This should make the conservatives pleased

[funjumper101 15]

What a pleasant story -

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-contractors17-2009apr17,0,5505250.story

Why should an insurance company pay claims that they can weasel out of? From a conservative perspective, this is just good business practices.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

What a pleasant story -

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-contractors17-2009apr17,0,5505250.story

Why should an insurance company pay claims that they can weasel out of? From a conservative perspective, this is just good business practices.

As a conservative, I find nothing with this practice that matches conservative values, so your title is lame.

AIG, as we all know, is now under government control, so surely these issues should go away...after all...the govt knows best right?

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[rushmc 23]

Quote

What a pleasant story -

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-contractors17-2009apr17,0,5505250.story

Why should an insurance company pay claims that they can weasel out of? From a conservative perspective, this is just good business practices.

What Garwin said and I will add
These jobs. These people knew the risks and what they were getting into for big money.

If someone is going to take a job like this then you had better understand the benifits (is insurance) before you take the job.

If the insurace company is screwing them, well that is another story

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

What a pleasant story -

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-contractors17-2009apr17,0,5505250.story

Why should an insurance company pay claims that they can weasel out of? From a conservative perspective, this is just good business practices.

This is another great example of a lib trying to tie conservatives to something negative without justification - and showing his true colors in the process.

Next you'll probably try to convince us that liberals give more to charity than conservatives. Oh wait, that's already been proven wrong.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[airdvr 210]

All insurance companies have huge departments with one goal...how to legally NOT pay claims.

Why is this a conservative v. liberal issue. Is it just that conservatives understand how these companies function?

BTW...Peter Lewis, the CEO of Progressive is extremely liberal. DO you think his company pays every claim without investigating?

http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/who-is-peter-lewis/

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[chuckakers 425]

Quote

All insurance companies have huge departments with one goal...how to legally NOT pay claims.

Why is this a conservative v. liberal issue. Is it just that conservatives understand how these companies function?

BTW...Peter Lewis, the CEO of Progressive is extremely liberal. DO you think his company pays every claim without investigating?

http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/who-is-peter-lewis/

I assume you were replying to OP.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[funjumper101 15]

Conservative business people operate in this manner all the time. If they can fuck you over, they will. The same folks often hold themselves out to be "good christians" and "highly ethical". I have the unpaid invoices to prove it.

Marc writes -

These jobs. These people knew the risks and what they were getting into for big money.

If someone is going to take a job like this then you had better understand the benifits (is insurance) before you take the job.

If the insurace company is screwing them, well that is another story

<<< end

One of the principal tenents of what passes for conservatism these days is that government is the source of most of the problems. Businesses would do just fine with minimal government intervention. Less regulation is better. Minimal enforcement of current regulations is good. Cut the budgets and staff of the regulatory agencies. etc, etc.

The end result of the successful efforts of the conservatives to accomplish this have resulted in the business tactics of denying legit claims. If they lose after dragging out the proceedings, the next step is appealing the findings against them. All of this causes no damage to the business, even if they lose in the end. Current regulations are quite toothless, thanks to the conservatives. In the meantime, the insured is left holding the bag.

It appears that none of the commentators in this thread read the entire story in the LA Times.

The actions of AIG on this matter are despicable. And the fact that the regulatory agencies no longer have the tools to fix the matter is shameful.

Conservative policies end results, in all their glory.

How come you all aren't real proud? Why don't you want to take credit for your success?

[Amazon 7]

Some people are just too fucking stupid to realize how bad they are getting fucked... unless Lush Rimjob tells them to get irate

[marks2065 0]

Quote

What a pleasant story -

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-contractors17-2009apr17,0,5505250.story

Why should an insurance company pay claims that they can weasel out of? From a conservative perspective, this is just good business practices.

Quote

this has nothing to do with conservatives. This would have more to do with liberals (if you want to do the left right thing) since aig donates mostly to liberals. they must want what liberals have to offer that will make the company more profitable or they would donate more to conservatives. my guess would be the conservative would want AIG to pay their claims or they figure they could get away with more from the lib's

[lawrocket 3]

Taxpayer funded?
Federally supervised?
Claims denied?
Payments arbitrarily ceased?
Monopoly leaving no other choice?

Wow. What's that sound like? Is this what we can expect?


This does not please a free-market capitalist libertarian such as me. Free markets are based on truth and fidelity and benefit of the bargain. It's why insurance bad faith laws exist.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Conservative Some business people operate in this manner all the time. If they can fuck you over, they will. The same folks often hold themselves out to be "good christians" and "highly ethical". I have the unpaid invoices to prove it.

Again, not a conservative/liberal thing. If you're thinking lib businesses don't work people over well...

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[lawrocket 3]

Why is this a "conservative" versus "liberal" thing? I've been screwed as much by liberals as conservatives.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

Taxpayer funded?
Federally supervised?
Claims denied?
Payments arbitrarily ceased?
Monopoly leaving no other choice?

Wow. What's that sound like? Is this what we can expect?

This does not please a free-market capitalist libertarian such as me. Free markets are based on truth and fidelity and benefit of the bargain. It's why insurance bad faith laws exist.

It seems like you are trying to suggest that the piss poor performance of private insurance company would be similar to a government operated and REGULATED national insurance plan.

That is a very wild leap of illogic.

The story is very clear on the source of why AIG has been treating the "insured" in this manner.
The agencies who, in the past, would have had the regulatory and enforcement authority to correct the condition, don't any more. The regulations and enforcement have been gutted. They have NOTHING to work with to force AIG to uphold their contracts.

The lack of regulatory and enforcement authority is DIRECTLY the result of the conservative success over the past 30 years.

Hence the title of the thread.

What AIG is doing (or not doing) is happening because they can blow off adhereing to the contracts signed, with no real harm to the company. No regulation plus no enforcement = conservative policy in action.

Why aren't you folks willing to take credit for the resuts of your policies? You should be very proud.
It is working out just as predicted.
You all knew what the outcome of successful de-regulation and decrease in penalties would bring, didn't you?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Why aren't you folks willing to take credit for the resuts of your policies? You should be very proud.
It is working out just as predicted.
You all knew what the outcome of successful de-regulation and decrease in penalties would bring, didn't you?

They are not pissed off because they have not had to use.. their vaunted private insurance yet.. and been told it was a pre existing condition... OR they are already covered by the government and have nothing to worry about like their local congressman. Its amazing that the I have mine and fuck the rest of you crowd will believe till reality slaps them in the face

[kbordson 8]

Quote

What a pleasant story -

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-contractors17-2009apr17,0,5505250.story

Why should an insurance company pay claims that they can weasel out of? From a conservative perspective, this is just good business practices.

"weasel out of"? I have no deep love for insurance companies and in fact have cursed several of them a time or two, but I wouldn't cry foul unless I can see the insurance contract that was signed by the insured including the fine print... that might list exclusions or requirments that would allow them the right to refuse payment for care.

Those contracts are ridiculously complex. Lots of "pre-requirement" and "authorization" issues. Many times the patient, the physician and even those within the insurance company don't truly understand the benefits provided. So... a lot of times the insurance companies just deny the claim and (per the insurance contact) it is now the responsibility of the patient to refute that denial. And, as stated in the article, the "high denial rate is partly due to government rules that give insurers only 14 days to decide the validity of a claim." Then the article further excuses the insurance by stating they "paid without dispute "when the proper supporting medical evidence has been received."" (again... very complex contracts and listing an improper ICD#9 code ie listing 309.81, but not listing one of the 12 index entries - which might be required on the submitted forms might cause it to be refused or they might require for the diagnosis a confirmation by a separate second opinion or...) without seeing the contract signed, I have no valid way to argue for or against the denials. And it's not all the insurance companies fault. One of the contractor workers mentioned in the article didn't even have insurance prior to going over there. So blaming the insurance company isn't always the right option.

Overall, I don't see this problem as a conservative or liberal thing. That's a business, legal, responsibility point.

Personally, I am saddened by the situation. I have friends that are/were civilian employees in dangerous situations. I don't want them to have to go through similar troubles if they were to get hurt, but I also don't know what insurance plans they signed up for and what the fine print on those policies were. But they should.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Overall, I don't see this problem as a conservative or liberal thing. That's a business, legal, responsibility point.

Personally, I am saddened by the situation. I have friends that are/were civilian employees in dangerous situations. I don't want them to have to go through similar troubles if they were to get hurt, but I also don't know what insurance plans they signed up for and what the fine print on those policies were. But they should.

I do see it as a conservative thing... MOST of the conservatives are vociferous in their support of any repubican candidate that tells them how horrible any kind of government intrusion into health care will be..... regardless of the facts. The insurance compaies.. and pharmacutical companies have paid those "conservative" politicians for their votes in deregulation....oh thats right.. its CAMPAIGN contributions.. not bribery... to maintain the status quo. They are bought and paid for.

Politicians and government employees don't have to wade thru this crap... their coverage is golden.... gee I wonder why that could be????

The current system is not working for most of the people. Trouble is.. most of them will not see the problems until they have to use their "medical coverage". When they find out they are not covered its a little too late.... and that my dear is a rip off.. legal or otherwise and I for one believe if something is broke.. it needs to be fixed.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

Overall, I don't see this problem as a conservative or liberal thing. That's a business, legal, responsibility point.

Personally, I am saddened by the situation. I have friends that are/were civilian employees in dangerous situations. I don't want them to have to go through similar troubles if they were to get hurt, but I also don't know what insurance plans they signed up for and what the fine print on those policies were. But they should.

I do see it as a conservative thing... MOST of the conservatives are vociferous in their support of any repubican candidate that tells them how horrible any kind of government intrusion into health care will be..... regardless of the facts. The insurance compaies.. and pharmacutical companies have paid those "conservative" politicians for their votes in deregulation....oh thats right.. its CAMPAIGN contributions.. not bribery... to maintain the status quo. They are bought and paid for.

Politicians and government employees don't have to wade thru this crap... their coverage is golden.... gee I wonder why that could be????

The current system is not working for most of the people. Trouble is.. most of them will not see the problems until they have to use their "medical coverage". When they find out they are not covered its a little too late.... and that my dear is a rip off.. legal or otherwise and I for one believe if something is broke.. it needs to be fixed.

You make some very good points.

But... there are lobbiests on both sides.

There should be correction in that. And it should be across the board.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Overall, I don't see this problem as a conservative or liberal thing. That's a business, legal, responsibility point.

Personally, I am saddened by the situation. I have friends that are/were civilian employees in dangerous situations. I don't want them to have to go through similar troubles if they were to get hurt, but I also don't know what insurance plans they signed up for and what the fine print on those policies were. But they should.

I do see it as a conservative thing... MOST of the conservatives are vociferous in their support of any repubican candidate that tells them how horrible any kind of government intrusion into health care will be..... regardless of the facts. The insurance compaies.. and pharmacutical companies have paid those "conservative" politicians for their votes in deregulation....oh thats right.. its CAMPAIGN contributions.. not bribery... to maintain the status quo. They are bought and paid for.

Politicians and government employees don't have to wade thru this crap... their coverage is golden.... gee I wonder why that could be????

The current system is not working for most of the people. Trouble is.. most of them will not see the problems until they have to use their "medical coverage". When they find out they are not covered its a little too late.... and that my dear is a rip off.. legal or otherwise and I for one believe if something is broke.. it needs to be fixed.

You make some very good points.

But... there are lobbiests on both sides.

There should be correction in that. And it should be across the board.

I think you know how I feel about lobbyists...

ELIMINATE ALL of them. ELIMINATE all campaign contributions....which is currently legalized bribery.

Anyone caught trying to bribe a politician.. jail time in federal prison....and not the white collar country club type.. Go Directly to Jail... do not pass GO.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

I think you know how I feel about lobbyists...

ELIMINATE ALL of them. ELIMINATE all campaign contributions....which is currently legalized bribery.

Anyone caught trying to bribe a politician.. jail time in federal prison....and not the white collar country club type.. Go Directly to Jail... do not pass GO.

See.

Now THAT would make this "conservative" happy.



(legal disclaimer: I am not really a "conservative" - I'm just portrayed as one for the humor and entertainment of others)

[Coreece 190]

Quote

Those contracts are ridiculously complex. Lots of "pre-requirement" and "authorization" issues. Many times the patient, the physician and even those within the insurance company don't truly understand the benefits provided. So... a lot of times the insurance companies just deny the claim and (per the insurance contact) it is now the responsibility of the patient to refute that denial. And, as stated in the article, the "high denial rate is partly due to government rules that give insurers only 14 days to decide the validity of a claim." Then the article further excuses the insurance by stating they "paid without dispute "when the proper supporting medical evidence has been received."" (again... very complex contracts and listing an improper ICD#9 code ie listing 309.81, but not listing one of the 12 index entries - which might be required on the submitted forms might cause it to be refused or they might require for the diagnosis a confirmation by a separate second opinion or...)

hopefully all this non-sense will soon change to something we can believe in....something like simple contracts that read, "No Worries, You're Covered!"

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[lawrocket 3]

Nothing to work with to ensure that insurers kive up to their end? How about "breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing." I will tell you that in my experience, this keeps them in line. They get opinions on it. The potential liability that they face for failure to pay a claim is huge. Huge. HUGE.

Here's a company that offeredinsurance for civilian contractors and charged too much, say some. Apparently, they underbid everyone else who was even willing to bid on it.

Regarding agencies who would have had the power previously to enforce and correct - which one? Which federal agency reviewed insurance contracts and instructed the parties to the agreement regarding the amount and extent of payments to be made? Here's a hint - there wasn't one.

Here's another clue - this issue is state controlled.

Another point - federal regulations have typically been for the purpose of ensuring the capitalization of the insurer and matters most important to the SEC. Gramm-Leach-Bliley basicly unified federal regulation of insurance with securities and banking, which gives a good idea of what the feds are interested in.

The regulatory authority that you mention is the business of the individual states.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[marks2065 0]

Quote

Quote

Overall, I don't see this problem as a conservative or liberal thing. That's a business, legal, responsibility point.

Personally, I am saddened by the situation. I have friends that are/were civilian employees in dangerous situations. I don't want them to have to go through similar troubles if they were to get hurt, but I also don't know what insurance plans they signed up for and what the fine print on those policies were. But they should.

I do see it as a conservative thing... MOST of the conservatives are vociferous in their support of any repubican candidate that tells them how horrible any kind of government intrusion into health care will be..... regardless of the facts. The insurance compaies.. and pharmacutical companies have paid those "conservative" politicians for their votes in deregulation....oh thats right.. its CAMPAIGN contributions.. not bribery... to maintain the status quo. They are bought and paid for.

Politicians and government employees don't have to wade thru this crap... their coverage is golden.... gee I wonder why that could be????

The current system is not working for most of the people. Trouble is.. most of them will not see the problems until they have to use their "medical coverage". When they find out they are not covered its a little too late.... and that my dear is a rip off.. legal or otherwise and I for one believe if something is broke.. it needs to be fixed.

Quote

this couldn't be a problem caused by something other than the right? Had nothing to do with lawers and stupid lawsuites causing all the extra wording tying the entire system into so much red tape that both sides have no clue what is going on. Or maybe some people and doctors ripping off the insurance companies causing them to cover their buts from fraudulant claims?



And as far as bribery goes, I guess the dem's are not partaking of that at all. (Dodd, Clinton, Obama, Frank) None of them got money from the failing companies like aig, fannie and freddie.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Overall, I don't see this problem as a conservative or liberal thing. That's a business, legal, responsibility point.

Personally, I am saddened by the situation. I have friends that are/were civilian employees in dangerous situations. I don't want them to have to go through similar troubles if they were to get hurt, but I also don't know what insurance plans they signed up for and what the fine print on those policies were. But they should.

I do see it as a conservative thing... MOST of the conservatives are vociferous in their support of any repubican candidate that tells them how horrible any kind of government intrusion into health care will be..... regardless of the facts. The insurance compaies.. and pharmacutical companies have paid those "conservative" politicians for their votes in deregulation....oh thats right.. its CAMPAIGN contributions.. not bribery... to maintain the status quo. They are bought and paid for.

Politicians and government employees don't have to wade thru this crap... their coverage is golden.... gee I wonder why that could be????

The current system is not working for most of the people. Trouble is.. most of them will not see the problems until they have to use their "medical coverage". When they find out they are not covered its a little too late.... and that my dear is a rip off.. legal or otherwise and I for one believe if something is broke.. it needs to be fixed.

Quote

this couldn't be a problem caused by something other than the right? Had nothing to do with lawers and stupid lawsuites causing all the extra wording tying the entire system into so much red tape that both sides have no clue what is going on. Or maybe some people and doctors ripping off the insurance companies causing them to cover their buts from fraudulant claims?



And as far as bribery goes, I guess the dem's are not partaking of that at all. (Dodd, Clinton, Obama, Frank) None of them got money from the failing companies like aig, fannie and freddie.

Yes or no

Would a basic healthcare system that covers all americans and run by the government solve the abuses of the insurance companies and allow for a modicum of coverage for all?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Yes or no

Would a basic healthcare system that covers all americans and run by the government ?

solve the abuses of the insurance companies YES, and replace with abuses by the government and employees of the government - absolutely

and allow for a modicum of coverage for all no

who's "all" - citizens? Taxpayers? only citizens above or below a certain income level? just better coverage for gov employees? only illegals and former emergency room visitors? "all" being just the demongraphics that Amazon thinks are 'worthy'? Just people with the "approved" cards in their wallets?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Yes or no

Would a basic healthcare system that covers all americans and run by the government ?

solve the abuses of the insurance companies YES, and replace with abuses by the government and employees of the government - absolutely

and allow for a modicum of coverage for all no

who's "all" - citizens? Taxpayers? only citizens above or below a certain income level? just better coverage for gov employees? only illegals and former emergency room visitors? "all" being just the demongraphics that Amazon thinks are 'worthy'? Just people with the "approved" cards in their wallets?

How about just taking care of Americans..... you know.. one of those pesky constitution things.

So basically you ARE part of the conservative problem.. thanks for making the point for the I've got mine and fuck the rest of you crowd.