Best, Martha

An estimated $153.1 million shortfall in the Commonwealth Care program is not a distraction but most definately a real issue that needs to be dealt with.

BR

Your points are distractions from the real issue at hand.

Ann

I did not mean to offend Norma. I was just trying to point out some of the benefits of COBRA, that alot of people are not aware of. If I did offend Norma, I do sincerely apologize.

As far as my example goes, I think it is realistic. Cut it half, if you want, say $500,000. Botton line is that a person with a net worth of 500K, a million or ten million can qualify for CommonwealthCare if their stated income falls into the guidelines. This does not make sense to me.

That has been my point throughout this discussion.

BR

Is BRs example of a person with a net worth of $1Million applying for CCare realistic and so even worth our time thinking about? A person with anywhere near that amount of wealth would have health insurance already!! BRs paternalistic advice to Norma is insulting and offensive; she knows about Cobra and knows if she can or cannot afford the insurance products available to her. BRs line of thinking is the same as Ronald Regan’s “Wefare Queen” attacks against the poor.

Healthcare and health insurance must be treated as a public good and not as a market-based profit-driven commodity. Period. This is one of the most urgent moral issues confronting us: the need to enact social insurance on the state level with SB 703 (see http://www.masscare.org ) and ultimately on the federal level with HR 676 (see http://www.healthcare-now )

You were eligible for COBRA from your husband’s past employer. Since your husband was eligible for COBRA, you could have been on as a single employee. This should have been alot less then the 1,000 you mentioned since that was most likely a family plan.

Typically COBRA is good for 18 months but if it is the result of a disability I believe you would have been eligible to remain on your husband’s old company as a single for 36 months.

That would have been the way to go and I hope that is what you did.

Bill

Bill,
yes my husband is on medicare but I am not.I think the industry you work for is ruining our country and nothing will change my mind.Too many are going broke trying to pay for insurance.

Secondly, I do not believe people who have a certain net worth should qualify for CommonwealthCare.

Thirdly, if CommonwealthCare affordability included an asset and someone had to tap into the equity of their home or retirement fund, I have no problem with that.

Reporter, let me ask you this. Take an example of someone who has owns their house free and clear worth $500,000 and another $500,000 in retirement funds but qualifies for free health insurance under CommonwealthCare for their health insurance based on their income. Do you think that is fair?

Bill

Under your plan a person could literally own a house with a million dollars in equity and have another million in

“The Connector will not utilize the estate recovery program for Commonwealth Care members. Although the wording on the application does not make that clear and should be changed.”

A contract must contain full disclosure and this one does not. If the Connector or state have no intentions of taking assets from Commonwealth Care members now or in the future, specific langauge excluding Commonwealth Care should be printed on the contract.

The Connector is fully aware that this is a problem. They have changed the contract twice – in Nov. 07 and again in Jan. 08 but have yet to add this language. In fact, they should have taken care of this when they created this program. They have received requests to do so at public testimony and in writing as well as a letter from one of our reps. They respond to nothing and no one. Curious, isn’t it? They are willing to tell people the estate recovery program doesn’t apply to Commonwealth Care but they won’t put their money where there mouth is. Perhaps they wish to keep this option open. It’s a great way to pay for a failing policy.

I wouldn’t sign that form in a million years the way it is and neither will thousands of others in this state. Attorneys have reviewed it and advised the same.

Maybe, at this point, they don’t want to change it because they don’t want any more people in Commonwealth Care – it’s costing the state too much. They are probably happier receiving penalty money to meet budget neutrality. But taking estates is really a better deal for them.

Did it occur to you that the reason they doubled the copays for the 300% and below FPL people was to discourage use of the insurance to save the state money?

They also dropped Plan 4 because it attracted the sickest residents and was costing the state too much. This plan had a slightly higher premium than Plan 3 but copays were half the cost. Oh well, the heck with the sick people who benefitted from that plan.

You really don’t get what this law is about, do you?

Please stop acting like you know it all. Quite frankly, from where I sit, you have no clue how this law is seriously hurting people – financially and with regard to the Connector dumping people, not paying medical bills, etc. In fact, I just read a report that they were sued for not paying a patient’s bills, and I personally know another resident who has the same problem and will be going after them as well.

By the way, you haven’t responded to my question above: If Commonwealth Care affordability is based on assets and, thus, a resident is eligible for a higher premium (and copay) or is pushed into Commonwealth Choice, how would he/she pay?

Should they sell their property or cash in their retirement fund? Otherwise, they would be required to pay with income they don’t have.

What responsibility do HMO’s and their broker-operatives such as Bill Randell, and the HMO board of directors such as newly elected Congresswoman Niki Tsongas (Fallon HMO), shoulder for these preventable injuries and deaths?