• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Judge Rules Aetna Lied About Reason for Leaving Obamacare Exchanges

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
In reality Aetna knew that Obamacare was going to be profitable. But they lied on why they withdrew. I remember some on the board were gleeful when Aetna announced they were pulling out. There seems to be no honesty left at the top levels of management in American Corporations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------


This is a really critical story on a number of levels. The debate over Obamacare has been shaped to a great extent over the last year by Aetna's decision to withdraw from exchanges in a number of states because, it claimed, it was losing money. But in a ruling today which blocked a proposed merger between Aetna and Humana, federal Judge John D. Bates held that Aetna's claim was bogus. Rather than being a business decision based on the inability to make a profit in those states, Bates ruled that Aetna had withdrawn from Obamacare exchanges at least in part as a strategy to threaten its way out of the anti-trust case.

Bates found that this rationalization was largely untrue. In fact, he noted, Aetna pulled out of some states and counties that were actually profitable to make a point in its lawsuit defense — and then misled the public about its motivations. Bates’ analysis relies in part on a “smoking gun” letter to the Justice Department in which Chief Executive Mark Bertolini explicitly ties Aetna’s participation in Obamacare to the DOJ’s actions on the merger, which we reported in August. But it goes much further.

Among the locations where Aetna withdrew were 17 counties in three states where the Department of Justice asserted that the merger would produce unlawfully low levels of competition. By pulling out, Aetna could say that it wasn’t competing in those counties anyway, rendering the government’s point moot: “The evidence provides persuasive support for the conclusion that Aetna withdrew from the on-exchange markets in the 17 complaint counties to improve its litigation position,” Bates wrote. “The Court does not credit the minimal efforts of Aetna executives to claim otherwise.”

Indeed, he wrote, Aetna’s decision to pull out of the exchange business in Florida was “so far outside of normal business practice” that it perplexed the company’s top executive in Florida, who was not in the decision loop.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...-about-reason-for-leaving-obamacare-exchanges
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Don't worry. I'm sure we'll see some alternative facts for this one.

The alternative facts have already been stated by Aetna when they liad as to why they were pulling out of Obamacare. Their internal documents show they know that the ACA would be profitable to them.
 

carpro

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
From Talking Points Memo...:Roflmao:Roflmao:Roflmao

But it doesn't really matter why they pulled out. It's their choice. They can pull out for any reason or no reason.
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
From Talking Points Memo...:Roflmao:Roflmao:Roflmao

But it doesn't really matter why they pulled out. It's their choice. They can pull out for any reason or no reason.

To those who danced with glee because Obamacare was blames it should make a difference. Obamacare would have been profitable to them. They did not pull out because they were loosing money from Obamacare. I expect you were one of those who condemned Obamacare when Atena pulled out.
 

carpro

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
To those who danced with glee because Obamacare was blames it should make a difference.

No, it doesn't.

They did lose money overall in the exchanges, like everyone else, and they were projecting they would lose more. However there were places where it was profitable for them in the past that they pulled out of. Whether or not they were projecting losses in those areas is unclear. But they did use the threat of pulling out as leverage to get their merger with Humana approved. Their leverage failed to work and they pulled out of most places that were unprofitable and some that were profitable.

Regardless of their reasons, they can do business whereever and whenever they please. Get over it/

Obamacare is a disaster. It's time to put it in the trash bin where it has always belonged.


BTW, you leading statement that "In reality Aetna knew that Obamacare was going to be profitable." is completly false and your own sources prove it.
 
Last edited:

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Don't worry. I'm sure we'll see some alternative facts for this one.
No kidding. And without fail Admiral Alternative Fact shows up and completely misreads the article, sees what he wants to see, and then makes uninformed comments.



Sent from my Moto Droid Turbo.
 

StefanM

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No kidding. And without fail Admiral Alternative Fact shows up and completely misreads the article, sees what he wants to see, and then makes uninformed comments.



Sent from my Moto Droid Turbo.

Devotion to His Holiness Lord Trump is solid.
 

carpro

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Ignorance is bliss, they say. You two are perfect examples.

From the OP source:

"As for Aetna’s claimed rationale for withdrawing from all but four states, Bates accepted that the company could credibly call it a “business decision,” since the overall exchange business was losing money; he just didn’t buy that that was its sole reason."
 

StefanM

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Ignorance is bliss, they say. You two are perfect examples.
I just live in a corner making marks on photos of Republicans with crayons.

I've finally got to use my orange crayon now that we have the best POTUS in the history of the country in office.

It's really great. I love Trump. He's my spirit animal, and I love his orange tone.
 

Crabtownboy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No, it doesn't.

They did lose money overall in the exchanges, like everyone else, and they were projecting they would lose more. However there were places where it was profitable for them in the past that they pulled out of. Whether or not they were projecting losses in those areas is unclear. But they did use the threat of pulling out as leverage to get their merger with Humana approved. Their leverage failed to work and they pulled out of most places that were unprofitable and some that were profitable.

Your alternative facts are wrong ... as alternative facts are.

From: https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/2016/08/25/cry-me-a-river-aetna/

ThanksObamacare (seriously)
And get this: Aetna and the other big insurers wouldn’t be getting as much profitable business from the government if not for Obamacare. Keep in mind that most of the newly insured Americans have coverage because of the Medicaid expansion made possible by Obamacare. Aetna and many of its competitors have benefited financially from this expansion because many states contract with private insurers to manage their Medicaid programs.

And then there is Medicare. Aetna and many other insurers participate in the Medicare Advantage program, the private alternative to traditional Medicare, and they’ve figured out how to convert a lot of the billions of dollars in revenue they get from the federal government to profits. And, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Medicare Advantage program has been growing leaps and bounds in recent years, thanks to all the marketing dollars the insurers spend every year to attract Medicare beneficiaries.

In 2010 – the year Obamacare became law – 24 percent of Medicare beneficiaries were enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans (11.1 million people). This year, 31 percent of the 57 million Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in MA plans (17.1 million people).

So, thanks to Obama – and more specifically, Obamacare – Aetna and its competitors are rolling in the federal dough. But, because of the self-serving desire on the part of the for-profit companies’ executives to exceed Wall Street’s expectations every three months, they’re not willing to tolerate for another New York minute an Obamacare risk pool that, in their opinion, is crowded with too many sick people. People they never wanted to insure in the

Source: https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/2016/08/25/cry-me-a-river-aetna/
Follow us: @EyeOnInsurance on Twitter | healthinsurance.org on Facebook


From: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/17/aetn...ear-but-will-exit-obamacare-market-there.html

Major health insurer Aetna included Pennsylvania on its list of 11 states where it will cease to sell Obamacare plans next year, despite the fact that it booked a decent profit on such plans in the Keystone State in 2015, records show.

Aetna collected more than $71 million in premiums, according to a recent rate filing request.


Before taxes, the company made $13.6 million from those plans, according to that same filing. That pre-tax profit represents the difference between the premiums it received, and what it paid out in claims — $52 million — and the $5.8 million it incurred in administrative expenses, Aetna said in its filing.
 

carpro

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Your alternative facts are wrong ... as alternative facts are.

.

:Roflmao Did you bother reading your own source article? It makes clear that your very first statement in the OP is false.

"As for Aetna’s claimed rationale for withdrawing from all but four states, Bates accepted that the company could credibly call it a “business decision,” since the overall exchange business was losing money; he just didn’t buy that that was its sole reason"

The only "facts" Im using here are yours. :Roflmao


.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So much alternative fact material to work with, but I'll go with the low hanging fruit.

Regardless of their reasons, they can do business whereever and whenever they please. Get over it/

No, insurance companies are regulated by the states. If, as you say, they can do business wherever they please, why is one of the features of TrumpCare to add the ability of insurance companies to sell across state lines? Answer: Because they can't do business wherever they please.

As to doing business whenever they please, sorry, that's not true either. With Obamacare, insurance companies can't just drop a policy holder whenever they feel like it nor can they deny someone with preexisting conditions.



Sent from my Moto Droid Turbo.
 

carpro

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So much alternative fact material to work with, but I'll go with the low hanging fruit.



No, insurance companies are regulated by the states. If, as you say, they can do business wherever they please, why is one of the features of TrumpCare to add the ability of insurance companies to sell across state lines? Answer: Because they can't do business wherever they please.

As to doing business whenever they please, sorry, that's not true either. With Obamacare, insurance companies can't just drop a policy holder whenever they feel like it nor can they deny someone with preexisting conditions.



Sent from my Moto Droid Turbo.

Partly correct. But they cannot be forced to participate in an exchange and they gave the notice required by law to exit them. They don't have to have a good reason, or a reason at all, for that matter.

So , within the law, they can do business wherever and whenever they please. Now show us where they broke the law by exiting those exchanges. That should be some "lowhanging fruit" that's easy for you to pick.
 

StefanM

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sorry, I'm on my phone and don't have any pictures of strawmen to upload.


Sent from my Moto Droid Turbo.
Got you covered!

straw-man.jpg
 
Top