Health Insurers Propose to Revise Stance on Pre-existing Conditions.

On the front-page of its Business Day section, the New York Times (3/25, B1, Pear) reports that the health insurance industry Tuesday said "that it was willing to end the practice of charging higher premiums to sick people if Congress adopted a comprehensive plan requiring all Americans to carry insurance. ... In effect, insurers said they were willing to discard an element of their longstanding business model -- pricing insurance policies, in part, on the basis of a person's medical condition or history." The insurers "set forth their position at a Senate hearing on Tuesday" and in a letter to Senate committee members. The letter was signed by the presidents of America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) and the BlueCross and BlueShield Association (BCBSA).

According to CQ HealthBeat (3/25, Adams), the insurance industry proposal would "apply only to the individual market that provides insurance for about five percent of people under 65 who have insurance and is contingent on lawmakers' willingness to impose a mandate requiring individuals to buy health insurance. ... The insurers also said that they should still be able to charge more based on age, the geographic location of patients, family size, and other factors." The letter by AHIP and BCBSA "was presented during a hearing in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee" on Tuesday. CQ notes that the industry "offer is intended to stave off efforts among congressional Democrats in creating a public health insurance program that would compete with the private insurers and potentially pose a serious threat to their business."

Similarly, the Los Angeles Times (3/25, Levey, Girion) points out that the offer "comes as lawmakers on Capitol Hill debate a proposal to create a government-run insurance program. It underscores the pressure the industry faces from Congress and the Obama administration as policymakers move ahead with plans to reshape the nation's healthcare system."

Likewise, the AP (3/25) charges that "to try to win political support," the insurance industry "has already made a number of concessions. Last year, for example, insurers offered to end the practice of denying coverage to sick people. They also said they would support a national goal of restraining cost increases." In this latest offer, "insurers are trying to head off the creation of a government insurance plan that would compete with them," something for which "liberals and many Democrats are pressing."

In a more optimistic light, USA Today (3/25, Wolf) calls the proposal "one of the first concrete steps forward" in the process of "a major overhaul of the nation's healthcare system." AHIP CEO Karen Ignagni "in a Newsmaker session with USA Today," said this is the first time the industry has submitted such a proposal. "This is a major step, and it changes everything about how the market works," Ignagni said. She emphasized that "insurers are prepared to 'offer coverage to everyone who applies.' In return, however, they want a system similar to the one that now exists only in Massachusetts. ... Insurers want the federal government to help those who cannot afford private insurance with subsidies or tax breaks." The industry also wants "to prevent any new system from including a government insurance plan similar to Medicare," according to Ignagni.

The Wall Street Journal (3/25, Meckler, Fuhrmans) adds, Tuesday's proposal "is the latest move by health insurers to position themselves as constructive participants, rather than obstacles, in the debate over how to overhaul the US healthcare system. Insurers hope to prove the private sector can fix problems on its own."

Similarly, The Hill (3/25, Young) reports, "By and large, the health insurance industry has been sounding a conciliatory tone in its communications with Obama and congressional Democrats this year." The Hill also points out that "the health insurance industry is not alone in its opposition to the public [universal coverage] plan: Republicans, the pharmaceutical sector and other healthcare interests have also expressed strong reservations about the proposal