those 1200 or so (many more applied for and denied)Obamacare Waivers were probably unecessary...right???

Student Health Insurance - NJCU :: Office of the Controller - NJCU :: Office of the Controller

In fact, the NJ State Colleges and Universities have come together to develop a group plan in an effort to keep costs as low as possible, while offering comprehensive student insurance package. The increases indicated are caused by the Public Health Service Act and the Affordable Care Act signed into law by President Obama in 2010. A provision of that act that is now in effect requires that College and University Student Health Plans meet certain minimum coverage requirements.

In addition to the State mandates, the United States Department of Health and Human Services has issued proposed that would establish rules for student health insurance coverage under the Public Health Service Act and the Affordable Care Act. Some of the major coverage changes are as follows:

■Plan maximum goes from $50,000 to $100,000
■Rx maximum increases $1000.00 to $100,000

■Wellness benefit increases to $100,000 without co-pay or deductible for in-network services.

William Paterson University - Health Insurance - Explanation of increase

Health Insurance - Explanation of increase-This year student health insurance cost will be increasing from $250 to $715 annually for undergraduate and from $361 to $1,033 for graduate students. In addition to the State mandates, the United State Department of Health and Human Services has issued proposed regulation that would establish rules for student health insurance coverage under the Public Health Service Act and the Affordable Care Act.

As the new federal health care laws and regulations are implemented over the next several years we know that we will be required to improve the level of coverage offered by our plan and consequently the cost of the premium will continue to increase due exclusively to those mandated changes.



Read more here: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/0...#storylink=cpy

MOSCOW — The Idaho State Board of Education opted Wednesday to keep its mandate that full-time public college and university students be insured.
Several institutions asked the board to suspend the rule for a year because of unexpected sharp increases in premiums. But the board ultimately decided the risk of having uninsured students outweighed the increased costs they will have to absorb.
In 2009, Lewis-Clark State College, Boise State University and Idaho State University joined in a consortium to purchase student health insurance in an effort to keep down costs. The effort largely worked until this year

The premium increases, revealed earlier this month, would hike costs at LCSC from $1,232 per year to $1,703, a 38.2 percent jump. ISU students will see a 46.5 percent increase to $1,861, and Boise State University students a 30.9 percent increase to $2,124.


UI financial Vice President Ron Smith spoke strongly against a yearlong waiver of the mandate due to the fear that healthy students would opt to go uninsured and shrink the pool of participants. That would likely lead to higher premiums next year.




http://www.northampton.edu/Student-R...-Insurance.htm

Anticipated Student Insurance Rate Increase


New healthcare reform legislation mandates that 2012-2013 student insurance plans must provide increased coverage. These benefit requirements are expected to increase the cost of the student insurance plan. Premiums are anticipated to be between $1,400-$1,800 per year.

I checked(that's up from $654)




http://articles.courant.com/2010-09-...-health-reform

State OKs Anthem Rate Hikes, Some More Than 20 Percent

September 17, 2010|By MATTHEW STURDEVANT,

The state's largest health insurer was granted rate hikes Friday that will be well over 20 percent for some plans, drawing sharp criticism from the attorney general.

Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield in Connecticut requested a wide range of premium increases, which will take effect Oct. 1, to cover the costs of new benefits required by federal health reform. Higher prices mostly affect new members shopping for a health plan on the individual market rather than people who have group plans through an employer or some other organization.


The Connecticut Department of Insurance approved Anthem's request without changes, including a boost of as much as 22.9 percent just to comply with one provision: eliminating annual spending limits per customer

I will look into the details of scott's post to confirm. I went to the first link.
"For the 2012-13 academic year student health insurance cost will be increasing from $715 to $855."
Student Health Insurance - NJCU :: Office of the Controller - NJCU :: Office of the Controller

That is about a 15% increase. Pretty sure that isn't double.

your initial question regarding the first post was....


there's no shortage of these

Coverage for the new plan year beginning August 1, 2011-July 31, 2012 will be offered through United Health Care. More information will be posted on this website by Mid May. The Annual rate for the Voluntary plan will be $1768.

Drake’s Student Health Insurance
for the Coverage Period of August 1, 2012-July 31, 2013

NOTICE: As of March 16, 2012, new federal Health Care Reform regulations were passed. These changes will result in substantial student health insurance policy changes beginning August 1, 2012. The premium will increase to include the required increased minimum insurance coverage levels.

Zimmy:

college healthcare cost will vary,some will pay a small increase and others will cost a lot more depending on type of coverage.

basically U have been wrong!!! U probably want to cover yourself by saying U R half right, "NA NA.... :)

Actually, not one thing posted in this entire thread verifies that the contents of the article in your first post are accurate. I have been wrong plenty of times in these discussions. I will happily admit it that my suspicions that the doubled price is not solely because of the health law, if I am wrong . So basically, I may be wrong, but neither u nor anyone else has demonstrated it. Most of what has been posted backs that up. A few indicate that prices may double for some people, but the only one that is specific (William Patterson) shows that the school did it partially to improve coverage, not that they had no choice because of the law. Please, lets stick with facts. That is all I ever requested from the start.

“Due to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA – commonly known as health care reform), the cost of student health insurance has doubled,” read the letter from the college’s human resources department....

maybe you should contact the college’s human resources department for clarification, verification, substantiation, :uhuh:

New healthcare reform legislation mandates that 2012-2013 student insurance plans must provide increased coverage. These benefit requirements are expected to increase the cost of the student insurance plan. Premiums are anticipated to be between $1,400-$1,800 per year.

I checked(that's up from $654)

how many percent is that zimmy?

your latest schtick where you are really smart and informed and intelligent and everyone else is ignorant, misinformed and willing victims of lies and propoganda and chain emails isn't going so well :rotf2:

Bye bye Scott. My mistake. Took you less than 24 hour to show again what a classy guy you are. :claps: Why don't you call them and you can tell everyone else what you find. I can see what they write.

Colleges are notorious for hiding what are really tuition hikes in various fees. I'm not saying the health costs doubled or whatever. Just that the methods that colleges employ to get to the real cost of attending are arbitrary.
They try and keep the tuition levels competitive with competing institutions - because that's what Mom and Dad go by. Once students are accepted and kids have gone to orientation, and have established a sense that this is the right school - then.....fee shock! Followed by textbook shock.

[QUOTES=zimmy]

"the school claiming the law doubled the cost for the kid is almost certainly a distortion or, worse yet, a lie."

"Despite the nonsense of some people on here"

"Never mind... you apparently don't get the question"

"This thread is about a bs report that a kids health care costs doubled because of the health care law"

"What a giant piece of simple minded garbage"

"Typical moronic scare tactic based not on the truth or reality, but on what gets people fired up. Almost not worth justifying with a response"


"You say moronic statements about me and Obama "

"a law that hasn't gone into full effect doubled a poor Christian boys health care costs"

"Why do they have to lie and distort everything?"

"Did anyone ever learn the basics of data analysis"

"but someone please find an actual connection between the Fox Spews report and the law"

"I wonder how many of these basic questions fox news asked? Almost certainly, none. Better to run with it since it fits the mantra of farse and unbalanced news."

"I hear common sense tossed around all the time in this forum. Common sense says that one should not fall for the bs that a law that hasn't taken affect is the reason that some random persons health care costs doubled."

"Common sense isn't very common, but it is sure brought up all the time."

"So then the whole premise of the original post is invalid."

"I wasn't even 100% sure it was since the details of it are nonexistent, but I am glad to find out that I was correct."

"I think I will call up one of the national right wing wack jobs and tell them "as a youngish aged Christian, my health care costs have gone up 300% since the law passed, and the moon slowed its orbit around the Earth." That'll get em going."

"This is some funny shizzle."

"This isn't more right wing "my perception must be reality" ?"

"Or is the spin going to be "Obama said it will go down, but it is going up."? Where did you get your info? Did you investigate the details?"

"I understand how if one doesn't like Obama, you could get riled up by this crap, but come on... is it even honest?"

"Sounds like a chain email, actually, or some nutso right wing talk show "

"That and most commentators on there say a bunch of crap that isn't really true, but many in those masses who are listening lack the gray matter to actually analyze multiple sources of information and form valid conclusions"

"How about we elect idiots who want to run things the way they were run 6 years ago? Now that is genius."

"Here it is again? Is this sandman's own words or is this some chain thing he is passing off as his own?"

stay classy GENIUS :uhuh::want:

Scott, your work is done here, you gutted him like a fish, you competely eviscerated him.

We can argue all we want about whether one particular policy saw an increase of 80% or 100%, and we can argue about exactly how much of that is due to Obamacare.

Bottom line...Obama thought he could significantly increase the number of insured folks, and significantly increase the coverage for all, while REDUCING costs, with the wave of his hand. His assumption reveals a breathtaking lack of knowledge of basic economics.

We need somebody with some basic understanding of what is possible, and what isn't.

It is nice to see all my quotes, but just to be clear, the question about the chain email... it was actually a chain email :biglaugh:

Premium Rate Increase Requests For Two More Health Insurers In Six States Deemed Excessive

In response to health insurance premium rate increases that it deemed excessive, the Department of Health and Human Services has called on Assurant Inc.'s Time Insurance Company and Bedford Park, Ill.-based United Security Life and Health Insurance Company to either offer rebates to customers in six states or rescind premium hikes ranging up to 24 percent.

The recently announced rate hikes affect about 60,000 individual and small group insurance customers in Arizona, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, and Wyoming. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires health insurers to justify premium increases of more than 10 percent but does not authorize the government to rescind those rates that are found excessive or unreasonable. In March, two insurers in nine states were found to have requested excessive premium rate increases. This latest review results pertain to two other health insurers in six of the nine states for which premium rate increases were first reviewed.


In these six states, the rate increases requested by Time Insurance for individual and small group insurance were identical to those requested by John Alden Life Insurance Company, another health insurance company doing business in the same states—for example 18 percent for individual and 23 percent for small group insurance. United Security requested the highest rate increases, 20 percent in Arizona and 26 percent in Louisiana, but up to 34 percent in Nebraska (still pending review).

"These increases are unreasonable for enrollees of these plans," said Gary Cohen, director of the HHS Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight. Cohen said the rate changes also failed to meet federal standards requiring health insurers to devote at least 80 percent of higher premium revenues to health care services.

Health Reform Talk: Premium Rate Increase Requests For Two More Health Insurers In Six States Deemed Excessive

Here you go Zim
I believe Politico is generally considered an un-biased source

Health care reform: Four inconvenient truths - POLITICO.com

Thanks Jimmy. A couple things to take from it:

"It’s not clear whether a lot of people actually expected premiums to go down — but there’s already a perception that the law has increased the cost of insurance, which is feeding the negative attitudes. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll released this week found that 49 percent believe the law has “significantly increased the price of health insurance.That’s not true. An Aon Hewitt survey of health plans found that health insurance premiums on average rose 12.3 percent in 2011 — but only an average of 1.5 percent can be attributed to the health law. And health premiums had been rising for years before the law was passed."
"
"But what is true is that what most people pay for their insurance — either through higher premiums or bigger co-pays and deductibles — aren’t rising more slowly. That’s because the main drivers of rising costs — including technology, expensive new drugs, an aging population, a surge in chronic diseases, and Americans’ propensity to use a lot more health care than many other countries, even if it doesn’t make them any healthier — have nothing to do with the law."

"“President Obama repeatedly promised during the health care debate, ‘if you like your current plan, you will be able to keep it,’” House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans said in a statement Friday...Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) cited the 20 million figure, saying: This law keeps getting worse and worse; it needs to be repealed.
Supporters of the law say it’s not as bad as all that. The 20 million figure is the extreme scenario, they point out — CBO says that 3 million to 5 million is more likely. And that’s out of the 161 million Americans who would have had workplace health insurance before the law was passed.
Even in that case, the number is misleading, according to Topher Spiro of the Center for American Progress, because CBO says about 3 million wouldn’t be forced out. They would leave their workplace coverage voluntarily — possibly for better coverage, with subsidies, through the law’s new health insurance exchange"


The devil is in the details on both sides of the issue.

Read more: Health care reform: Four inconvenient truths - POLITICO.com

of course you ignored Obamas promises. Why the costs are rising is irrelevant. Obama promised they would decline, they have not and will not.

I haven't ignored that Jimmy, everything I have posted is relevant to the question of the legitimacy of the article. I don't know specifically what his claims were, but I will look into it. I believe it center more on controlling costs, not that they will be lower than they are today. I don't know that for sure and it is beside the point.

Zimmy, Obama said costs would decrease. I have never, ever, heard anyone deny that Obama claimed this.

"http://www.factcheck.org/2008/06/obamas-inflated-health-savings/"

"■Obama says he’ll "lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year”"

OK, how many fishermen on here are paying $2500 less a year for health insurance, thanks to Obamacare...

"it is beside the point"

If the point is whether or not Obama knows his azz from his elbow, his promises are most certainly not besides the point.

Keep your head in the sand, Zimmy. Take yoru head out for the November elections, and listen to the bell, it tolls for thee.

You're citing a campaign quote about a specific policy change which isn't necessarily what was implemented as law.

I don't think any discussion on health care costs is valid without a good what if we kept the current course. Even with tort reform and interstate competition (which I support) there still are massive issues.

-spence

"Obama repeated a version of that vow during debate over the federal law, saying the legislation plus some effort to reduce costs from labor unions, and insurance, drug and medical industries “could save families $2,500 in the coming years – $2,500 per family.” That time, the administration had determined the savings in national expenditures could total $2 trillion over 10 years, and with a little math, that works out to $2,500 a year for a family of four. That assumes the savings happen, that is, and that every penny saved somehow translates to lower prices, lower taxes or higher wages for families.
It should be noted that Obama is promising to slow the rate of growth of premiums or health care spending, so costs would still rise, but not by as much."

FactCheck.org : FactChecking Health Insurance Premiums

This is in reference to the campaign statement I see in Spence's post was addressed above. The savings were based on a switch to IT instead of paper. He should have known that there wouldn't be full implementation and that savings wouldn't necessarily get passed on to consumers.

"Obama says his plan will "lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year," partly through the use of electronic records. But experts say large savings from health IT are unlikely to flow to consumers.

Desroches points out that the average voter may never see the savings that the RAND study postulates. "Definitely insurance companies and federal and state payers would see savings," Desroches says. "I’m not sure individuals will see savings, [except] in the unlikely event that payers realize these savings and pass them on in the form of lower premiums."

FactCheck.org : Obama’s Inflated Health “Savings”

"You're citing a campaign quote "

wrong, wrong, wrong. The promise of $2500 decreases was a direct claim about Obamacare, which was passed long after the election. Obama made that promise both as a candidate as a sitting president.

"without a good what if we kept the current course"

Zimmy, Obama said premiums would decrease. He was spectacularly wrong.

"Even with tort reform and interstate competition (which I support) there still are massive issues."

On that we agree. And what's worse, that means we both know more about this issue than Obama. Because he claimed that he could magically decrease costs.

Zimmy, all I'm doing is holding the man accountable for what he said...