Consumer Watchdog Warns White House Strong Early Health Reform Rules are Needed to Prove Value of Law to Public

/PRNewswire/ -- Consumer Watchdog today warned the White House that the insurance industry is still intent on demolishing modest consumer protections in the health reform law, and outlined the most damaging industry demands in a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. The letter, noting that the chief industry lobbying group is hiring lobbyists with direct HHS and Justice Department ties, urges Sebelius not to accept any weakening and to repair some of the damage already done by industry pressure.

Read the letter, with data links, at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/SebeliusMLR1110.pdf

"The midterm elections are not a signal to water down reform until consumers can't see any benefit," said Carmen Balber, Washington director of the nonprofit, nonpartisan Consumer Watchdog. "The White House has to prove to doubting voters that it can protect them from having to choose between paying the mortgage and keeping their health insurance."

"Consumers' unhappiness with the health reform law stems directly from their belief that they won't personally benefit from it as they watch premiums soar," said Balber. "You can help most Americans see the benefit by enacting strong protections in these consumer regulations."

The letter said:

"As you know, the health reform law did nothing to cap runaway rate hikes. However, two provisions of the law meant to at least curb the premiums consumers pay are now in your court: rules to require insurance companies to spend more on actual health care and less on administration and profit, and rules to define and require insurance companies to justify 'unreasonable' premiums before they take effect. The insurance industry, in the wake of the midterm election, is refocusing its efforts against these provisions on your agency.

"The insurers have threatened to disrupt insurance markets if health reform regulations are not to their liking. We urge you to reject such intimidation.

"You must instead strengthen new rules intended to shine a spotlight on insurer spending and make the insurance industry more efficient in providing health care. This must include a strong definition of what constitutes an 'unreasonable' rate increase, given the unaffordable double-digit premium increases that insurers are now imposing on existing customers. Your definition will govern whether insurers have to publicly defend their rate increases, and should be as simple and inclusive as possible to ensure that any questionable increase receives additional review."

The letter also warned that insurers have key additional demands that would, if accepted, make meaningless the law's demand that insurers spend a higher proportion of premium revenue on health care:

"[The industry's] chief and most damaging additional demands are, in brief:

"1. To combine each plan of a single insurer at the national level. …. Combining them nationally for purposes of the medical loss ratio would allow insurers to gouge customers in high-profit states by offsetting areas of low medical spending with higher proportions in better-regulated states.

"2. To deduct insurance broker fees from premiums before measuring MLR. …. If the deduction is allowed, the MLR minimum of 80% in those markets will become meaningless.

"3. To give many plans a larger percentage 'bonus' in calculating whether they have met the 80% individual/small business minimum and the 85% group plan minimum for health care spending."

In addition, said the letter, HHS must tighten the NAIC's too-loose definitions of what can be counted as insurer health care, particularly: corporate image marketing campaigns wrapped in a public health care message; deduction of virtually all federal and state taxes from premium income before the health care percentage is calculated; and failure to make public the insurers' defense of what they are counting as health care.

Ultimately, said the letter,

"Consumers cannot expect to pay a fair price for health insurance until all insurance companies are required to justify, and get approval for, every premium change, and until the public is allowed to fully participate in the rate review process. We urge you to encourage the states to enact and enhance prior approval rate regulation and consumer participation. Strong rules on medical spending and premium review are nevertheless your strongest currently available tools to protect consumers from insurer profiteering and greed."

Consumer Watchdog is a nonpartisan consumer advocacy organization with offices in Washington, D.C. and Santa Monica, CA. Find us on the web at: http://www.ConsumerWatchdog.org

50,000 Letters Sent to Notre Dame Alumni Re: Obama

50,000 Letters Sent to Notre Dame Alumni Re: Obama; In Letter, Bishop Gracida Urged Former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican Mary Ann Glendon to Refuse Award


/PRNewswire/ -- 50,000 hand addressed letters were sent to Notre Dame Alumni, and 100,000 post cards for Vatican and Notre Dame officials, urging ND Grads to fight against Obama's scheduled speech.

Randall Terry and local Notre Dame Alumni sent 50,000 letters to Alumni from '88 and back. (Older Alumni were selected because they tend to be more conservative.)

The post cards are designed to be sent to Vatican and Notre Dame officials.

Link to the Letter, and PDF printer ready version of postcards below.

Here are some experts, beginning with an endorsement from Bishop Rene Henry Gracida, with his exhortation to Former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican Mary Ann Glendon:

"Randall,

I have visited your website and have signed the petition. I congratulate you on starting this initiative and I pray that it is successful. I urge you to expand this initiative to also persuade Ambassador Mary Ann Glendon to refuse to accept Notre Dame's Laetare Award. Blessings!"

+Rene Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi

Following are excerpts from Randall Terry:


I know that some cautious souls fear "strident" rhetoric, or "controversial" images. I ask those friends to remember the Gospels: remember Jesus turning over tables; chasing people with a whip; calling Pharisees the children of hell, a brood of vipers, white washed tombs, and sons of the devil.

In considering an appropriate response to killing babies and hurting mothers, remember Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Nathan, and other prophets -- who rebuked kings and priests -- who fearlessly condemned child-sacrifice in their day. They used rhetoric and images equal to the crimes they condemned. Shouldn't we follow their example? Are we above them? Or do we and our leaders have an unholy attachment to our "reputation" and "dignity" that shackles and muzzles us?

In the fight to end slavery, Frederick Douglass said, "It is not light that is needed, but fire; it is not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind, and the earthquake. The feeling of the nation must be quickened; the conscience of the nation must be roused; the propriety of the nation must be startled; the hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed; and its crimes against God and man must be proclaimed and denounced...

...But I am not naive... there are many faculty and alumni who have bought into the confusion of the death movement. They place unity and peace above justice -- and therefore do not like our actions as we cry out for the babies and moms. Still others support the President speaking at Notre Dame!

Randall Terry states: "We honor former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican Mary Ann Glendon, for her courage and integrity, as she refuses to share a platform at Notre Dame with President Obama. We pray that great is her reward in heaven.

"Our phones are ringing off the hook with praise and complaint, with joy from some and rage from others. I guess we really hit a nerve!"

The full letter and the post cards for Vatican and Notre Dame officials can be seen at www.StopObamaNotreDame.com