Home : Blogs : Inna Hardison-ha media group Design, Printing, Web : Ha Media's Marketing & Advertising Blog

Humana Gag Orders...

So here we are, trying our best to battle out the health care debate with the crazies, arguing with downright laughable insinuations (death panels, school-based-abortions, communist takeover), and the administration, instead of dissecting the bill for the moderate dems to assuage their fears - are gagging insurance companies' ability to speak to their clients.

I don't know whether or not what's in the Humana mailer is full of inaccuracies. I do not know whether or not Medicare Advantage will, indeed, be cut in its entirety, or what if any other options seniors who currently use it will be offered. It's immaterial to this conversation. I would like to know why the people that are supposed to be doing their best right now to PASS a health care bill are shooting themselves in the foot over and over again. I would like to know who, in their infinite wisdom, decided that it would be better to tell Humana to shut up than to address the points they brought up in the letter. After all, doesn't the FED have those same lists?

Your thoughts?

Originally published by me at www.coffeedrinkersunite.com - a social network for the progressive types. Click to join.

cause i rock...

Posted by Inna Hardison-ha media group Design, Printing, Web on 09/24/2009 08:00 AM

Comments (46)

libs screwing up, baucus, humana, medicare advantage, wtf are we thinking

Post is included in group: Silent Majority
Post is included in group: Blatant Politics
Post is included in group: Wrong Right Turn
Post is included in group: Proud to be a Liberal
Post is included in group: Dissent

46 Comments on Humana Gag Orders...

SEP

I've lived in the Washington area 51 years and have worked for the congressmen you speak of. Follow the money is the guiding principal. It never ceases to amaze me at how many decisions are made based on whose vote they will get or lose. Ask the staffers that work for these congressmen and they will tell you the same.

Inna, I agree with you. If the letter is inaccurate why not address those points. To me maybe Humana is correct with thier assumptions. I am with you CONFUSED>

I agree if they did not have anything to hide they would not be acting the way they are.

Dan - given that any elected official's electebility is directly tied to votes - it's not suprising. Of course when one is willing to sacrifice a reform as huge as healthcare for that vote, we ought to raise a lot more than eyebrows. Public servants my ass.

Thanks for commenting.

Inna~The same reason they are against posting the bill on the internet for 72 hours before voting on it. They are a group of corrupt elitlists who know that they will never get what they want passed if the public finds out before they vote on it. Business as usual in Washington. Also I am not taking sides here, just another reason why I hate giving our pols more power.

Frank - I wouldn't be surprised if the seniors take it as such, whether or not Humana is correct. It's just plain stupid at this point. I think now that this happened, the Medicare adminstration has AN OBLIGATION to address these people's plans in plain English so they know what WOULD happen if the legislation should pass.

Terri - hi. It's not really what the point of the post was or anything I said. I don't think it's about "hiding" anything, and I am sure that legally speaking the medicare administration is right - mailing lists of customers should not be used for lobbying or political campaigning. There is, however, something to be said for not sticking to those rules selectively (AARP's many advertisements in support of the bill are fine, for example). :-) Apply the rules equally or Don't - but again, equally. Just my .002 cents.

My dear Hugh - the bills have been available, last I checked, unless this is in reference to the very first attempt at this. Corrupt elitists, huh? :-)

Inna it is in reference to the Bill they wouldn't let out of committe yesterday that would have required a 72 hour window of posting any bill on the internet before voting on it. The media is too obssessed with telling us how evil Beck and Limbaugh are and too little concerned with the atrocities our govt. are acting on right under our noses.

I agree with Hugh. It doesn't matter what side you're on these guys are corrupt elitists. They live inside the beltway and can not relate to the work a day man or woman - or the small business owner. And this goes for both parties.

Inna- the answer is simple, they feel a health insurance (and eventually health care) takeover slipping away. Regardless of the the merits, or demerits, of the reform bills, the administration and congress do not want to hear opposition so they have verbally attacked and abused those speaking out, they have focused attacks on talk radio, and now they are attacking civil rights of a corporation that speaks out against the program. They do not understand that they have misread the election results thinking that it gave them a mandate to do anything that they wanted. And they are responding like spoiled children. Rather than truly address the issues they are attacking people (and corporations). They are self destructing.

In regard to the 72 hours Hugh mentioned. I posted about it yesterday. Dems in the senate shot down an ammendment to have the final bill available for review by the public, and for reading by the senate, for 72 hours before a vote. A bipartisan bill with similar requirements, has been in the house and languishing in committee. Apparently, Pelosi will not let it come out for a floor vote.

And in regard to Medicare Advantage, Obama has wanted to eliminate it since as long ago as 2007. And the democrats have wanted to get rid of it for even longer.

Do you see something wrong with an insurance company notifying its customers of possible changes to their policy. Gosh, I get them all the time from my husbands insurance at this school district.

If the government is so upset, why?

Missy - obviously if I saw something wrong with it I wouldn't have written this post.

Hugh and Mike - off to read stuff. Back at you in a bit.:-)

Syreeta - I am not sure how your response is relevant to this post. These types of generalized statements don't do much to foster a discussion or change of any kind, in my opinion.

Inna - arguing with downright laughable insinuations?

pages 425 – 430 of the Health Care Bill that would have opened the door for what was mockingly termed a “Death Panel”. The White House has denied the existence of this language that was in fact removed by the Senate version of “the Bill”.

Funny how you can remove something from a bill when in their own words it was never there!! Hypocrites and liars.

You say its is downright laughable, but again the facts outweigh your insinuations.

Don't let the facts get in the way of your liberal rantings.

But I do agree, there should be freedom for all to express their viewpoints, and government should never interfer.

But Obama and his administration has his presidentcy at stake now, and nothing will stop this president from achieving his goals.

The Constitution won't stop him, nothing will....

Inna - I could not agree with you more. Gagging the opposing viewpoint, whether accurate or not, only invites a sinister perception - real or not.

Nicholas - the language on end of life counseling was removed because the dems have no balls, not because it was reflective of any death panels. I have read all those pages you reference, and the ONLY thing in it was that medicare HAD to reimburse for end-of-life consults. IMHO - not a bad thing, and one most PRIVATE insurances reimburse for anyway, always have.

SO yes, laughable.

Patrick - yep, it certainly does invite suspition at the very least. Thank you for commenting.:-)

Inna - I think you are so gullible it is laughable. You trust government and I don't. You give government power, they will take more power, that is the difference in our philosophies,

You are not the enemy, I just don't agree with you. and your trust in this government takeover of healthcare.

Nich - I never said that I trust governement. It's just that in the case of Health Care I mistrust profit driven corporations and Insurance Lobby a LOT more. They've been the death panels, Nick.

Gag orders, mocking the people, trying to silence talk radio. My thoughts are that this flailing administration is all about abuse of power and getting rid of our constitution.

Humana has a fiduciary responsibility to its members and they are abiding by that. The corrupt elected idiots disagree and are throwing temper tantrums.

Kim - I thought the last administration was all about abuse of Power and getting rid of our Constitution...

Now to your actually valid point - yes, Humana has a fiduciary responsibility to its customers. What i'd like to know is whether or not the mailer they sent out falls under the execution of those duties. If it does not, then they (Humana) are indeed in violation. However, that being said, the same rules should apply to AARP, in my humble opinion.

This post is now Featured In Silent Majority of Active Rain.

Inna........there will be no massive change. there will be no health care bill that remotely resembles what everyone is talking about. there is no money for it. there was no money when Hillary tried and there is no money now. At best, they will pass some weak tea version of supplemental aid in the form of tax credits.

The insurance companies will not give up the ability to make millions. The health care industry will not become more efficient. Medicare will most likely just move it's eligible age back to 72.

All this fuss and public outcry. Just a smoke screen. A well paid for smoke screen.

It matters not which party appears to be in power. All the elected officials are in POWER.

Each side will argue the merits and in the end the compromise will be the same old thing, the golden rule will prevail and the elected officials have the gold.

Inna, A point we can agree upon. From my understanding the government feels they can control Humana because they joined into a negotiated contract. The contract is between provider and payer.

AARP is comprised of a paid membership. Third party insurance companies contract with AARP to provide lower rates to members. AARP makes the referral. The insurance company then contracts with the federal government the same way Humana does.

Since AARP is not party to the contractual service agreement they are free to convey any opinion to their membership.

I also heard that Humana's numbers came from the Government Accounting office. It would appear that portion of Humana's message is accurate.

What happened to transparency?

Nick - why am i not surprised:-)

J-Mac - you are probably right on this, but I reserve the right to hope that at the end of the day our elected officials do the right thing by those who elected them. It might be naive of me, but in the absense of a good alternative, I'll take that.

Bonnie - thank you for the clarification of differences in treatment of AARP and Humana in this case, though I will still say that at the very least, it was a stupid move, even if legally and otherwise defensible to gag the company instead of addressing the issues.

Just my opinion.

Inna, I just heard a legal opinion that stated a corporation is a "person" under the Constitution. They have the right to free speech even if they are wrong about their facts. Any one may say anything they want about the government freely and without fear of reprisal by that government.

Humana should ignore the gag order and let the Department of Health and Human Services sue them.

Humana was correct. The bill cuts 123 billion from the Advantage program.

If the government is successful at restricting ANY free speech ALL is in danger.

J-Mac, I like the way you think. I certainly don't know what will or will not happen. Like Inna I HOPE the officials will do the right thing for the people but in the real world I THINK you are right on.

Inna, I agree Humana has every right to inform their insured on what changes would occur if the bill passed as is.

My question is- Was the gag order because Humana did "ONLY" that or because they are investigating whether Humana misrepresented and misstated things about what the Bill would or would not do?

I am with you regarding your statement: "I never said that I trust government. It's just that in the case of Health Care I mistrust profit driven corporations and Insurance Lobby a LOT more."

If we are going to put gag orders on corporations that may have the facts wrong shouldn't that apply to the media as well? How much drivel that is printed or voiced on a daily basis is in a liberal biased form? They should not be allowed to speak either.

Kim,

Interesting point.

Kim - I would ask you the same question regarding right-wing media... SHould we silence Glenn every time he lies, which is often, orMalkin, or Rush?

Hi Linda...

Inna - I haven't read the letter so my comment is fairly uninformed. My expectation would be to find a very biased document full of predictions designed to scare consumers into expressing outrage at the bill. The letter I envision will certainly not indicate the (im)probability of any of these events taking place. THAT BEING SAID, it is disappointing to see the tactics of the previous administration being used to silence opposition by the party promising to do this differently. Address the issues and discredit Humana if they are wrong. The gag order gives the letter credence.

Hi Inna, my friend. I am simply too tired to jump into this fray. Just wanted to say MWA and thanks for always getting out there. You are my hero! xxoo

I think there could be some interesting Constitutionality arguments here... And it has to tick off the White house that the CBO keeps refuting what the WH says...

Let's just for a second say that Humana got everything completely wrong. I don't care!! What gives any Government the right to gag anyone? Where are we living? And unfortunately this is not about left and right; Dems or republicans - it's about the abuse of power in DC which has been going on for a very long time. America is waking up - finally!!! And for that I am grateful to our President.

I'm featuring this in Blatant.

SEP

Inna - in my rant on this subject I included a link to the Humana mailer if anyone is interested.

http://activerain.com/blogsview/1252075/what-ever-happened-to-liberty-and-freedom-of-expression

Ted, I recommend everyone read theletter. It's not that long. There was nothing inflammatory. The points Humana made we have already heard in the news. Major cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and the Advantage program will be used in part to fund the health care reform. That's true.

In light of the content the governments actions become even more chilling and troublesome.

Ted - thanks for the link, I just read the letter, it is pretty much milquetoast and certainly is not misrepresenting anything, nor is it inflammatory. For Buacus and the administration to feel threatened by this just shows how inherently insecure they are in their health care reform position.

Ted - thank you for the link. I did read the letter prior to writing this post, the one bit of info I don't have is actual proposed cuts to the Medicare Advantage program and the like.

I think the only thing that could give Baucus's orders legal legitimacy is the lobbying/political bit included in the mailer, a call to action to contact one's elected officials. Of course my perspective on the matter is that even if Human did violate the guidlines of Medicaid and Medicare administration - the gag order move was still a stupid one, at best.

Erik - read the link to the letter in Ted's post. It's not inflamatory, though I can't vouch for the accuracy of what is said in it.:-) I, of course, agree with you on the rest of your commentary.

My Susan - MWA right back at you.:-)

Simon - if Humana got everything (or anything significant) wrong - that would be false advertising at the least. Since they are discussing senior's benefits in the letter, they do have an obligation to Not misinform or scare their customers. I don't think false facts are protected under the first amendment, but Ted can correct me on that if I am wrong.

That being said, I only wish that if there are rules of what an isurance company can and cannot say to its customers, that they be enforced equally or not at all.

PS: Thanks for the feature.

Lane - these arguments are already taking place. It would be interesting to watch for many reasons. I am not sure I would personally be ok with a corporation being considered in the same exact light legally speaking as a person, especially when it comes to political influence. If we presume that people who work in those corporations already have those rights, why have the possibility of a double protection and double power? Just a thought.

Mike S. Baucus has every reason to be insecure. He sold out and drafted a crappy bill. :-)

Bonnie - thank you for your comment.

Inna, Not to argue with you but a Constitutional judge said yesterday that Free Speech can contain falsehood and inaccuracies. He said that even if the Humana letter did contain mis-information they were free to state their opinion,

You are free to say or write anything you like even against the government. If speech were to be edited for content in any manner it would no longer be free. I know you support free speech and believe it needs to be protected for all not just some.

SEP

Ok, I actually read the letter. I don't see anything that warrants a gag order. I also don't see much of anything newsworthy. Congress debates cuts to Medicare EVERY year. I do however see irony, which I really enjoy. Humana and much of the Right are in lock-step trying to make sure government spends MORE money to provide health care. Come to think of it, this is more along the lines of hypocrisy, which I don't like.

The taking over of America continues...when will we wake up?

Remember, corporations (at least C-corps) are taxed as individual entities... so, they are paying taxes taxes apart from their employees. Maybe they should get a vote...

;^ )

Leave a response…

Name:

Email:
(optional)

Comment:

What does the graphic say?