I'm normally sympathetic to insurers, but something about this filing rubs me wrong. Maybe it's because someone thought it was important that everyone know that we're paying an extra 1.1% for women's preventative health services through the ACA, so important that they included it as a line item in the summary.
Or maybe it's because of this:
Instead of estimating an annual factor and blowing it out over 23 months I'm looking at the actual 23 month changes. I'm comparing that to Providence's selected 7.2% annual factor, which compounds out to 14.3%. Even against the worst point in 2011 the factor used in the proposed rates is almost double. Putting it in comparative terms,