Insurers, Anti-Abortion Groups Affected By New Health Law

Post-health-reform insurance coverage -- including abortion coverage -- is in the news today.

The Associated Press: "Abortion opponents fought passage of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul to the bitter end, and now that it's the law, they're using it to limit coverage by private insurers. An obscure part of the law allows states to restrict abortion coverage by private plans operating in new insurance markets. Capitalizing on that language, abortion foes have succeeded in passing bans that, in some cases, go beyond federal statutes. ... Since Obama signed the legislation law March 23, Arizona and Tennessee have enacted laws restricting abortion coverage by health plans in new insurance markets, called exchanges. About 30 million people will get their coverage through exchanges, which open in 2014 to serve individuals and small businesses. In Florida, Mississippi and Missouri, lawmakers have passed bans and sent them to their governors."

"Overall, there are 29 states where lawmakers or public policy groups expressed serious interest," said Mary Harned, attorney for Americans United for Life, a national organization that wrote a model law for the states (Alonso-Zaldivar, 5/16).

The Arizona Republic reports on fallout from a "life-or-death drama" in 2009: "A Catholic nun and longtime administrator of St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix was reassigned in the wake of a decision to allow a pregnancy to be ended in order to save the life of a critically ill patient. The decision also drew a sharp rebuke from Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, head of the Phoenix Diocese, who indicated the woman was 'automatically excommunicated' because of the action. … Sister Margaret McBride, who had been vice president of mission integration at the hospital, was on call as a member of the hospital's ethics committee when the surgery took place, hospital officials said. She was part of a group of people, including the patient and doctors, who decided upon the course of action. … [The case] involved a serious illness, pulmonary hypertension. The condition limits the ability of the heart and lungs to function and is made worse, possibly even fatal, by pregnancy” (Clancy, 5/15).

New York Times reports: "Health insurance companies are lobbying federal and state officials in an effort to ward off strict regulation of premiums and profits under the new health care law. The effort is, in some ways, a continuation of the battle over health care that consumed Congress last year. Insurance lobbyists are trying to shape regulations that will define 'unreasonable' premium increases and require them to pay rebates to consumers if the companies do not spend enough on patient care. For their part, consumer groups say they worry that their legislative victories could be undone or undercut by the rules being written by the federal government and the states" (Pear, 5/15).

In a separate story, The New York Times profiles one controversial player: "Angela F. Braly never hesitates to speak up for her company. In the last several months, Ms. Braly, the chief executive of WellPoint, one of the nation’s largest health insurers, has tangled with state regulators, Congress and the Obama administration over concerns that it charges customers too much or engages in questionable tactics to avoid paying claims. She’s even willing to take on President Obama himself."

"WellPoint became the focus of lawmakers’ indignation over its decision to raise premiums in California as much as 39 percent. … Unlike some commercial insurers, WellPoint has bet heavily on the generous profits that flow from selling health insurance to individuals and small businesses. The company, which operates Blue Cross plans in more than a dozen states, is under pressure to deliver results under the new law, which sharply limits the prices it can charge and will eventually require it to cover all potential customers regardless of whether they have an expensive medical condition" (Abelson, 5/14).

The Columbus Dispatch: "The new health-reform law promises to penalize companies with more than 50 workers that don't provide employee health insurance. But the hit -- $2,000 a year per worker -- would cost less than providing health insurance. Some worry that employers would rather pay the fine than pay the insurance costs" (Hoholick, 5/16).

The [Lynchburg Va.] News & Advance: "With 120 employees in Central and Southside Virginia, Strategic Therapy Associates is too large to get a tax credit for providing health insurance for employees; it is too small to negotiate less expensive deals on its group health insurance premiums. One provision in the law could help the business, though: In 2014 insurance companies must put all small groups in one risk pool, spreading the costs of high usage. 'This has definitely been an issue for us in the past. We had one year when four employees were hospitalized,' [Laura] Blondino said in an e-mail Friday. '… That was the year that our insurance went up 33 percent.' Virginia employers large and small have started sifting through information to find out how the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act could affect the insurance they provide to employees and how much they pay" (Gentry, 5/15).




This is part of Kaiser Health News' Daily Report - a summary of health policy coverage from major news organizations. The full summary of the day's news can be found here and you can sign up for e-mail subscriptions to the Daily Report here. In addition, our staff of reporters and correspondents file original stories each day, which you can find on our home page.