For-profit insurance companies are on the hot seat after Senators have discovered that the companies have been using premium dollars deceptively. The companies have been reporting that they use a large majority of premium dollars strictly to pay medical claims, when in actuality, a much smaller amount is been applied to claims while the rest go to marketing, administrative costs, and of course profit.

A Senate analysis, released the second week of Nov. 2009, revealed that consumers are indeed getting the shaft on their premium dollars spent. When looking at the six largest insurers, the analysis showed that the following amounts were applied to medical claims in insurance plans:

  • 74 percent is set aside for individual insurance plans.
  • For small businesses, 80 percent is set aside.
  • 84 percent is set aside for large businesses.

These numbers differ drastically from Medicare, which is reported to pay as much as 98 to 99 percent of its revenue on claims.

In other words, consumers in private plans are paying more than ever for their health insurance premiums and actually getting less in return, Sen. John Rockefeller (D-WV) explained.

He is pushing for health care reform in Senate that is similar to that in House, which would require insurance companies to rebate customers if they spend less than 85 percent of their premium on actual health care.

The insurance industry is opposed to putting any type of cap on profit, claiming that this will undermine other reform efforts to cut costs and improve patient care.

Read more…

I recently came across a story at www.kfoxtv.com. The story explains how a new law in Texas is causing people to lose their cars because of not having insurance.

Getting your car towed if you don’t have car insurance is common since it is the law in all states to carry some type of minimum car insurance. Some in the story feel the law should not be so strict. A person in the article, Teran, says that before towing someone’s car because of not having insurance the authorities should, “check first if a person has had insurance. If it has lapsed within a certain amount of time, then give them a break, cite them for no insurance, but don’t tow the car.”

“Give Them a Break?” What do you think would happen if we just gave everyone a break as Teran suggests when one does not have car insurance?

You already know that health insurance is a complicated topic, but who knew even basic health could be so difficult? Thanks to YahooAnswerFail.com, we’ve rounded up the 10 worst health questions ever posted to Yahoo!Answers.

1. Penis Music Fail

2. Poison Freckles Fail

3. Taste Test Fail

4. Chickenpox Fail

5. Alter Eye Fail

6. Nutrition Fail

7. Conspiracy Fail

8. Watching TV Fail

9. Broken Wrist Fail

10. Period Fail

View the full-size graphic

If it’s one thing we’ve learned, it’s that you shouldn’t get your medical advice from strangers on the internet. Instead, get the medical attention you need from a doctor or start looking for free health insurance quotes courtesy of Go Insurance Rates.

November 4th, 2009Who Wants to Win an iPhone 3G?

HomeInsurance.com launched the iPhone Giveaway Contest today and one lucky visitor will walk away with a brand new iPhone 3G when the contest is over on January 5th, 2010.

Entering is easy- visitors simply complete the quick 10 question survey about home and auto insurance and they are automatically entered to win the iPhone. The winner will be selected at random by a HomeInsurance.com employee on January 5th and announced on HomeInsurance.com and Twitter.

 Enter Now! 

In an effort to shed some light on the number of people who fall victim to the health care system each year, a new website has been launched to honor those who have died as a result of health insurance denials. Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) started the site, which was launched in October 2009, to show just how many people suffer from the lack of adequate health insurance.

Names of the Dead

According to the site, NamesoftheDead.com, each year there are “more than 44,000 Americans who die simply because they have no health insurance.” Grayson’s statistics come from a recent Harvard study that showed that as many as 45,000 deaths annually can be tied to a lack of health insurance. His idea was to create a project that honors their memory and also help to shed light on the need for adequate health insurance for all Americans.

Criticism of the Site’s Purpose

While Grayson seems to have developed the site with good intentions, his site has received its share of criticism. Some Republicans in particular have noted that he’s exploiting the dead for political gain. Grayson has undoubtedly made his rounds in the public arena to discuss his beliefs, even referring to the GOP plan as “Don’t get sick, and if you do get sick, die quickly.”

The Site Gets “Punked”

No, Ashton Kutcher didn’t create an identical website then show it to Grayson as it dissolved under a virus attack. However, some pranksters did add names such as Wile E. Coyote and Norma Jeane Mortenson (Marilyn Monroe’s real name) to the site, supposedly as those dead from health care denial.

Read more…

An article last week in National Underwriter, an insurance trade publication, warned that home insurance companies should expect to be hit by a wave of liability claims from policyholders being sued over the swine flu.

The thinking is that if you have a cocktail party and a guest contracts swine flu from your sick child, you’re liable for medical bills. Or, if a child come to your house for a play date and catches swine flu and dies, you’re on the hook. Liability claims like this would fall under home insurance coverage.

I checked with some of my insurance company sources, and they turned out to be quite dubious about this. The sticking point is this: Someone would have to prove that your household was the sole source of exposure for the H1N1 flu.

They would also have to show economic damages (i.e. medical bills).

While your pal may suspect they got swine flu at your house and be mad about it, a successful claim against you would be quite unlikely. The person would have to prove that they had no other exposure to H1N1, which is remote at best.