, a health care economist at the University of California, San Francisco. She said the wide variations could reflect different experiences the insurers have had with the CalPERS patient population."</p>
<p>I am leaning towards Kaiser so I hope that 4.3% drop transfers to individual plans.</p>
<p>"Overall, the CalPERS basic HMO plans will see a 3.9 percent increase, while its HMO Medicare members will see rates go up 5.9 percent. PPO rates will go up less than 1 percent, but Medicare PPO rates will rise 11.5 percent.</p>
<p>CalPERS said more than 570,000 members of CalPERS will see rate cuts averaging 3 percent. Another 175,000 members will see their rates go up, but by less than 3 percent. Together, those groups represent about half of the CalPERS membership pool."
"</p>
<p>Fang, I don’t think they care about the money. This was all about striking a blow against ACA. </p>
<p>Wow. I agree with Lasma! And, the like buttons are suddenly back,btw.</p>
<p>I just read this and smile.</p>
<p>"In its battle over contraception coverage, Hobby Lobby is coming out with egg on its face.</p>
<p>The craft store chain is fighting Obamacare’s contraception mandate, taking its argument to the Supreme Court, which heard arguments last week and is expected to rule by June.</p>
<p>But Hobby Lobby’s right hand apparently doesn’t know what its left hand is doing, at least when it comes to the companies that make certain forms of birth control that it equates with abortion. While the company has waged a fight against the Affordable Care Act’s coverage of birth control methods it opposes, its own 401k plan had more than $73 million invested in funds with stakes in companies producing intrauterine devices (IUDs) and emergency contraceptive pills, Mother Jones reports.</p>
<p>“This is the height of hypocrisy,” Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said in a statement to The Associated Press. “Hobby Lobby’s CEO wants to deny the company’s 13,000 employees access to affordable birth control, while investing in pharmaceutical companies that make it.”</p>
<p>It’s no small share, either: the $73 million represents three-quarters of the retirement plan’s total assets, Mother Jones notes.</p>
<p>So which companies are being supported by Hobby Lobby’s 401k investments? They include Pfizer (PFE), which makes the drugs Cytotec and Prostin E2, which are used to induce abortions, and Bayer, which makes the Mirena and Skyla IUDs."</p>
<p><a href=“Anti-abortion company Hobby Lobby invests in contraception makers - CBS News”>http://www.cbsnews.com/news/antiabortion-company-hobby-lobby-invests-in-contraception-makers/</a></p>
<p>Flossy, are you comfortable with the idea that your boss gets to decide which specific health care benefits you can have and which you can’t? </p>
<p>I agree that the Hobby Lobby court case was not motivated by money, and apparently their “sincerely held” convictions about birth control methods that they wrongly believe cause abortion are not so sincere when it comes to their investments. It’s all about trying to strike a blow against the ACA. But it’s not much of a blow. </p>