10:17 am, July 13, 2014

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 11
       

  • Health insurance  (Flagged as Abuse)
    MatthewKnudtson
    Show/Hide Message
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Health insurance
    MatthewKnudtson
    The federal government is lowering premiums for a taxpayer-subsidized plan that provides health insurance for those with pre-existing conditions check "Penny Health" website
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • There are issues with FEHB
    Bill Samuel
    The FEHB has some clear benefits, but there are a number of things I don't like about it: - The huge penalty build into the program against 2-person families, which probably more than doubles the premium. This is due to the lack of a 2-person category, unlike FEDVIP. - The reversal of the benefit of the doubt. In private insurance, it is a settled rule that all ambiguities must be resolved in favor of the insured. OPM gave FEHB insurers a sweetheart deal by reversing that so that the companies get the benefit of any ambiguities. - The inability to really know what your insurance coverage is. The actual contract is not provided to the insured. You have a company-written summary which is not authoritative, is often ambiguous, and sometimes just has nothing on certain situations. This would be illegal in the private sector. - No advocate for the Federal worker. OPM contracts with the insurance companies, and tends to side with them because otherwise they look like they didn't do the contracting right. They have no ombudsman for the insured. They neutralized the unions by allowing them to offer insurance plans, despite the blatant conflict of interest in unions performing a management function. This means the interest of the unions is directly contrary to that of the employees they represent. Congress seems to be bought out by the insurance companies, and they don't see the political advantage of improving the program because they would rather have a lot of case work dealing with individual situations since then the employees feel beholden to them. At least I have not been able to get my Congressional delegation (Mikulksi, Sarbanes, Van Hollen) the least bit interested in reforming the program. Mostly, they won't even answer my emails about it, although they answer them on almost any other issue.
    Bill Samuel Silver Spring, MD 20906
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Single Plus 1
    Linda
    It would be nice if the government offered a Single Plus 1 option like many private sector employers do. Than it doesn't matter if it is spouses with no children, or a single parent with 1 child. Either way, for my spouse and I it is cheaper for us each to get our own insurance as single. His because his employer pays 90+% of his insurance and almost none of mine, and because my family is higher than his single plus 1. Amazes me that have two plans is cheaper than 1. Go figure!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • problems with FEHB
    Moderate
    Of course people will find problems with FEHB. Those who want coverage for 2 will complain that they pay the same as those with coverage for 10. Both are family plans. if 2 gets segregated out, then why not 3? If 3 gets segregated out, then why not 4? And keep on going. And you can say the same about maternity benefits for retired people etc.--- we have group plans. I pay about $5000 per year for a family plan which will be for 2 in a few years. if I tried to get a comparable plan on the outside for 2 people without employer subsidy, it would cost $15000-20000. Although not perfect, I will take what I have.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Another issue with the FEHB
    Bill Samuel
    I forgot to add the addition of the so-called "Consumer driven" and high deductible plans in recent years in order to siphon out the young and healthy, and thereby raise premiums for the rest of the Federal work force. These plans somewhat contradict the concept of risk sharing which supposedly underlies the program.
    Bill Samuel Silver Spring, MD 20906
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • High Deductibles
    Rob
    High deductible plans are not just for the young and healthy. I have a spouse and three kids and have been in one of these plans for 5 years now. Although I've hit my deductible a couple of times the plan is still cheaper than say BCBS. What I'd pay for the BCBS premiums ends up being more than the high deductible.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • High Deductible
    Linda
    A high deductible works great as long as you have the deductible saved up. I have seen way too many people who don't save up the deductible, then compain about paying for the medical expenses. Or can't pay. Some of the high deductibles (Federal is probably ok) also have high out of pocket, poor coverage, and small total benefits. It is a surprise to some people when they pay for a high deductible and pay the $5,000 deductible and their coverage is gone at $20,000. Let's see, the insurance covered $15,000. Hope the premiums were real low if you have open heart surgery!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Follow-up to High Deductibles
    Rob
    The way to set aside money for the deductible is to save the difference in premiums between the HDHP and BCBS (roughly $100 per pay check or $2600 per year). You can set up payroll deduction where the money can come out of your check (pre-tax) and go directly into your HSA. Plus the plan deposits $125 per month into your HSA. So, if you save the premium difference you'll have $4100 in your HSA for the year (more than enough to cover the deductible). If you're going to blow the money you'd save in premiums by switching to a HDHP then you're right, you won't be able to afford the deductible. Remember, all the money in your HSA is yours forever even if you leave the plan or federal government for that matter. The plan I'm in pays 90/10 after I hit my deductible. Also, you don't have co-pays and all of your routine exams are covered 100%.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Any premiums are too much
    StarTrek1701
    That's right. Until recently, the average Federal employee was paid 22% LESS than their private sector counterpart. Now, because of the pay freeze, I have read where that is now closer to 25%. That means my take home pay is about $350.00 short. There is a Federal law (can't remember the name but I believe it was enacted during the Clinton administration) that is suppose to close the pay gap between the private sector employees and the public. So, until the President and/or Congress starts applying that law and replace the money I have been short all these years (yea, like that is gonna happen), then any insurance premiums, health or otherwise, they require me to pay is too much.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }