Anthem Rate Increase Likely Justified By Cost Of Claims

by Louise on April 29, 2010

Earlier this year, the Colorado Division of Insurance began a review process of the rate increase they had approved for Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield last fall.  The rate increase of nearly 20% went into effect in January 2010, but the Division of Insurance is reconsidering it, and wading through mounds of paperwork to do so.  The process of reviewing the rate increase is a lengthy one, and it will probably take a few more months before it’s completed.

The executive director of the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative, Dede de Percin, noted that “This rate hike sounds outrageous and it is outrageous but it’s probably not a case of gouging. That’s the thing. That’s the real story. The rising cost of health care.”  She also explained that last year, the actual increase in expenses for health insurance carriers in terms of money spent to pay members’ medical claims, increase by 12%.  As long as we continue to have double digit increases in the cost of claims, double digit increases in premiums are pretty much unavoidable.  Consumers express outrage over the large premium increases rather than the increases in the cost of care, simply because they generally aren’t aware of the increases in the cost of care.  But there is no feasible way to bring down the cost of health insurance without addressing the cost of care.

As I noted last month, while Anthem’s rate increase for 2010 was a big one, their premiums are still very much in line with premiums currently being charged by other individual health insurance carriers in Colorado.  My guess is that de Percin’s take on this is probably correct: “… it is outrageous but it’s probably not a case of gouging.”

{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }

Jay May 3, 2010 at 3:15 pm

Dede de Percin shared a letter with us that she sent to John Tomasic of the Colorado Independent:

Dear John,

I was surprised to see my name in your story, “No relief yet for consumers suffering double-digit WellPoint rate hike,” since I haven’t spoken with you since early March. In it you suggest that I think Colorado should adopt a commission oversight model for health care. While I have said that thinking about the regulation of the private insurance market in the health system as similar to the regulation of utilities – private companies can be publicly regulated for the common good – I have never said that there should be a consumer commission for oversight. We actually already have a Consumer Insurance Council as part of the Division of Insurance here in Colorado, although our scope does not include direct regulation, we do advise and provide input.

Back in March, I emailed and called you to discuss points that needed clarification about your earlier Wellpoint story. At that time, I felt like I was clear about CCHI’s position and my statements, but clearly there was a problem with communication between us. I’m also wondering if perhaps you or Colorado Independent have a strong anti-insurer/pro-singer-payer perspective. If it’s the latter, I’m clearly not pleased with you manipulating things I said to you to advance your agenda.

I am concerned that you published a story purporting to cover new information on a topic using quotes from an interview conducted six or seven weeks ago. At this point I regard our professional relationship as tenuous; I hope you are able to improve in how you cover this story, your accuracy in representing my statements, and CCHI’s position.

Sincerely,

Dede de Percin

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: