HSA 2009

These are the new minimum deductibles and annual contribution limits for Health Savings Accounts in 2009.

Minimum Deductible -

Individual $1,150
Family $2,300

Annual Contribution Limit -

Individual $3,000
Family $5,950

If you're 55 or older, there's an additional $1,000 catch up contribution you can make to your HSA.

The maximum out-of-pocket amounts have been increased to $5,800 and $11,600. That's the entire in-network exposure you can have in a health insurance policy that is HSA-qualified.

I Think This Is Campaign Issue #2 (After Iraq)

From Fortune Magazine -

Why McCain Has the Best Health-care Plan

"Here's where [McCain's plan] gets interesting. Employers would no longer be able to buy more health care with $9,000 of their employees' money than the workers could buy on their own. The raison d'être for corporate health benefits would vanish. Employers have another compelling reason to pass the ball to the employee: While wages are rising around 3% ayear, their health-care costs are growing at three times that rate. 'I predict that most companies would stop paying for health care in three to four years,' says Robert Laszewski, a consultant who works with corporate benefits managers. Hence, an employer that pays $9,000 for your benefits would simply pack an extra $9,000 a year into your paycheck. (Why? Because in a competitive labor market, companies would have to hand over that cash to employees or risk losing them.) So you'd have $6,000 after tax, plus the $5,000 family credit, to buy insurance. That's $11,000 in new cash that employees can set aside for health care."

"The [Democrat] standard benefits package isn't just a bad idea because it will substantially raise the cost to taxpayers. It will also make it virtually impossible for Americans to buy insurance tailored to their needs. Suppose you're one of those 25-year-olds. You probably don't want to spring for a full-blown plan that covers old-age diseases like Alzheimer's and would rather save some money and go with a low-premium, high-deductible plan. But the Democrat approach requires that any competing plans be "actuarily equivalent" (Clinton's term) to the federal employee plan - which translates as a generous minimum standard for health insurance. 'With that mandate, you rule out high-deductible plans,' says Gruber. 'It would make it very difficult to design one that would qualify.'"

"The Democrat proposals have some additional drawbacks. First, the Dems want to heavily regulate the insurance industry by limiting everything from profits to marketing expenses. If the earning power of insurers is determined by federal regulators, their pricing will be too, and thus they will evolve into the equivalent of public utilities. Would you rather have medical prices set by fiat or by nationwide market competition?"

"Second, the Democrat plan exacerbates the fundamental problem in the American health-care system, which is that no one has any incentive to care about price. (How much is that MRI center charging for your ankle scan? Who cares? Just hand over the $50 co-pay and never you mind.) Creating a huge new medical superstructure would shift far more spending to third-party providers, chiefly the federal government, giving consumers even less incentive to concern themselves with the price of an MRI - or any other service, from an elective wart-removal procedure to a life-saving heart bypass. 'The Clinton and Obama plans would enormously increase total health-care spending, but disguise the extra costs by shifting them to taxpayers,' says John Sheils of the Lewin Group, a research firm that does statistical modeling for health-care plans."

Are High Deductible Health Plans Discriminatory?

I have held off for a bit on posting any commentary about the recent study by Harvard Medical School researcher Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, who came to this conclusion -

"High-deductible plans punish women for having breasts and uteruses and having babies."

I'm not particularly keen on spreading this message (also Woolhandler)-

"When an employer switches all his employees into a consumer-driven health plan, it's the same as giving all the women a $1,000 pay cut, on average, because women on average have $1,000 more in health costs than men."

I'd like you to come to your own conclusion on this one, but the fact is that women require more routine medical care than men. This comes down to your philosophy on insurance. Does health insurance fall into its own category, or is it like any other type of insurance, where higher risk leads to higher premiums? The upcoming presidential election will shine a spotlight, and we will soon hear some ideas.

Here are two places you can read about the study -

insurancenewsnet.com

msnbc.com