An increasing number of our young people are suffering from a multitude of ailments that result from the modern environmental pressures like lack of exercise, lifestyles or stress. The medical profession has also progressed some and is usually able to address most of these resultant disorders. However, for people in the low-income brackets, the steady rise in health insurance expenses means that they are now finding it difficult to get medical help on time.
For most people medical health insurance seems to be unaffordable. Health insurance is there to offer succor for the unexpected medical problem. There is a dearth of health insurance service providers in California resulting in a very competitive market.
The laws in California require that every person has access to some medical cover. The state provides health insurance programs for people in low-income brackets to afford insurance.
Low income individuals in California can use the services of the Medicaid program. The federal government set up this program to permit as many people as possible to be able to some form of insurance cover. The funding for this program comes from the federal and state funds.
Individuals get the application forms from an office in the Division of Family services. Some form of documentation is required of each applicant to be able to qualify for the program.
The individual and their family have their various health needs catered for. For the individuals whose employees to not cover the rest of the family, the Medicaid program provides a feasible option for them.
The MRMIB (California Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board takes pains to provide a quality health insurance that is also affordable. For low-income groups, through their HFP (Healthy Family Program), MRMIB cover for vision, dental and health, at fairly inexpensive rates for children.
Another MRMIB program, AIM (Access for Infants and Mothers) provides low cost insurance to pregnant women in low income groups. The infants also get cover under the program.
Before picking health insurance service provider, take some time to research the options available that suit your needs and your budget.
For Whom Does the Health Insurance Broker Work?
Largely tucked away from the view of the general public is an intense debate over the future role of health insurance brokers in the United States. Traditionally brokers have played an important role in the highly fragmented market for health insurance sold to small groups or individuals. How they will be affected by the health care overhaul remains unclear.
Brokers in general are middlemen between buyers and sellers of a good or a service. Because they are involved in many similar transactions, they can harvest economies of scale in the gathering and structuring of pertinent information. In the process, they become experts on the good or service being traded.
One would assume that brokers have played that role ever since humans abandoned one-on-one barter and engaged in wider trade. Because their economic contribution to trade is valuable, either buyers or sellers are willing to pay brokers a commission.
In modern economies, however, brokers are forever vulnerable to two developments, even in the absence of government regulations that may impinge on their economic turf.
One development is the standardization of the good or service being traded; the other is the power of electronic-information technology to gather and structure information at substantially lower cost.
The recently passed Affordable Care Act seeks to further both developments and adds a third: the regulatory requirement that insurers must limit the fraction of premiums spent on marketing and administration.
Ever since Paul Ellwood and Walter McClure developed and Alain Enthoven refined the concept of managed competition among private health insurers in the 1970s, policy analysts favoring a private health insurance system have dreamed of a standard benefit package on which competing private insurers would quote risk-adjusted premiums — making it easier for individuals, households and employers to make a cost-conscious choice among insurers.
The Affordable Care Act seeks to follow in that tradition.
First, it specifies a minimum, standard benefit package, albeit with varying degrees of cost-sharing by patients. Second, it calls for electronic, state-based health insurance exchanges designed to facilitate easy choice among insurers.
In principle, such exchanges could be designed in a user-friendly way that could provide small businesses and individuals with much of the structured information traditionally provided by brokers. The Swiss health system, for example, relies on that approach for its wholly private health insurance system, as does the Dutch system.
To get a feel for what is possible in the United States, browse the Web site of the Federal Employee Benefit Program operated by the Office of Personnel Management. Several private-sector electronic health insurance exchanges have also been operating for a decade or so — for example, eHealthInsurance.com.
If I were a broker, however, I would not despair at the prospect of the state-based insurance exchanges for one simple reason: administrative simplicity and efficiency is decidedly not America’s strong suit, in either the private or the public health sectors.
So it’s a pretty safe bet that the state-based exchanges envisaged in the Affordable Care Act will be so complicated and bewildering that the services of brokers will still be needed. In fact, the Affordable Care Act anticipates this by requiring that the exchanges award grants to “navigators,” tasked with educating the public about qualified plans, available subsidies, enrollment procedures and so on.
Noting the need for such navigators, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, passed on Aug. 17 a resolution, “To Protect the Ability of Licensed Insurance Professionals to Continue to Serve the Public.” It recommends that insurance brokers serve as the navigators and “be adequately compensated for the services they provide.”
In July, two dozen members of the House of Representatives asked regulators to ensure a role for licensed insurance agents in the Web portal that will be used to aid consumers in comparing coverage options.
Evidently, then, health insurance brokers have many politically powerful friends on their side.
Another complex issue that I raised last week is the medical-loss ratio. The Affordable Care Act requires health insurers to spend at least 85 percent of premium revenue on “clinical services provided to enrollees and activities that improve health care quality” for coverage offered in the large-group market and at least 80 percent for coverage in the small-group and individual markets. This percentage is known as the medical-loss ratio.
Ideally such a regulatory stricture, if imposed at all, should have been phased in gradually, say over four to five years, as is usually done with major changes of this sort. In this case, however, the law calls for the rules to take full effect by Jan. 1.
Because it simply would not make sense to consider commissions paid by insurance plans to brokers an outlay designed “to improve health care quality,” the National Association of Insurance Commissioners treats commissions as a marketing and administrative expense that reduces profits. Brokers fear insurers will put the squeeze on commissions in order to maximize profits within the allowed ratio.
One advocate for the brokers, Alan Katz, a past president of both the National and the California Associations of Health Underwriters, has argued that the commissions should be left out of the ratio calculations altogether:
“Commissions are paid by consumers (whether individuals or employers). Today carriers collect these funds and pass 100 percent of them along to an independent third-party – producers. Health-insurance companies don’t benefit from these dollars. They are providing an administrative convenience to their members and to their distribution partners – a convenience that reduces overall cost in the system.”
So who actually is these brokers’ principal? In principal-agent economic theory, at least, the principal should compensate the agent directly, to make sure that the agent always acts in the principal’s interests.
“Insurance broker” is sometimes treated as a synonym for “insurance agent” or even “producer,” although that is sloppy usage. Dictionaries describe an insurance broker as the agent of the insured and an insurance agent as someone who represents an insurance company.
From conversations with advocates of insurance brokers, I have learned that most brokers consider the insured as their principal, even though their commission is typically paid by the insurer.
This raises the question of why the insured do not directly pay their health-insurance brokers, just as they pay accountants for help with their tax returns or lawyers who help them in legal matters.
If insurance companies, which seem to think of brokers as “producers,” pay different rates of commissions and explicitly reward with bonuses brokers who provide high volume, does that not set up at least the appearance of a conflict of interest that the brokers may wish to avoid?
If the insured paid their brokers (or the “navigators”) directly, the problem of how to treat those commissions in the ratio calculation would go away. The commissions to be included in the ratio would then be just those of bona fide agents of the insurance companies.
Brokers in general are middlemen between buyers and sellers of a good or a service. Because they are involved in many similar transactions, they can harvest economies of scale in the gathering and structuring of pertinent information. In the process, they become experts on the good or service being traded.
One would assume that brokers have played that role ever since humans abandoned one-on-one barter and engaged in wider trade. Because their economic contribution to trade is valuable, either buyers or sellers are willing to pay brokers a commission.
In modern economies, however, brokers are forever vulnerable to two developments, even in the absence of government regulations that may impinge on their economic turf.
One development is the standardization of the good or service being traded; the other is the power of electronic-information technology to gather and structure information at substantially lower cost.
The recently passed Affordable Care Act seeks to further both developments and adds a third: the regulatory requirement that insurers must limit the fraction of premiums spent on marketing and administration.
Ever since Paul Ellwood and Walter McClure developed and Alain Enthoven refined the concept of managed competition among private health insurers in the 1970s, policy analysts favoring a private health insurance system have dreamed of a standard benefit package on which competing private insurers would quote risk-adjusted premiums — making it easier for individuals, households and employers to make a cost-conscious choice among insurers.
The Affordable Care Act seeks to follow in that tradition.
First, it specifies a minimum, standard benefit package, albeit with varying degrees of cost-sharing by patients. Second, it calls for electronic, state-based health insurance exchanges designed to facilitate easy choice among insurers.
In principle, such exchanges could be designed in a user-friendly way that could provide small businesses and individuals with much of the structured information traditionally provided by brokers. The Swiss health system, for example, relies on that approach for its wholly private health insurance system, as does the Dutch system.
To get a feel for what is possible in the United States, browse the Web site of the Federal Employee Benefit Program operated by the Office of Personnel Management. Several private-sector electronic health insurance exchanges have also been operating for a decade or so — for example, eHealthInsurance.com.
If I were a broker, however, I would not despair at the prospect of the state-based insurance exchanges for one simple reason: administrative simplicity and efficiency is decidedly not America’s strong suit, in either the private or the public health sectors.
So it’s a pretty safe bet that the state-based exchanges envisaged in the Affordable Care Act will be so complicated and bewildering that the services of brokers will still be needed. In fact, the Affordable Care Act anticipates this by requiring that the exchanges award grants to “navigators,” tasked with educating the public about qualified plans, available subsidies, enrollment procedures and so on.
Noting the need for such navigators, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, passed on Aug. 17 a resolution, “To Protect the Ability of Licensed Insurance Professionals to Continue to Serve the Public.” It recommends that insurance brokers serve as the navigators and “be adequately compensated for the services they provide.”
In July, two dozen members of the House of Representatives asked regulators to ensure a role for licensed insurance agents in the Web portal that will be used to aid consumers in comparing coverage options.
Evidently, then, health insurance brokers have many politically powerful friends on their side.
Another complex issue that I raised last week is the medical-loss ratio. The Affordable Care Act requires health insurers to spend at least 85 percent of premium revenue on “clinical services provided to enrollees and activities that improve health care quality” for coverage offered in the large-group market and at least 80 percent for coverage in the small-group and individual markets. This percentage is known as the medical-loss ratio.
Ideally such a regulatory stricture, if imposed at all, should have been phased in gradually, say over four to five years, as is usually done with major changes of this sort. In this case, however, the law calls for the rules to take full effect by Jan. 1.
Because it simply would not make sense to consider commissions paid by insurance plans to brokers an outlay designed “to improve health care quality,” the National Association of Insurance Commissioners treats commissions as a marketing and administrative expense that reduces profits. Brokers fear insurers will put the squeeze on commissions in order to maximize profits within the allowed ratio.
One advocate for the brokers, Alan Katz, a past president of both the National and the California Associations of Health Underwriters, has argued that the commissions should be left out of the ratio calculations altogether:
“Commissions are paid by consumers (whether individuals or employers). Today carriers collect these funds and pass 100 percent of them along to an independent third-party – producers. Health-insurance companies don’t benefit from these dollars. They are providing an administrative convenience to their members and to their distribution partners – a convenience that reduces overall cost in the system.”
So who actually is these brokers’ principal? In principal-agent economic theory, at least, the principal should compensate the agent directly, to make sure that the agent always acts in the principal’s interests.
“Insurance broker” is sometimes treated as a synonym for “insurance agent” or even “producer,” although that is sloppy usage. Dictionaries describe an insurance broker as the agent of the insured and an insurance agent as someone who represents an insurance company.
From conversations with advocates of insurance brokers, I have learned that most brokers consider the insured as their principal, even though their commission is typically paid by the insurer.
This raises the question of why the insured do not directly pay their health-insurance brokers, just as they pay accountants for help with their tax returns or lawyers who help them in legal matters.
If insurance companies, which seem to think of brokers as “producers,” pay different rates of commissions and explicitly reward with bonuses brokers who provide high volume, does that not set up at least the appearance of a conflict of interest that the brokers may wish to avoid?
If the insured paid their brokers (or the “navigators”) directly, the problem of how to treat those commissions in the ratio calculation would go away. The commissions to be included in the ratio would then be just those of bona fide agents of the insurance companies.
Wherever you live - Insure for Less with InsureandGo, for your Car Insurance UK & Home Insurance
In its continuing drive to shake up the insurance market, InsureandGo today launches its great value home insurance.
As with all the company's products its home insurance offers fantastic levels of cover at highly competitive prices. And the range available can cover most property types from a rented flat to a holiday villa abroad.
A spokesperson from InsureandGo, says: "People need to be sure that when they are covering something as important as their home that they pick an insurer that provides top class insurance. We do just that but at prices that won't break the bank."
People can pick up a quote by visiting www.insureandgo.com.
As with all the company's products its home insurance offers fantastic levels of cover at highly competitive prices. And the range available can cover most property types from a rented flat to a holiday villa abroad.
A spokesperson from InsureandGo, says: "People need to be sure that when they are covering something as important as their home that they pick an insurer that provides top class insurance. We do just that but at prices that won't break the bank."
People can pick up a quote by visiting www.insureandgo.com.
Cheap House and Home Insurance
Making sure your home is fully covered with an insurance policy is very important and finding a policy that is low-cost and comprehensive can be tricky. Whether you own a small flat or a large mansion, InsureandGo can provide you with cheap home insurance in minutes.
InsureandGo can help you to find the right house insurance policy at the right price. Our products are placed with a range of insurers and we also offer a wide range of cover and pricing options so you can find the policy that’s perfect for you.
Benefits of a home insurance policy from InsureandGo:
Accidental damage cover (available as an optional extension)
High risk items covered up to one third of the contents sum insured (single article limit from £1,000)
Automatic cover for Christmas and wedding gifts (up to 10% of the contents sum Insured)
Unlimited cover available for frozen food (with contents insurance)
Money covered up to £1,500 and credit card covered up to £1,500 (with personal possessions cover)
Garden furniture, statues and ornaments left in the open within the boundaries of your home are covered up to £2,500 (with contents insurance)
Personal legal liability (contents), property owners’ liability (buildings)
Policy Documents
Download a copy of your policy wording and keyfacts here.
InsureandGo can help you to find the right house insurance policy at the right price. Our products are placed with a range of insurers and we also offer a wide range of cover and pricing options so you can find the policy that’s perfect for you.
Benefits of a home insurance policy from InsureandGo:
Accidental damage cover (available as an optional extension)
High risk items covered up to one third of the contents sum insured (single article limit from £1,000)
Automatic cover for Christmas and wedding gifts (up to 10% of the contents sum Insured)
Unlimited cover available for frozen food (with contents insurance)
Money covered up to £1,500 and credit card covered up to £1,500 (with personal possessions cover)
Garden furniture, statues and ornaments left in the open within the boundaries of your home are covered up to £2,500 (with contents insurance)
Personal legal liability (contents), property owners’ liability (buildings)
Policy Documents
Download a copy of your policy wording and keyfacts here.
Bundling Your Car and Home Insurance Can Save You Money
There are various ways to save money on home insurance and car insurance. By purchasing auto and home insurance through the same provider, many find they can receive a discount. The insurance industry typically rewards loyalty, and merging two separate policies into one surely benefits the insured. Most A rated insurance companies offer discounts when you purchase both home and auto insurance through them. Insurers usually offer some form of discount when you purchase more than one policy.
While purchasing home and auto insurance from the same insurance company can save you money, many people don't realize how this or other simple ideas can be beneficial. The following tips can be done in a matter of minutes, either through research or with an agent, and will likely save money in the long run.
Reviewing a home insurance policy to see if reduced coverage could be realized.
Increasing a home or auto insurance policy's deductible can increase savings in a year, assuming no claims are made on the account.
Move high risk coverage to a separate insurance policy, if the research says it will save money. For instance, many places offer wind or flood damage as separate policies. Make sure the home insurance policy has no conflicts with this arrangement.
If purchasing new coverage, be sure to shop around or both home and auto. The results may save you hundreds of dollars a year.
Put security measures in place, like a home alarm system.
Buy a home near a fire station for increased security, which lowers home owner's insurance
Have your home surveyed for wind mitigation factors and submit the survey to your home owner's insurance company for discounts related to the survey results.
Bundling your car and home insurance can save you money just like the previous tips we described. Auto insurance tends to drop in price as we grow in age and as we become more responsible behind the wheel. Drivers who experience the following should see a decrease in their auto insurance policy premium, thus saving them money.
No accidents or claims on the auto insurance policy within three to five years.
No moving violations.
Drivers who purchase a safe vehicle will realize savings over those who drive poorly rated sports cars and the like.
Theft deterrents will save some money on auto insurance.
When you combine both home and auto insurance through the same insurance company the discount comes immediately. There's usually no probationary period. Typically the discount you receive could reach a few hundred dollars, depending on the value of your home and car. To find out more information on bundling your car and home insurance to save you money, visit the website of a prospective insurer to review their offers. Most insurance companies post these discounts. You can also contact an agent or call the insurance company directly.
While purchasing home and auto insurance from the same insurance company can save you money, many people don't realize how this or other simple ideas can be beneficial. The following tips can be done in a matter of minutes, either through research or with an agent, and will likely save money in the long run.
Reviewing a home insurance policy to see if reduced coverage could be realized.
Increasing a home or auto insurance policy's deductible can increase savings in a year, assuming no claims are made on the account.
Move high risk coverage to a separate insurance policy, if the research says it will save money. For instance, many places offer wind or flood damage as separate policies. Make sure the home insurance policy has no conflicts with this arrangement.
If purchasing new coverage, be sure to shop around or both home and auto. The results may save you hundreds of dollars a year.
Put security measures in place, like a home alarm system.
Buy a home near a fire station for increased security, which lowers home owner's insurance
Have your home surveyed for wind mitigation factors and submit the survey to your home owner's insurance company for discounts related to the survey results.
Bundling your car and home insurance can save you money just like the previous tips we described. Auto insurance tends to drop in price as we grow in age and as we become more responsible behind the wheel. Drivers who experience the following should see a decrease in their auto insurance policy premium, thus saving them money.
No accidents or claims on the auto insurance policy within three to five years.
No moving violations.
Drivers who purchase a safe vehicle will realize savings over those who drive poorly rated sports cars and the like.
Theft deterrents will save some money on auto insurance.
When you combine both home and auto insurance through the same insurance company the discount comes immediately. There's usually no probationary period. Typically the discount you receive could reach a few hundred dollars, depending on the value of your home and car. To find out more information on bundling your car and home insurance to save you money, visit the website of a prospective insurer to review their offers. Most insurance companies post these discounts. You can also contact an agent or call the insurance company directly.
订阅：
博文 (Atom)