I am an independent broker. CIGNA is one of the insurance companies we have used for our clients. They represent less than 10% of my book of business. I am educated as an engineer and I do have an aptitude for math. This is my response to your article, "Tragic Tale," which ran on November 7, 2011.
I agree that we have to face tough issues regarding healthcare that are only going to get tougher. Two of the toughest will be helping our population understand that no one is to blame and that money is a finite resource.
I agree that Bill Mantlo's tale is tragic; it is tragic that he was a victim of a bad driver. But I do not agree that his situation has been made more tragic by our current healthcare system. He has received the all care our system can supply at this time.
We have a reasonable national healthcare system for people over 65, the severely chronically disabled and the people who have exhausted their assets—Medicare and Medicaid. These systems will not improve for existing recipients to any significant degree with any of the proposed legislation.
I do not agree with your comments about MLR and insurance companies concerns over profits. I suggest you secure additional data regarding MLR. For all of my groups over 100 participants, MLR is already 86% or more.
For all groups and individuals, insurance companies will be able to achieve 85%. It is easy, just have the rates support the loss ratio. That is why you have not seen much from the insurance companies on MLR.
What is driving costs?
Let's start by reviewing the January 2008 CBO report and see what is driving healthcare spending increases. The bottom line is new technology is driving health care spending. More spending results in higher funding needs and the expense is paid by insurance, Medicare, personal wealth and lastly Medicaid.
There is much new, great technology that can continue and improve life.
What will today's system do for Bill? For Bill Mantlo, the system has operated exactly as it is designed today. He had medical insurance coverage with CIGNA, had he had long term disability coverage, he would have been eligible for Medicare after two years of disability to pay medical expenses for life, and once he went on maintenance, he would have to spend his assets and then receive Medicaid to cover custodial care for life. I can only estimate Bill will consume a total of $5,000,000 as he lives the remainder of his life.
How is our spending changing? Here is a telling statistic. I have a significant, reasonably stable book of business with one insurance company, and it is not CIGNA. Around 1990, they provided a distribution of claims report for my book of business. The findings were that for a year, 20% of the covered employees and dependents had no paid claims, the top 10% of this population consumed about 50% of the claim dollars and the top 1% consumed about 23% of the claims dollars.
A 2009 distribution of claims report shows the total paid claims is four times the 1990 level with 20% of the covered employees and dependents having no paid claims, the top 10% of this population consumed about 70% of the claim dollars and the top 1% consumed about 52% of the claims dollars. More of the resource is being consumed by fewer people. This is not sustainable.
Could addition care have improved Bill's results? That is questionable. You state Bill is a very strong-willed person, who sustained a serious injury. There is hypothecation that additional therapy would have been helpful. In your article you indicated that CIGNA would not approve certain treatment. What about Medicare? Bill must have qualified for Medicare after his second year of disability. Did Medicare agree to pay for services CIGNA did not agree to pay? With 20 years having past, is Medicare now paying for procedures that CIGNA previously refused? If Medicare did not provide additional benefits beyond CIGNA and CIGNA paid according to their contract, CIGNA was fair to Bill and the other CIGNA policy holders.