[Vision2020] ID Public Records Law: UI
Wayne Price
bear at moscow.com
Wed Oct 7 15:05:22 PDT 2009
Kit,
Your comment raises an interesting question. IF medical/health
insurance is going to be required for everyone in the US, does that
mean that car insurance will go down?
Wayne
On Oct 7, 2009, at 2:46 PM, Craine Kit wrote:
> Another cost of the lack of a realistic payment system for health
> care involves car insurance. I drive a 20 year old Honda. Most of my
> insurance premium is devoted to covering medical costs, just in case
> I am in an accident. A good chunk of that covers me and my
> passengers if the other driver is at-fault and un- or under insured.
>
> Kit Craine
>
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 6, 2009, at 7:56 AM, Wayne Price wrote:
>
>> Saundra,
>>
>> Your message below has also brought up another unintended
>> consequence that has resulted from the insurance problem - Law suits!
>>
>> "And, even for those able to make minimal contributions to an HSA,
>> they may
>>> never get ahead. All it may take is your kid falling of his bike
>>> & breaking
>>> his arm, or your daughter getting hit by a softball & needing
>>> stitches, or a
>>> slip on the ice, or an asthma attack to wipe out the little
>>> saved . . . and
>>> a good chunk of you annual salary to boot."
>>
>>
>> A slip on the ice and underinsured? Result is to sue the property
>> owner. Who threw the softball that resulted in little Susie
>> needing stitched up? Sue them.
>> Billy falls off his bike due to an uneven sidewalk - Sue the
>> property owner!
>>
>> Folks that would normally just shake off the incident don't
>> anymore. Because of the lack of insurance (or under insured) the
>> solution is sue them.
>>
>>
>>
>> Wayne
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 6, 2009, at 1:07 AM, Saundra Lund wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Again Paul,
>>>
>>> You wrote:
>>> " I'm not quite sure why my ginormous and presumably unearned
>>> salary has
>>> become such a big issue. I was letting you know that there are at
>>> least a
>>> few situations where people are happily saving money on this plan."
>>>
>>> A couple of points.
>>>
>>> I'll say *again* I'm truly glad Plan H is working well for you.
>>> As a member
>>> of the UI community, I would certainly hope you would wish the
>>> same for the
>>> UI employees -- that they have affordable access to health
>>> insurance that
>>> works well for them -- who can afford nothing BUT Plan H that
>>> ISN'T working
>>> well for them.
>>>
>>> And, I apologize if it sounded like I was picking on your salary
>>> -- that
>>> wasn't my intention. I don't know what you make, and until your
>>> response, I
>>> didn't know you had no dependents, either. When I first started
>>> looking into
>>> the whole health insurance debacle in this country, I learned that
>>> rural
>>> parts of the country face unique challenges with respect to both
>>> health
>>> *care* and health *insurance*. Looking for an easy quick & dirty
>>> comparison, I thought I'd compare UI & BSU. The results were
>>> shocking, and
>>> not in a good way. I then thought maybe I'd best check out ISU so I
>>> wouldn't have a sample of one that could very well be skewed.
>>> When the
>>> rates were identical, I checked out LCSC only to see that they
>>> have the same
>>> excellent choices and prices as the other two, and that's when I
>>> learned
>>> that the reason for the excellent choices and prices are because
>>> they are
>>> part of the state pool.
>>>
>>> Clearly, UI employees ***with families*** are at a HUGE financial
>>> disadvantage with respect to health insurance, and that became my
>>> refrain.
>>>
>>> However, the more I asked questions and talked to UI employees,
>>> the more I
>>> heard that it's *not* just UI employees with families -- single
>>> employees
>>> are unhappy, too, particularly those towards the bottom of the
>>> university-wide compensation spread. If you're above that level,
>>> congrats
>>> and I'm happy to assume you earn your salary just the same as the
>>> cleaning
>>> specialist who's earning $21,000 a year :-)
>>>
>>> I don't know how old you are, but allow me to point out that
>>> living on Ramen
>>> noodles and pancakes is an entirely different thing when you are
>>> in your 20s
>>> than when you are in your 40s . . . or older.
>>>
>>> It sounds like Plan H is a really good fit for you, but if you've
>>> kept up
>>> with the health care debate, you surely understand that HSAs
>>> really *aren't*
>>> appropriate for a great many people, yet that turned out to be the
>>> *only*
>>> affordable option for a lot of UI employees. You may also know
>>> that the
>>> whole CDHC theory is hotly debated, and HSAs are perceived to be a
>>> cornerstone of CDHC. I think for people who WANT to take the risk
>>> with what
>>> is modified catastrophic only coverage, that's their choice;
>>> however, I
>>> vehemently disagree with a large employer like UI pricing the vast
>>> majority
>>> of employees with families out of anything BUT a high deductible
>>> HSA plan.
>>> It's just completely immoral, IMHO.
>>>
>>> But, let's get back to my main point, please: what on earth is
>>> going on
>>> that UI employees are at such a HUGE health insurance disadvantage
>>> compared
>>> to other state employees?! If the 25,000+ state employees --
>>> including
>>> those just 30 miles away at LCSC -- were all in the same boat,
>>> that would be
>>> one thing, but employees in the state pool are at a distinct
>>> advantage when
>>> it comes to health insurance. In addition to the real-life
>>> difference this
>>> makes to UI employees, it's also harmful when it comes to
>>> recruiting faculty
>>> and staff, which isn't good for the UI community.
>>>
>>> You also wrote:
>>> "If you are putting money into the HSA, then you will have some in
>>> the
>>> account that can be used when trying to meet your higher
>>> deductible. I
>>> understand that the first year is a crap shoot - you may need to
>>> pay $X when
>>> you have yet put that much into the account."
>>>
>>> But, Paul, that's a big IF in your first sentence. Quite a few of
>>> the
>>> people I know who were financially forced into Plan H aren't able
>>> to benefit
>>> much -- if at all -- from the HSA because they just can't afford to
>>> contribute -- or contribute much -- to an HSA. Rewind to my
>>> example of a
>>> single parent with two children with a gross pay of $40,000 and
>>> tell me how
>>> much you realistically think he or she could contribute to an
>>> HSA. We know
>>> there are more than a few UI employees who qualify for food
>>> stamps, for
>>> Pete's sake -- it's not difficult to understand how those in that
>>> situation
>>> just can't contribute to an HSA, is it?
>>>
>>> And, even for those able to make minimal contributions to an HSA,
>>> they may
>>> never get ahead. All it may take is your kid falling of his bike
>>> & breaking
>>> his arm, or your daughter getting hit by a softball & needing
>>> stitches, or a
>>> slip on the ice, or an asthma attack to wipe out the little
>>> saved . . . and
>>> a good chunk of you annual salary to boot.
>>>
>>> You also wrote:
>>> "What are the differences in coverage between Plan A and Plan H?
>>> I'm not
>>> trying to claim that Plan H is better, I simply don't know."
>>>
>>> Ron sent you the link, so you can check that out, but I'll throw
>>> out a
>>> couple of examples for those who just want a quick glimpse. The
>>> deductibles
>>> are dramatically different with Plan A being a heck of a lot
>>> better ($350
>>> individual / $1050 family aggregate), and Plan B being even better
>>> ($175
>>> individual / $525 family aggregate), and Plan H sucking ($1150
>>> single /
>>> $2300 family). Of course, the employee premium is higher for
>>> Plans A & B.
>>>
>>> But, there are other very real differences as well. For those
>>> able to
>>> afford Plan A (or Plan B) premiums, they can see a doctor if they
>>> get sick
>>> for a very reasonable *pre-deductible* co-pay. For those on Plan
>>> H, you pay
>>> EVERYTHING (except wellness/preventative care) *until* you meet the
>>> deductible.
>>>
>>> For those able to afford Plan A, should you or a family member
>>> need an
>>> ambulance, it will only cost you a $50 *pre-deductible* co-pay.
>>> For those
>>> with Plan H, you'll pay the entire amount unless or until you've
>>> met the
>>> deductible, and then insurance will cover 70% of UCR costs.
>>>
>>> And, of course, the coverage levels are less for those with Plan H
>>> even once
>>> the deductible is met. For someone with Plan A or (B), you have a
>>> $25 (or
>>> $15) co-pay if you have to go to the QuickCare; that same visit
>>> will cost
>>> someone with Plan H about $41 IF they have met the deductible.
>>> Generally
>>> speaking, Plan A pays 80%, Plan B pays 90%, and Plan H pays 70%.
>>>
>>> OTOH, the family out-of-pocket maximums are lower for those on
>>> Plan H than
>>> for those on the UI's Plan A.
>>>
>>> Paul, both Rose & I have tried to get stats for many of the
>>> questions you're
>>> asking. Previously, statistics were readily available; now, the
>>> UI acts
>>> like you are asking for top secret information when you ask.
>>> Frankly, if
>>> the UI wants to act secretive and suspicious -- and to tell
>>> different
>>> stories to different audiences -- I'm going think there's a reason
>>> for the
>>> complete lack of transparency until proven otherwise.
>>>
>>> You also wrote:
>>> "It's my understanding that we haven't been on the State plan for
>>> years, if
>>> ever. What would we have paid if we had stayed with Regence?"
>>>
>>> According to the Benefits person I spoke with, the UI has never
>>> been in the
>>> state pool. My understanding is the question has arisen
>>> periodically -- I
>>> think someone has asked it at every Open Enrollment meeting I've
>>> attended --
>>> and the explanation has always been that it would be
>>> disadvantageous to UI
>>> employees because we are a healthier pool.
>>>
>>> Clearly, that explanation hasn't held any water for at least the
>>> last two
>>> years yet it continues to be the explanation offered.
>>>
>>> I don't know what the premiums would be had we stayed with Regence
>>> because
>>> the UI jumped ship for FY04, IIRC.
>>>
>>> However, I can tell you that the City of Moscow has Regence as their
>>> carrier, and they are looking at a 4.5% premium increase. The City
>>> apparently covers the cost for employees as well as 50% of the
>>> cost for
>>> dependents, if I correctly understood Mr. Riedner's comments in the
>>> 9/28/2009 Administrative Committee meeting. Because employees
>>> didn't get
>>> raises, the City is proposing to absorb the 4.5% increase so that
>>> employees
>>> don't see their wages eroded, and I say KUDOS to the idea.
>>>
>>> Of course, I don't know what City employees pay in premiums or
>>> details of
>>> the coverage, but I sure hope our hard-working City employees have
>>> better
>>> coverage than the two-thirds of hard-working UI employees stuck
>>> with the
>>> high deductible Plan H.
>>>
>>> Again, if all state employees were in the same rotten boat as UI
>>> employees,
>>> that would be one thing, but they aren't. State employees have two
>>> infinitely more affordable health insurance options in addition to
>>> an
>>> affordable high deductible plan where one could CHOOSE to
>>> individually open
>>> an HSA, if I correctly understand the regulations (no guarantee
>>> there!).
>>>
>>> If you -- or anyone else -- has read this far, thanks :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Saundra Lund
>>> Moscow, ID
>>>
>>> The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good
>>> people to do
>>> nothing.
>>> ~ Edmund Burke
>>>
>>> ***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2009 through
>>> life plus
>>> 70 years, Saundra Lund. Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or
>>> reproduce outside
>>> the Vision 2020 forum without the express written permission of the
>>> author.*****
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Paul Rumelhart [mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 7:21 PM
>>> To: Saundra Lund
>>> Cc: 'Wayne Price'; 'Moscow Vision 2020'; 'Rosemary Rose Huskey'
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] ID Public Records Law: UI
>>>
>>> Saundra,
>>>
>>> I had every confidence that you had crunched the numbers. I just
>>> wanted
>>> to know what plans and what options. More below.
>>>
>>> Saundra Lund wrote:
>>>> Paul wrote:
>>>> "Where does the $191 per pay period number come from? Which
>>>> plan, what
>>>> options?"
>>>>
>>> <lots of great information snipped for brevity>
>>>> Paul, I'm truly glad the CHOICE you made to go with Plan H is
>>>> working for
>>>> you, but I would certainly hope you've not lost the humanity to
>>>> understand
>>>> that people who earn half what you make feel very differently
>>>> about being
>>>> financially forced into Plan H. Extend yourself, Paul, and talk to
>>> someone
>>>> at the UI whose gross pay is $25,000 per year, and ask them how
>>>> easy it is
>>>> for them to make ANY contribution to the HSA or to meet the $1150
>>> individual
>>>> / $2300 family deductible. Then, find a single parent (and there
>>>> are more
>>>> than a few) at UI whose gross pay is $40,000 per year, and ask
>>>> that parent
>>>> how Plan H is working for them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not quite sure why my ginormous and presumably unearned salary
>>> has
>>> become such a big issue. I was letting you know that there are at
>>> least
>>> a few situations where people are happily saving money on this plan.
>>> The amount I put away into the HSA was factored into my resulting $3
>>> health care payment.
>>>
>>> I started working at the U of I making minimum wage, so I know
>>> something
>>> about eating Top Ramen and pancakes to get by. Not real poverty
>>> by any
>>> means, but not the country club atmosphere you seem to believe I've
>>> insulated myself with.
>>>
>>>> In short, it's NOT. Because they can't AFFORD real insurance
>>>> like Plan A
>>> or
>>>> Plan B where you can see a doctor for an affordable pre-
>>>> deductible co-pay,
>>>> they can't AFFORD to see doctors for things like bronchitis or
>>>> pneumonia
>>> or
>>>> ear aches or strep -- or headaches that may be a symptom of
>>>> hypertension
>>> --
>>>> without becoming unable to afford to EAT or pay their rent or put
>>>> gas in
>>> the
>>>> cars to get to work or pay child care so they can work. I know
>>>> several UI
>>>> employees who have had to stop taking medication for chronic health
>>>> conditions because they can't AFFORD to pay the entire monthly
>>>> cost of the
>>>> medication until they meet the deductible :-(
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course the landscape changes if you have dependents, or if you
>>> have
>>> chronic ailments, or if you have other drains on your bank
>>> account. I
>>> agree with that.
>>>
>>>> I can also tell you, Paul, that even the single Plan H UI
>>>> employees I've
>>>> showed the costs to would much rather pay $30 per month for that
>>>> PPO
>>>> coverage or $37 per month for traditional coverage than to be
>>>> stuck with
>>>> Plan H.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps I'm unique then. I like plan H. I made it through the
>>> first
>>> year, so I now have enough in my HSA to cover my deductibles. I
>>> like
>>> the lower ceiling. I go to the doctor only when I have to anyway,
>>> I'm
>>> covered if something horrible happens, and I pay less than I do
>>> for my
>>> parking permit for it. I have an account that, gods willing, I
>>> can use
>>> as an extra retirement account someday. Or as a source of needed
>>> cash
>>> if I do have something tragic happen to me.
>>>
>>>> It's a damn shame that UI employees are getting totally SCREWED
>>>> on health
>>>> insurance while those in the state insurance pool continue to be
>>>> offered
>>>> real and affordable health insurance.
>>>>
>>>> And, here's another little factoid the UI isn't talking about:
>>>> when
>>> people
>>>> can't AFFORD to go to the doctor when they are sick, they are far
>>>> less
>>>> likely to take advantage of wellness/preventative care benefits.
>>>> So, for
>>>> all those UI employees -- and their families -- who were
>>>> financially
>>> FORCED
>>>> into Plan H, the wellness/preventative care benefit most likely
>>>> won't pay
>>>> off over time by helping keep health care costs down as intended.
>>>>
>>>> Paul, I don't have statistics for this year because the UI has
>>>> become less
>>>> and less transparent about the information over the last couple
>>>> of years,
>>>> but I can tell you that for CY08, something like 67% of employees
>>>> went
>>> with
>>>> Plan H, 26% were able to afford Plan A, and only 7% could afford
>>>> Plan B.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Without taking this as an attack or anything, what does the Plan H
>>> participant pay compared to the Plan A participant if they take full
>>> advantage of the HSA? Just to get the numbers. If you are putting
>>> money into the HSA, then you will have some in the account that
>>> can be
>>> used when trying to meet your higher deductible. I understand
>>> that the
>>> first year is a crap shoot - you may need to pay $X when you have
>>> yet
>>> put that much into the account.
>>>
>>> What are the differences in coverage between Plan A and Plan H?
>>> I'm not
>>> trying to claim that Plan H is better, I simply don't know.
>>>
>>>> And, to show you just how completely out of touch UI
>>>> administration is
>>> with
>>>> the financial realities for their employees, they thought the
>>>> reason for
>>> the
>>>> "success" of Plan H was because they "actively marketed" it.
>>>> <snort> How
>>>> they can remain oblivious to the fact that Plan H is the ONLY
>>>> coverage
>>> many
>>>> employees can afford is a mystery to me, particularly since
>>>> employees
>>>> certainly haven't been quiet about it!
>>>>
>>>> Paul also wrote:
>>>> "I don't know if we can get these numbers, but it would be nice
>>>> to know
>>> what
>>>> LCSC pays average per employee compared to the U of I. That
>>>> might be
>>>> something we can sink our teeth into."
>>>>
>>>> I really don't think that would be helpful because they are
>>>> fortunate to
>>> be
>>>> in the state pool. What you'd want to see is the average pay of
>>>> those in
>>>> the state pool compared to the average UI employee.
>>>>
>>>> In looking back through all the meeting minutes, it's a CRUEL
>>>> JOKE that UI
>>>> employees have been told at every turn it wouldn't be
>>>> advantageous for the
>>>> UI to participate in the state insurance pool because UI
>>>> employees are a
>>>> healthier pool and we'd see our costs go up were we to join the
>>>> state
>>> pool.
>>>> In fact, when questioned in ***2007*** Lloyd Mues offered the same
>>>> explanation yet again and added that the state pool rates
>>>> wouldn't look as
>>>> good come ***July 1, 2008*** as they then looked. Fortunately
>>>> for all the
>>>> state employees -- and unfortunately for UI employees -- Mues was
>>>> wrong,
>>>> wrong, wrong.
>>>>
>>>> For any who are interested in seeing for themselves the details
>>>> of the
>>>> coverage those in the state pool are offered, check out:
>>>> http://adm.idaho.gov/insurance/contracts.htm
>>>> For FY10, check out:
>>>>
>>> http://adm.idaho.gov/insurance/grp/contracts/FY2010/GI_Handbook_Summary_FY20
>>>> 10_final_CCD.pdf
>>>> Current rates are on page 14.
>>>>
>>>> State pool rate increases positively pale in comparison to what
>>>> my family
>>>> has seen with the UI in recent years. Our family premiums
>>>> increased 23%
>>> for
>>>> FY07 (7/1/2006 - 6/30/2007). We then had a WHOPPING 69% premium
>>>> increase
>>>> effective 7-1-2007, and we *would* have had another 70% premium
>>>> increase
>>>> just six months later effective 1-1-2008, but that's when we were
>>>> financially forced into Plan H.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's my understanding that we haven't been on the State plan for
>>> years,
>>> if ever. What would we have paid if we had stayed with Regence?
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list