common interest in maintaining and improving regional stability. ..

august 15th, on a sunday, one those of moments when richard nixon essentially appeared on national television halfway through bonanza, a great cowboy show, not really my time but maybe the viewers will remember. and interrupted the show to say we're not going to allow the dollar to be converted into gold anymore, and this is one of most significant events, the most significant thats to have happened in the history of money, and i was a very decisive moment where he shut the gold window. that's the term. where people could not simply come into fort

representatives. this is an hour. >> good afternoon. and welcome. my name is byron and i am an adj adjunct professor and the 170ing president of the national press club. he are commit today our professions future through programming with events such as

this while fostering a free press world wide. for more information about the pres club visit our website at press.org. i would like to welcome our speaker and those attending the event. guest of our speaker are at the head table and working s. if you hear applause in our audience, i note members of the general public are attending so it's not necessarily lack of journalistic objectivity. identity also like to welcome or c-span and public radio audiences. you can follow the action on twitter, using the hash tag npc lunch. off our guest concludes we'll have a question and answer period. now it's time to introduce or head table guest, i'd like each of you stand briefly as your name is announced from your right, aaron kessler, automotive writer, "the new york times."

marissa schultz, washington correspondent for the detroit news. kristina marcos, staff reporter for the hill. hope bare row. former head of the house of representatives office of legislative consult and guests of the speaker. kevin marita, manage are editor, washington post. i richard branson, former house energy and commerce committee consul who handled environmental matters and guest of our speaker. and skipping over our speaker for a moment, the war bureau chief of the buffalo news, chairman of the npc speaker committee and past npc president, and a bloomberg news correspondent, the 2013 national press club president and the member of the speakers committee who organized today's luncheon. angela, thank you very minute. conway low, washington, council who hamm handled sec and

financial matters and a guest of the speaker. david shepardson, detroit news, washington correspondent. laura, congressional reporter for bloomberg news, and rohan, columnist. [applause] >> when our guest today took his seat representing michigan in the u.s. house, it was the same year the first mcdonald's opened and coca-cola was first coca-cola was sold in cans, gas was 23 cents a gallon and you could buy a car for $1900. john dingell took office in 1955 and served alongside 11 presidents and is not only the

longest serving member of the house, he is the longest serving member ever. he announced he is going to retire at the end of his 29th full-term. dingell at 29 succeeded his father in the congressional district. his district is the heart of the big three auto countries. he is hoping that the dingell dynasty continues with his wife debby being elected in november to succeed him. dingell spent a decade and a half with the house chairman committee and was there until 2008. he is known for his quick temper and questions that people magazine called intimidating.

the committee has wide ranging jurisdiction he has has authored laws on clean air, endangered species and health care acts. inspite of that, dingell has a reputation as an ally of the auto industry. he watched congress since he was a child. at his father's knee and serving as a house page in the 1940's. we invited him to give a farewell speech but mr. dingell said he is not done working or governing yet. so he is here to talk about to about when congress worked. please give a warm national press club welcome to congressman john dingell for his

7th appearance at a luncheon since march 7th, 1975. [ applause ] >> well, president, thank you for your very gracious introduction. and thank you all, my dear friends, four your kindness in and such a gracious and gentle welcome. i hope win this is finished you'll feel the same way. i want to thank the press club for inviting me and for allowing me to bring so many of my i am particularly pleased that my colleague, jim mooreand, is

here today. he has -- tipáup'd up, jim. we're very proud of you. [applause] >> it has been a particular honor and privilege for me to serve with you. and he has been a role model for any and all. i also want to welcome and to recognize so many of my dear friends, and former members of my staff, who are here today. and i ask that all of you whoever worked on behalf of the people of southeast michigan are with me on the energy and commerce committee, will you please stand and be recognized. applause

[applause] >> there is a strange thing about my association with my staff. i have picked not only the most extraordinarily able, but also some of the finest and most loyal people whoever drew a breath. i am proud of you all, and i am grateful you would be here today and grateful indeed you would be my friends. it is true, i've served in the house for nearly 60 years. and i've seen many things, good and bad, and much change. i've had the privilege of watching washington change from a little town in the woods to an institution and then into a major city of international proportions, and i have had the privilege of serving with, not

under, and not for, 11 presidents,çó from eisenhower to obama, and i wouldâ observe tht same rayburn used to get very much touched off when people were ask, how many presidents he had served under. [laughter] >> had the privilege of casting some 25,000 votes, i've served alongside more than 24 minnesota hundred colleagues -- 2400 colleagues and sat in the chamber of the house of representatives to witness some 51 state of the union speeches from all of the 11 presidents with whom i have served. in my service, i have been able to author and to pass landmark legislation that helped protect the environment, ensure civil rights for all, and to help our middle class to grow and prosper.

and i'm proud of what i have been able to do. i was thinking as i made my mind up whether i was going to run, as to whether i should stay and serve, and when the lovely deb by and i sit to talk about these things we like to see -- and we have completed those things which my dad set out to do when he was here, and we have also been able to move forward to complete all of the goals which i had when i started out here. i want to make it clear, this is not to brag about my accomplishments. it's simply to show that there was a time when congress could and did work, and when congress and -- passed major legislation, and earned bipartisan support to move the nation forward. where its business was done with

hard fighting but also with good will and mutual respect. i want to make it clear i did not do these things by myself. no man, and no woman, could. we did them with colleagues who were more interested in seeing this nation degree than to see it falter. people who are willing and able to put partisan labels on the shelf and insteadi.v work for greater and common good. where the hallmark of those congresses. in those days, that was how it was. in these days, i often remind my colleagues of the very definition of the word "congress." it means, coming together. it means, a body which has come together. and it is a part of the historic understandings that this country

had when we had a congress which worked. sadly, however, it has not been doing much coming together lately. and i imagine that you have observed this also. this is not a congress that is working, but it could be and, frankly, it should be. last year we saw some 57 bills signed into law by the president. that's 57 total. we created as many laws as there are varieties of heinz's famous product. perhaps that's the way we should name that congress. but do not get me wrong. getting things done does take time. i remember years ago i brought up a set of bipartisan clean air

amendments to pass the house with a vote of 401 to 21. just 13 hours of work took the house to complete this effort. folks came up to me afterwards and said, dingell, how in the name of common sense did you manage to pass that bill in just 13 hours. i looked at them and i said, it took me 13 hours to get a bill that both sides agreed to on the floor. but it took me 13 years to do the work that made thatvmq posse that tells you how hard legislation is to do, and my former staff here, most of you news men and women, and my good friend, jim moreand can testify to the difficulty of the process

of compromise, of getting legislation with good will one of the interesting things about the congress is the change. it's become in too many instances a money chase. it has become in too many instances an instance where it is the goal of members to have the name of a committee on their letterhead, which draws and attracts attention and support politically. it is unfortunate indeed that this is so. because the congress is an important national trust. it is something where we have a duty to the people to do what is necessary in the broad public interest, and regretably it is the case we do not see that occurring on many instances in

the congress. the committees are too large, and should be shrunk. the subcommittees are too large. i serve on one committee -- served on one committee that the number of members in the subcommittees exceeded the number of members on the full committee, when i went on there. and it could go on and on as to how it has gotten so big as to be incapable of carrying out its responsibilities and its functions. other forces are making things go badly. the supreme court decision in the citizens united case has allowed unlimited anonymous or system. we have a court that has taken

the most literal approach to so many of these important decisions that the consequences are beginning to have a very serious effect on not only democracy but the trust of people in their government. and i regret to note that there are still more god awful cases rattling around over there at the supreme court that are almost certain to do more harm. any layman reading the citizens united decision will assume that surely this was in no way written by a group of intelligent individuals. [laughter] [applause] or people even remotely aware of what is going on in our current political structure.

the decision flies in the face of so much of what our representative government was founded upon. allowing people and corporate interest groups and others to spend an unlimited amount of unidentified money has enabled certain individuals to swing any and all elections, whether they are congressional, federal, local, state, or whether they're votes about the creation of some kind of local entity or resolution of local question. that's why we have seen the rise of the super pacs, and people r now dipping their hot hands into every kind of election, and state ballot initiatives, and

anything under the sun that will help them to get what it is they want. unfortunately, and rarely, our -- these people having goals which are in line with those of the general public. history will show us that there is a very selfish game that is going on, and that our government has largely been put up for sale. we have also had many in congress that wish to do nothing more than shrink the size and the scope of the federal government. and this without taking into account the families, the veterans, active duty military, the countless others who rely on

this government and on our nation, and these people forget that there are even more than 300 million americans, and that those 300 million americans and more are living in one of most dangerous times in american history. many of my republican colleagues now find that they must sign a grover nordquist pledge when they run for congress, saying that they will carry out his goal to shrink government down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub. these are his words. these are not my words. and so with his nordquist pledge and similar litmus tests, these quandaries are only made worse  redistricting, where a similar event has occurred before, to enable legislatures

to be owned by these same special interests. we see state legislators draw and state legislatures draw our congressional lines with little interest in fair representation. with small concern about protecting regional boundaries, or about any blink of consideration for any part of the voting rights act, which is again under attack. they operate simply in the interests and the making of the majorities for one political party.%ñ and for achieving one particular set of views. as redistricting creates more and more safe seats, we see members focus only on winning primaries, not about the public interest, and not about real

discussion of the concerns that members have or that citizens have. the pledges are signed. and they attempt to become the ideological image of what their primary electorate sees their political party is or should be, with a work product that equals their goals and facilitates their wishes. now, there's also no incentive to stick one's neck outxd and to compromise, and it should be noted that many on both sides can only run further on the fiercely narrow and partisan principles. a simple analysis will tell us that this does not help our democracy.

i've said before, that i would be scared to bring up the ten commandments for a vote in the congress because i'm not sure they would pass. and3l i'm almost certain that ty would have a vast number of amendments laid upon them. unfortunately, i still am compelled to stand on the validity of that concern. we also now know that we have a congress that is decidedly begun running policies and legislative priorities out of the speaker's office. the congress was built over a long period of time, to achieve particular goals by seeing to it that every member and that everybody in the chamber, and that everybody outside the chamber represented by people in the chamber, would have a right

to be heard. and would have the right to be able to see to it that the congress functioned in a way that heard and attended to the fears and the hopes and the dreams and the concerns of every american. and so, beginning back with gingrich and delay -- that's a funny word, isn't it, delay -- we came out with the idea that we would facilitate by allowing one man our one entity to -- or one entity to run the congress of the united states, and so now we have seen a clear effort by both republicans and by their democratic successors, and now the republicans again, to

ultimately usurp the committee process. when i started there were only a handful of members on each committee, and three to nine members on each subcommittee. three to nine. and the interesting thing was some of the most complex and difficult questions would be where members would come together, they would first hear the testimony, then they'd run everybody out of the room, remove their coats, and one of my colleagues used to say, fight like hell. for however long it took. the result was that we result -- that we had committees that knew and understood legislation. they could explain and it defend it. and they had the trust of their colleagues. today there are committees with

nearly 100 members on them. if each member gets five minutes, multiply that out, and see how much opportunity there is for real and intelligent discussion of the important issues of the day. and at any time there's an important meeting, each member then gets only minutes and, maybe seconds, to address their interests oar ask their questions. i repeat. what do you think the chances are for intelligent debate of important national questions and important national concerns? now, one of the other things. we see knew members who come in and they head right to the floor. to make some of those great big wonderful speeches before they

even know where the restrooms are. they land in washington on a monday, or maybe a tuesday, and their first question is, what time is the first plane on which they can return home. again, how is this going to facilitate a significant national debate or intelligent discussion of the legislative business? we hear from the members, i'm against this, and i'm against that. do we ever hear much about what they're for? l importantly, the question is, what are they willing to make a compromise on? because compromise is an honorable word, and i am going to try to continue pushing that view during my remaining time in

the congress. and so we ought to ask these new numbers, what are you for? what are you going to compromise on? and what are you going to try too achieve? to see to it that we come up with a program in government that gives us a resolution of the difficult controversies and difficult national questions of the day. now, i'm sad to leave the congress. i love the congress, and i'm delighted that the lovely debra, my wife, is running for the congress, because i think she is smarter and decent and certainly much prettier than i am. i will observe that my sadness is ameal you'rated by the poisonous atmosphere we see in american politics today. so, while i'm troubled by the many hurdles this congress faces, in refocusing efforts on

the important matters at hand, i'm comforted to know that they can only improve. so, when the dictionary defines the word "congress" as a coming together, it also defines the very way we can emerge from this current mess. first and foremost, it will take a congress willing to put aside petty differences, and live up to the definition of the word. it's compromise is not a dirty word, and it is not an evil thing, conciliation is not a bad idea. cooperation is not an unspeakable act. the sooner that congress realizes this, and that american citizens realize this, and that they begin impressing this view on their candidates, the better the situation is going to get.pt so, then the congress could

begin to focus its work more on the public interests, but it also is going to take an american people who are willing to, and interested in, seeing to it that the congress works. it also is going to begin to require a control on expenditures of money. first race i ran i spent 19,000. i thought, good god, what an awful number. i later had the fight of what up to that time was my life. 35,000. more recently, had a serious fight with an incumbent colleague, and i had to spend in that race 3 million. she spent six. so, there are some needed changes where people understand that their congress is not something that should be traded

or should not be traded on the commodity exchanges. the congress is something which belongs to us all. and it's something which has been achieved only at great bloodshed, great loss of life, great suffering, huge, hard work, and the wisdom of men and women far smarter than any that we see running around now. and interestingly enough, those men and women were not people who had prodigious educations. they were rather people who understood by hard study of the wisdom of persons earlier in the history of this world. so, what we need to do is to have the american people dictate

that which must be done. i am proud that i have been able to be part of the body, and institution. i intend to keep this nation and all my colleagues in my thoughts and prayers, and i have to say, more often in my prayers than in my thoughts. [laughter] >> in any event, in any event, thank you for what you do. thank you for the great power which you wield with your pen and your type type writer and your ability to communicate thoughts, including the wonderful computers. and thank you for your leadership in what you are doing. because we desperately need good thinking people, and people who

are determined to see to it that this oldest institution of its kind in the world continues to be the greatest gift of all. you know, when i go to bed at night, and when i get up in the morning, i thank the good lord for the gift which he has given to me, making me a citizen of the united states, some 87 or shortly 88 years, and the opportunity to be an american having more real good things and more money but more freedom, independence, and opportunity, than any person in the world before. so, thank you. and god bless us all. but more importantly, god bless the united states of america. thank you. applause

[applause] [applause] ongressman with us today. for delivering your speech, and for following tradition, the tradition of a question and answer session. the first question is: what has changed in congress the most since you first visited capitol hill while your father was a member of the house from 1933 to 1955? >> well, obviously the quote reforms, which -- and in point

of fact, which have denied us the ability to really talk about the concerns which we have. second of all, the size of the committee. third of all, the unworkability. fourth of all, the lack of capacity of the members to carry out their function because of the size of the committees, the size of the subcommittees, and the harsh fact that nobody trusts the committee. we used to have an entity which was called the tuesday through thursday club, and this was the crowd which showed up on tuesday, and got the hell out of washington on thursday. that's not the way the government should run. government should be a full-time business where we seek to serve

the nation and see to it that its business is well conducted. this is not washington and the congress is not a place where everybody comes to have a good time. this is a place where the most important of the nation's business is supposed to be addressed. there are other things that i could mention to you, which i'm sure you all would recognize, and any or all of you could come forward with your own wise and necessary additions to my comments.çoí >> you ever see congress returning to the more bipartisan ways of days gone by, what would mak that happen? >> well, two things. one, some kind of a national event which forced the members

and the leadership to do that. roosevelt, a war. something like that. buttoned that, there are other -- buttoned that there are other things that could do that. one would be a national calamity or perhaps something else which would be almost unique, and that would be a wiping out of almost the entire membership by seeing it to that the voters threw us all the hell out of washington, and installed their own people in our place. there are other thinged but that would be a fair summary of some of the things that might be helpful. >> do democrats deserve any of the blame for the partisan divide in congress? >> of course. everybody deserves it.

democrats deserve it. republicans deserve it. but you know, if you look around, you will find that the the news media, the public at large, the citizenry in general, all have their faults in this, and their reason for feeling guilty about this. look and see what the listenership of the president's state of the union message is on tv. and you will observe one thing. that it is usually timed to fall after, and instead of super bowl or something of the kind. i'm not going to tell you the superíxl bowl is not important,d not good to watch or listen to or not exciting. but i am going to tell you that

from the standpoint of the nation's well-being, it's not important. and so what we have to do is get the american people to say, you know, we want you to do something, and when you have a up to meeting, have them get up and say, what are you going to do about compromising this matter into something where the citizen ric accept it. one of the strengths i had as committee chairman was that i always would see to it that i got the left and the right to compromise together. on legislation. the end result was we'd pass enormously difficult legislation after often times huge fights, but we passed it and we passed it with very large votes.

that still is do-able. but again, it requires leadership, and it requires people be elected to lead in the congress. >> you had some less than kind things to say about the supreme court. i think -- >> i thought they were quite kind. matter of fact i thought they were not only deserved but right, but truthfully, if they had listened perhaps even a bit helpful. and following on, what do you think motivated their citizens united decision? >> money. and the fact that almost the entire court was selected on the basis of ideology and not legal training or anything.

i probably shouldn't say any more. i've so far.f have been overly kind to the supreme court. i think is probably staying in that particular mode and vein. >> what has been the lowest point in your congressional career? >> oh, boy. i saw my world come down around my ears when i had to get a divorce, get the custody of the kids, and raise four kids alone. and thank god i was able to do it through the help of a sister who is going to find the lord waiting for her in heaven. and i was able to do that in a

way which made me kids solid, successful citizens. it was tough. and at that time we were having a huge battle over energy and energy prices, something we regularly do on the hill, but something which where the administration was putting out a publication entitled, quote, shove to it dingell. and so i was in the midst of this dogfight about whether they were going shove it to dingell or whether i was going to survive, and by narrow margin i did. some of the people in this room here where there to help me through those very, very difficult days. >> and carrying on, what has

been the biggest highlight of your time in congress? >> you know, i'd answer this, this way. every day is a blessing. and when i get up in the morning, always look down and seenc! there's a little green ur foot and i say, thank you, lord. but more importantly, the highlights, the single one i remember was obamacare, or the wonderful bill that we got through that took care of healthcare for all of our people. something my dad wanted. something we finally did. a lot of other bills we did, too, that were important, but -- and legislative standpoint,

think that was probably the one thing that was most important. >> why does congress need members like you who stay for many years as part of the institution? >> learn the business. a lot of people think you walk through the door and all of a sudden you're an expert. not. a lot of people that never learned where the hell their office is or anything. a lot of people who, frankly, never learned how to get along or don't know the named of their colleagues, or are unable to compromise because congress is essentially and necessary -- necessarily compromise. it's getting along with your colleagues. it's knowing what it is they need and what they want, what

they've got to have. years ago i got a little guy by the name of gross from iowa. everybody says, that's awful. i said, hell know. gros is a good and decent man, and if i can get a reasonable relationship with him and a reasonable friendship we'll run the committee and run it well, and re ran a subcommittee but we wrote conservation legislation than we have done sincejss it was tremendous. i got another guy -- today, god rest his soul, he's gone. i still think warmly of him. another guy was bud brown of ohio. a lot of people said, oh, he's got a terrible sense of humor. yeah, terrible acid sense of

humor but a wonderful, wonderful guy. if you got underneath that you'd find what a wonderful fellow there was down there. and one reporter says, you know, dingell, he says, my wife is filing for divorce. and she is going to name you as a correspondent. [laughter] >> we're spending more time together, you and i, than we are -- than he was with his wife. i would catch unsure hell from his right-wing crackpots and i'd have a few crackpots of my own and we had to get along and get things started. we contrived to do it. and we did it because we had to trust,, friendship, and i saw --

i had trust in friendship and got the secretaries of transportation up and i said, you don't know me from adam and i don't know you, but we got to work together and our word has to be good, and we got to trust each other. and we did. one of these strikes we sold -- we solved in 48 hours, the other we solved in 18. probably the worth mistake ever made as a chairman because damned if i didn't find that the -- they took jurisdiction of the railroads away from the commerce committee because we had done nobody -- we had hadn't done anything, but a lot of this is like that, and to know how importantby$at the human relationship is between members

in the congress. if you have that, you have almost everything. if you don't, you have nothing. >> one of the criticisms often made of politics in the united states is it is corrupted by money. during your six decades in the house, you have amassed a net worth of between 2.8 and $7.6 million according to an analysis of personal finance disclosures, making you the 71st richest member in the chamber. how do you account for that wealth and did a lifetime in washington help you get rich if that is a true portrayal? >> well, first of all, i ain't rich. second of all, i live very frugally. third of all, i am very careful about how i spend money. as is debra.

we have lived in the same house in virginia for 30 years, almost 40 years. we have made money trading houses, and the average american, if he does -- uses good sense, can do something like that, too. >> relations between the press and members of congress changed over the course of the past 58 years? >> about the same. [laughter] >> it is kind of interesting now. used to be a guy on the committee, i could always tell

whether the media was going to be there because he'd show up. and that was always a tip that things were= ñ pretty important that day. the business of the house has been a little bit corrupted -- not a lot but a little -- because it's interesting to note -- it's interesting to note that that money -- rather, that the relationship with the media is one which generally scares the members of the house. it also is a situation where if you watch the members -- and do this on c-span or something like

that -- and watch. he's not talking to his colleagues. he's got his eye on that television up there. and if you look, you'll find instead of an intelligent debate, all of a sudden we have a guy who is making a big speech to the television, which is quite different than it would be were he to make his speech to somebody with whom he was having a real discussion. of the important issues. just to return to one point, i've done pretty well because i learned something, and that is

how one can take and use the compound interest rule to benefit himself. and one of the reasons you know that is that i actually report it, so you can be pretty sure it's fairly truthful,fz and it does very frankly keep me in the system. >> now some questions about the issues. the start of every congress, you have always introduced a bill establishing a national healthcare system. we don't have that but we do have obamacare. how is obamacare working in your estimation? >> well, it's a little bit like asking how is this child going

to do in his presidential race as that child boy or girl does in his or her race for the presidency. i have to think very well, this is the biggest single mcd%rtaking of r done by this nation.rtaking of r social security was something like maybe 50 million. this is more like 350 million. and it is not done by people who are working with their government. it's done by people who are working with insurance companies, and so all of these

things have got to be done by everybody pitching in and cooperating. we didn't get a nickel for it, help from the republicans. they sulked, and so their complaint is that they weren't heard. but we'd invite them and they didn't come. so i don't have any questions about the fact that -- given the circumstances, as it could. but going a little further than that, if you look, first of all, almost every8ç american is covered. second of all, the long-standing complaints of the american citizens about how they were treated have been largely addressed. citizens are able now to know they're not going to cancel their policy when they go into

the operating room on the gurney. also going to know that there's not going to be any preexisting conditions following them. the numbers of recipients benefits is almost 100%. a young fellow in the office was paying 360 something in insurance, guess what? he went out into the market -- it's not going to do the good for you he wants. give you the same policy for 160. he said, wow. so, then he went into the market and they looked at him and says, this is costing you too much for your wage. and we're going to credit -- so he winds up paying 68 bucks a

month. same policy. haven't heard a word or squawk from him. although you hear it from the republicans, yelling their heads off that it ain't working, and insurance companies, if insurance companies are not satisfied, they're all of a sudden finding that they've got to pay -- they've got to pay to -- if they exceed the cap of 80 or 85%, depending on the side of the facility, send you a check. a lot of people got that. the republicans complain about that. i guess they're busy with other more important things. >> speaking of republicans, republicans point to the irs scandal, the va scandal, and iraq and say that president obama is incompetent. to other presidents you have

served with? >> didn't get us into the iraq war, did he? and he wasn't involved in watergate. and he did -- he has run a pretty honest administration. so let's take first the va. one of the reasons the va is -- the problem is that he's got to take care of 100 million vets and he's got to see to it that he not only takes care of them but that he sees to it that they get the care that they're supposed to, and that is against the skin flint congress that had a cut of $10 million or -- or 10% that the republicans were

prepared to give. so i don't have any real problems with that. a lot of these people are getting -- in the va are getting their benefits and a fair number of these guys are waiting because they are not qualified to go in at this particular time. these are nonservice connected guys. the service-connected are for the most part not going -- are not -- what was the other one? >> i think that we have -- i think we covered everything as we're nearing the end of our hour. >> i don't want to run out of here with my tail between my legs. i want to address what these no-good republicans say because every once in a while they -- i'd kind of like to praise them if you can find me an instance. >> i thoughtow had covered the

three. the republicans point to the irs scandal, the va -- >> the irs. >> and iraq. >> here we're giving gigantic, gigantic amounts ofzwjátk under the citizens united to fat cats that are trying to buy the government. so the irs is looking at them. i say, hooray. these guys -- the guys doing this are a crowd that very frankly would steal the red hot stove and then go back to get the smoke. [laughter] >> ladies and gentlemen, we are almost out of time. but before asking the last question we have a couple of housekeeping matters to take care of. first i'd like to remind you about our upcoming evented and speakers. jewel 17th. anthony foxx, secretary of the department of transportation, july 22nd, dr. thomas frieden,

director of centers for disease control will address concerns about the mers virus, and on jewel 21, good luck jonathan, president of nigeria, and then the president of the republic of congo will discuss peace, security, and stability in the central african region. next i'd like to present congressman dingell with the traditional national press club mark. i don't know if you already have a set of half a dozen but another one we're honored to give to you. and finally, our traditional last question, given your reputation as one of the toughest questioners of congress, what advice do you have for reporters asking members questions as you experienced today. >> know the answer before you ask the question. [laughter]

>> thank you, congressman dingell. thank you all for coming, and thank the national press club staff, including the journalism institute and broadcast center for organizing today's event. we are adjourned. [applause] cj, >> on this weekend's newsmakers, south dakota senatoron thune is our guest. as chair of the senate republican conference he talks bat number of topics, including the 2014 mid-term elections, the country's transportation needs and the ongoing irs investigation. here is a portion. >> that is if you want to keep a user fee-based program, that's i

think probably the most logical place that most folks would end up, and senator corker and senator mer murphy came out with a proposal, six-cent increase, first year, and thin index is after that and indexing help but you have more fuel efficient cars are more hybrids on the road so isn't raising the amount it has in the past but taking those things into consideration it's still something that highway users pay for, and so there are reasons why that, if you're looking at all the various scenarios and options out there if you have to raise revenue to do this, is an option that's being discussed. now, other things talked about as well. some members on the republican side and some democrats are talking about using repatriation, multi national corporations that have earnings parked offshore right now, getting them to bring them back into the country, tax them at a lower level, but that would

general rate revenue that would fund things for a time but threat not a permanent solution either. the are house members that believe that opening up federal lands to energy exploration would more than cover the shortfall in the highway trust fund over a period of time, and that is something i think you'll probably hear more discussion debt is a well. so several ideas about a longer term fix. all of which have shortcomings and their own liabilities. the highway -- the gas tax senator corker proposed is something up until nowed a least the president has not expressed any kind of openness to. they sound more open to that but until they get to that point it's going to be awfully hard t feature congress going forward with that sort of a solution if you don't have the administration weighing in or engaging on it. so we'll see what happens on the longer term fix. right now we're focused on the immediate crisis. >> you can see more of that interview with senator john

thune when newsmakers airs sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> we believe that all men are created equal. yet many are denied equal treatment. we believe that all men have certain unalienable rights, yet many americans do not enjoy those rights. we believe that all men are entitled too the blessings of liberty. yet millions are being deprived of those lessons. not because of their own failures, but because of the color of their skin. the reasons are deeply imbedded in history and tradition, and the nature of man. we can understand without rancor

or hatred how this happened but it cannot continue. our constitution, the foundation of our republic, forbids it. the principles of our freedom forbid it. morality forbids it. and the law i will sign tonight forbids it. >> this weekend, the 50th 50th anniversary of the 1964 civil rights act, with president johnson's address to the nation and the signing ceremony, and later hear from reporters who covered the debate in congress. roger mudd of cbs and the harold tribune's andy glass, sunday night at 8:00 eastern on american history tv on c-span p. >> next, discussion on health insurance rates following the health care law lazy implementation and wwqpá can be exempt expected in 2015.

among the speak speakers is an individualer to the massachusetts and federal healthcare plans. host evidence by the alliance for health reform. it's an hour and a half. >> those of you who are still looking for seats, look for a staff nobody help guide you towards the ones that are still open. some good afternoon. my name is ed howard with the alliance for health reform, and let me not get away from the microphone. and i want to welcome you on behalf of senator blunt, senator rock fell, our board of directors, to this program on health insurance rates, including the market forces and regulatory structures that affect them. every few days it seems we read about insurance rates for 2015 being proposed in one state or another so even though it seems that we just got through the

open enrollment period a fee weeks ago, insurers are already filing their proposed rates, mostly with the state insurance departments for the coming year. what we're going to try to do today with the help of a group of panelists with deep experience and big analytical fire power, is to help explain what those numbers mean, what factors affect them, and what importance we should place on them. one fact that i'd like you to keep in mind while you're listening, is that most of the rate numbers you'll be hearing refer to policies sold in what is called the individual market, and in the year 2012, about 19 million people were covered in that market, out of the 267 nonelderly americans who had coverage from all sources.

so, as interesting and useful as this discussion will surely be, remember that it applies to about seven percent of persons with coverage.3oh we're pleased to have at our partner in today's program the commonwealth fund, century old philanthropy established to promote the mom wealth or common good and we are doubly pleased to have as the co-moderator, rachel newsome, somebody with a lot of policy experience herself, including stints on the staff of a couple of u.s. senators. rachel will start off with a bit of cop text on this complex -- context on this complex topic of health rates for 2016 and how they're shaped. rachel? >> great. thanks so much, ed. welcome to everyone. we're thrilled, this is how you are choosing to spend your

friday afternoon with us. so thank you for joining us. and wait for the slides to come up. but as ed said, this topic is a really critical topic of the moment. in the briefing today really represents an important part of the work that the commonwealth fun is doing to really track and measure how the affordable care act is being implemented. we know that a vast majority, 85% of folks were enrolling in health plans through the market places hill year will be eligible for a premium subsidy so we know the cost that the premiums represent will be important to consumers and to the federal government. so understanding what goes into the rate setting process is critical. one thing we wanted to do today was to kind of help everyone understand what are the factors going into the numbers you're going to be seeing throughout the summer and the fall. and i think it's important to keep in mind that there's never before been a systemic effort to collect and analyze this data on

premiums nationwide looking at the individual insurance market. we'll talk about why. some policies that are new that are enabling us to do that. we think in order to understand the impact the changes the aca made to the private insurance landscape we have to start by orienting ourselves to the baseline. what we are measuring our progress against. so part oft what you'll hear is the work supported by the funds discussed to really provide a benchmarkih to compare future trends, and to help determine if the law is achieving one of its major goals, providing comprehensive halve insurance to nearly all americans who are buying coverage at an affordable price. just to recap, most of us understand what the shortcomings in the individual market player prior to the aca but to kind of level set, prior to the aca the rates in the individual market were unstable and highly veriable. also an immense amount of

variation across the country in terms of how states regulated plans on the individual marked which you can see in this slide. not every state con ticketed rate review. some conducted -- states with prior approval processes, many of the states had a deeming period, meant the rates the insurers were proposing went into effect unless the state took action in a given time public access to rate review data was limited. only 13 states had access to rate filings or summary statistics on rate asks there's much variation how states made the rate review information public. so that what really means is prior to the aca we were very limit fled our able to look across plans, across states and across the country to make conclusions about both the adequacy of coverage as well as the affordability of coverage in the individual market. so, i think as we also know, regulation of health insurance and the health insurance market has historically fallen to the

states. the affordable care act did provide new rule ford the federal government to contribute to this process. a major way that the affordable care act inserted the federal government into the regulation was providing grant funds to states to assist them in this new authority and responsibility to review rates, and by requiring that plans and insurers justify certain rates. so, for example, you see the highlights here in kind of milestones that plans had to meet in the affordable care act. 2010, $250 million was made to states to use over five years to assist them in the rate review process. currently 43 of the 45 decided that as part of those new resources they would focus onx2w making that information publicly available, available on the internet in a consumer friendly format. also in 2010, the medical loss ratio provisions went into effect which determines that insurers needed to spend 80 or

85% of premiums of -- of the premiums on medical claims and quality improvements and so that resulted in about a billion dollars in rebates being paid out in 2011. so we're starting to see actual outcomes from the early provisions. ... wn to is the affordable care act aims to bring down premiums by increase transparency regarding premium increases. that think it is important to keep in mind that it does not include a formal approval process of the federal level. health and human services is tasked with working with states to develop a process for annual review of rates. they do not have the ability to deny proposed rate increases. the opening up to transparency will help enable consumer jurist and strong competition in the market. due to the changes made

consumers them to have more complete access to systematic information about the benefits covered and the prices of those plans regardless of the state of the 11. importantly for this group researchers and policy makers have the ability to make informed decisions based upon standardize data to be able to look across time and talk about and think or what has been happening in that space. so why are we focusing on this now? what does this mean? as you may have noticed, every week it feels like a few more states are coming out with proposed rates. it is really important, the average premium rate across all

the plans. keep in mind, these are also the proposed rates. the final premium rate changes could increase or decrease. the main reason we wanted to focus on this today, the majority will be releasing rates this summer leading up to the fall. releasing their 2015 rates in the fall as well. we will talk more about the regulation process as well. as ed mentioned, we have the team to panel of experts. what it means for 2015. my first panelists, discuss the findings from the latest report which said an important context through the race that will continue to be released. the american company of actuaries, describing the factors that go into the rate setting process with the major

drivers as a cross increases in 2015. on my right the georgetown center providing more details about states' regulatory processes as well as the variation across the country. finally, the vice-president of federal affairs, no stranger to capitol hill, providing in on the ground perspective as a nationwide insurer and some insight. you can find biographies along with complex information for these and other experts. with that i will turn to doctor gruber. >> if i may, can i do a little housekeeping? want to make sure people know that if you want to engage in or engage the twitter sphere, you can dudack. -jack is raised 2015.

the lower right of the slide that is on the screen now. we have got a new feature if you want to use a device for which you need wi-fi access. we actually have arranged for wi-fi access from you. there are instructions on each of your tables. the user name and password. they are on there. there we go. okay. there will be a video recording of this briefing in a few days on our website and a transcript a couple of days after that. call your attention to two pieces of paper in your packets, blue and green. i card that you could use to ask a question when we get to that part of the program. very important.

we can improve these programs as we go along. you're watching you can find all of these background materials that we have distributed to the people in the room on line and at the same website. you can follow along, including with the slides. thank you for -- >> thank you. thanks. the title says it all, context. we think about things in life in context. if it is 85 degrees today, is that hot or not? that depends upon the historical pattern of weather and will we expect. the redskins win 12 games that's pretty good given how bad they were last year. patriots fans, 12 games are what you expect. everything is about context.

somehow we forget i human basic instincts. of $500 billion deficit, that is actually historic ric >> >> in anything and health insurance is no exception and to evaluate in the abstract fashion and is o ist relevant but it is not.s we talk about rates and what we will see we should compare them to what scientists call the counterfactual what would have happened otherwise that is the goal of myç report to talk of what that should like. and handed to do so i will rely on data4(y collected by someone else. on data collected by john and his colleagues. >>

out reports with averages, but there has never been a comprehensive evaluation of what the far rate increase requests have been och. they had a sample that grew over time. it reported overall national data as well as the specific data only reporter for states where they had only 50 percent of the individual market enrollment. they went on the web, collected all the information they could on the five largest insurers in >>n >> to get the zero fleeted

representation in so the universeav has a sample of the smaller insurers with the weighted average.iete al this is not perfect datah to be clear it is with the incomplete sample of states and insurers but the best data help their and most comprehensive to date and most importantlyb for thea period that we care aboutllec which is the period before 2011.ro collecting 28 or 2010 but the reason that matters although the ec a kid can in jay very sturdy and 2011 with- the federal rate review of all insurance rates with an increase of more than 10% as well as a minimum lossual

ratios that shook up thef individual market so talk01 about free obamacare fake ofa free 2011ca because that reflects the effects of obamacare itself so that is the best way to look at that market slump will focus on the 2008 through 2010 period.08- find high a premium growth in the insurance market and overall it grew more than any year and growth rates were high and the variable growing as much as 3% others as much as others perez saidin he rich variability ofe rates the bottom line is favored rapid theorizing.h .

highly technical graph shows the average rate of premium increase to market across time. increasing. this was sort of the state of the world and the individual market. this is a market with consistent double-digit premium increases. be clear on what that means. the same product over time. if you look at what people paid three people were buying less and less general policies to compensate. if he looked at what people paid it might have gone up less than the deductible. if you look for the same policy as well was charged, premium increases will double digit. that is the first consistent finding your. now, as i mentioned, data are not perfect.

let's play with the data little bit, cut it to for ways to see how robust the conclusion. the first column is will we showed you. what if i only consider states where the data included more than 60 percent of the individual insurance market. the third column says order finally include states for the data included more than 80%? more than 60 percent of the market in every single year, tried to restrict the data act, if the results suffer. the ever -- the answer is no. you get the same bottom-line results no matter how you cut the state which is sort of low double digit rate increases in the pre a ca. that is our baseline, our baseline temperature, number of wins, we should be thinking about what we see the data coming out.

basically single-digit increases means that gone up less. that's the context in which we want to put these increases. that's the first point. the second point is about variability. this shows the state rate of increase, this is the state rate of increase. the only important to take away, these numbers are all over the map in 2010 you had kentucky with the five and a half and nebraska with a 21%. the point is, these numbers are all highly variable. what that means is we cannot draw conclusions about the

overall impact of obamacare on this market. these states will be very variable demand we cannot react. even further, go to the next table where show autograph of the percentile of change. i take all the data, every observation and graft the distribution of the changes. if you look of 50% and focus of the 50th percentile was 11%, with typical firm increase the premiums. but for 1% of firms, from premiums actually fell by nine and half percent to 1% or more premiums rose by 28%. this is just showing you have variable premiums chased across

the firm. the blue line is weighted. the red line is what the newspapers are reporting. this is look at the data, ignore the big insurer and ask what happened to premium increases. you had some furniture for a 50% more. it turns out to prepare a small. but the important point, there was a lot of variability in the reported rates over time and said he could not learn anything from anyone degrees certainly not if you don't wait it. with the previous sale will saying it was hard ameritech's a large sample of states to get a picture of what's happening. so what are want to do is just, what are what you take away from misses to conclusions, in some

sense of the start with the second point. we cannot draw a conclusion from any one story. we have to wait and see the broad picture. it will be hard to really know what has happened until we get a final set of rates. conclusion to, they're right context in which we interpret is the double-digit increases. the key. >> things go on john. i too will be providing some context. my role will be to provide a brief overview of some of the premium components and talk about some of the major drivers of changes for 2015 premiums.

in terms of premium components the major factors are who is in short and whether their health costs. terms of who is covered from other demographic and health status and from that their health spending. of the premier and components include administrative costs, taxes and profits, and laws and regulations can affect in nerol. be talking about three major drivers. the first this changes in expectations. when insurers are developing their 2014 rates and to make a lot of assumptions. there was a lot of uncertainty.

in tennis will we know i'm a we do have information. but in as limited envy. uncertainty moving forward to the public changes in those assumptions could be affecting premiums. also have to keep in mind that insurers need to make assumptions amelie well and some other enrollee population in terms of retrospective, but also looking forward where reeve going to get an increase in enrollment because of the

increase in the individual mandate penalty? another couple of things that we need to think a is the single risk pool requirement. that means when developing premiums insurers have to incorporate and woman and claims not only in size but also outside. lot of the data really focuses on exchange keep time. that policy was implemented late last year and allows the states to allow insurers to renew who the hon ac he complied plans. insurers said larry finalized premiums when that policy was implemented.

they could not incorporate the changes to the risk profile that would result from that policy. what could happen is on the the transition policy people who were lower cost by the end up staying with or keeping than non hca compliant coverage whereas higher cost people could move to new coverage. insurers did not incorporate that the one. there will be able to incorporate that. you may see higher premium increases in states that a osha transition.

the second major drivers the insurance program fond. 10 billion will be used to reimburse high cost claims. that amount will decline and 2015. reinsurance programs of such claims. by doing that and can lower premiums. a reduction would result of lower offset.

as something that happens every year. the big question is, will this recent slowdown continue. insurers have to make assumptions about the. those are the major drivers believe there were several other us including since and provider networks, broad verses narrow, changes and provide a payment. and have it start rookies in more detail. >> thank you.

>> thank heehaw the new review requirements, and the who labored you when scared and the interplay between the department of insurance and the state and federal marketplaces and. state rate filing requirements generally fallen to one of two categories. in the prior approval issuers

misheard submit rate filings. issuers must submit rate filings to the department of insurance but can't begin charging them without approval from the department of insurance. based on research conducted by the kaiser family foundation to weigh in the individual market impartially 30 states and the district of columbia require prior approval. seventeen states require race to be filed but not approved, and three have not. for example, a state with an authority to disapprove or prove may appear to have more leverage there are a will to use the authority to engage in discussions.

even absent authority they were able to engage carriers. the rate review process included minimal transparency. rates generally were not privileged and the information included is often considered to be a trade secret. the resultant is often a new mechanism. half before will care act, in an effort to create consistency and transparency. hhs will review rate increases and less of as the servant of state -- to assure consistency

they consider file and use face a beacon for -- effective. with that said based on research conducted in 2204 in the individual market for the 17th and one with no filing requirement pass legislation to obtain prior approval authority. it is important to point out of the federal rate review program and provide 250 million grant funding. what is an effective program? to be an effective review statements received sufficient information, consider at least 15 rating factors identified by regulation, make a determination

of their reasonableness and make the filing information available to the public and provide a mechanism for receiving public comment on proposed increases which allows the public to have them put and also must report the results to hhs and. so what has the impact of the federal rate review program ben? of of 43 straight -- state to the district of columbia receive federal grants. in mexico provides a nuys snapshot of how the process is continuing to improve as the mexicos initiatives are similar to those in other states. to the approximately seven and a half million which allowed them to pass legislation. in mexico posted the rate

filings on line and the state now conduct public hearings and plans to recycle three grant to pursue more in-depth analysis and analyzed and published person did and coordination with premium andre filing information . >> the difference between the rate and price in. >> it's a great question. the information that the carrier files to justify the office of representative permian. if you pay 500 a month in premiums, the rate filing is all of the data that supports how they get to that price. in terms of the interplay of the departments of insurance are solely responsible for reviewing

and improving rates to lead except in those five states said hhs is determined to not have an effective rate review program. when you go online the premiums received for the qualified health plans offered reflect the underlying rate approved by the province of insurance. while the exchanges of the marketplace is to not have direct input and review or approval authority, the marketplace does create parian transparency with stern's competition and of town or pressure at just want to thank everyone for letting me be your and join the panel and in the discussion for insurer perspective on what is going on to my how we set our rates to mile market has of marking.

and let me start by talking about who will point is. era of large national insurer. we do business in many of our states command you will see on this map the states in which we do business. we generally are known as and the blue cross and blue shield. new york as empire blue cross. it is through those subsidiaries we're participating. there are also our nation's largest medicaid managed-care company. anything in the house insurance here we are to submit an. well for medicare coverage, advantage. we have a lot of experience across a number of markets, we

of the largest individual and small group market insurer. when you think about the hca, this is an overlay. halases and harlan viejo ca impact to say is that a dramatic expansion. where we're participating right now, we are actively participating in two of the demonstrations and also working with the states of texas and new york. we're in six states that are expanding medicaid and participating in 14 exchanges. it's a little bit messy, but a few spend more time studying it is pretty straightforward. we are in six state-based exchanges, california, car wrong

, new york, kentucky, conn., and nevada. the awesome and nine panera facilitated marketplaces or partnership arrangements. that is maine, new hampshire, georgia, missouri, ohio, wisconsin, indiana, virginia tech. that's a long way of saying we have a lot of experience of the lot of different regulatory schemes will a lot of experiences with the lot of different rules. very indifferent to a graphics. i was asked to participate because we got the breadth of experience and one of the things that is clear is the context of support. one. are with like to make is ask the look at 2015 rates we can't forgive or ruin.

going into the market we were looking and a very different regulatory structure than those individual insurers experienced previously. we were allowed the rate based on health status, age, gender to and we used those mechanisms and tools to try to price our products and encourage people to come and our plans. wheeler also looking and our risk profile and how we maintain affordability. coming in the 2014 that had changed significantly. we could not rate or price products based on health status, gender. a limit of three to one. a very different environment. that was just one major factor. the second is essentially to five covering the essential health benefits.

a third factor that i mention this who the uninsured were and how they act. we had a good sense but did not. slow our anthem company started pressing products. we started with doing research elite field. we drove down in the three states to in which we did business but had experience and. we're in new york and maine. her also in kentucky which had and that in place, repeal that and has it back in place. we looked at all the experience. the third thing we did, and the belief -- we have not talked about what they did, we went out

and did a simulator experience with about 60,000 uninsured. was a web based experience. we want them to run number of questions asking them what would motivate them to purchase insurance, what was important to them looking at network, formulary and tried to better understand how there were going to purchase nba ventured marketplace we did not have subsidies in the marketplace. trying to understand how they make decisions. but we took all that and factored it into our 2014 rates. one of the things we found is we thought that the individual market under these market rules with subsidies was going to behave much more like a traditional smart group market would look. we actually started our rate process based on small group

operates in the best and tried to look at those and modify from there. really what you end up with is i guess, an educated guess. retread to make it as well educated as they could, but it is a guess. then you fast forward to today, and we are looking at and filing a 2015 rates and you have to ask yourself what additional information you have since. a great job of you have information about medical trend. you also now have some demographic data. we know who are in our plans. geography, where they live in each individual state. that really is the most concrete additional information that we have. as she mentioned, we have some medical claims data and some pharmacy data, and i want to caution everyone that it is difficult to draw broad conclusions based upon the data. medical claims stated generally

has some of to the three month run out which means that it can actually takeoff up to three months from the date the you are provided a service by a provider before your insurer gets the blame. often does not take that long, but it can take up to that long. if you think about the open enrollment and how far we are after, many people actually did not start having effective coverage of the applied to the april 15th deadline until may may 1st. we don't have a lot of medical claims data, and what we have is going to tend to be heavy on those who utilize services right away. those who have a pent-up demand but if needed services were not hard to get with. we do have more up-to-date pharmacy data. a little bit more real time. again, it is sergeant from broad conclusions about how the entire enrollee population will behave

to the end of the year because it is early data. we are analyzing that. we will not really fully use that experience state debt and to we prize for 2016. other point i would like to make is, this really is the transition. looking at context, one year or two years, you have to think about this as potentially three or four years until we get full clay is stated, so long story short, it is difficult to draw broad conclusions about pricing. every company had different information, making their best educated guess. similarly for 2015 they tried to enhance that, but it is still very much an estimate. you also cannot generalize the

averages over in individuals experience. at risk and contradicting myself one resource of want to point you all to as you look to materials coming out coming it is on their website which is on the slide and it was available to anyone in the public. the summary from a couple of days ago. states make information available and are putting it up on their website. what you can see is that there is a great deal of variety in the experience across the board. again, don't draw individual conclusions about us take a person, but it does point out a few individual things. you have additional players coming into the marketplace. they talk about carrier participation. there were 55 carriers coming back into the markets from a total of 56. an additional 18 are coming into

the market. the yen, while we start out from the beginning because we want to go where our customers were and try to limit disruption as the largest individual market insurer, there are additional folks who did not get into the market right away. and that will impact pricing. similarly, there are additional products. we learn to bought them, if they like them, introducing new ones, different ones. they're is a change in the number of products available. when you looked at the premiums across all ten states, it is up and down side. the lowest and second lowest, there are no changes downward and changes up or. people make educated guesses. they're no adjusting based upon additional information lot to do it again next year.

what is interesting, really that the premium alone in a market that is 80 to 85% subsidized is not enough to look at. you also -- if you're trying to understand the impact on the individual consumer. a totally different element into the marketplace. it is interesting. 78 percent of the consumers, 175% of the federal poverty level. so again, it depends on your background and your age. 78 percent of people will see their rates go up and 20 percent will see it cut down.

you have a decrease in rate that still has an increase since the amount of premium that the subsidize individual will pay. similarly states where you see increases in premiums overall but a reduction in the premium that is subsidized. we are still growing. it is something we are proud to be supported. >> the extent that you have an sense of this, when typically in the various states that will point operates in, the 2015 raids thus far in the states we have had to file. in one case we file first with the exchange before we file with

the insurance regulator. in that case we have filed with the stains the night at the insurance regulator. the state of california, an active negotiation. none of them have made public yet. if the thing i would point out is that the of the piece to keep in mind, we often have to provide a certain amount of notice to our existing customers about the impact on their individual rate. at various state by state. in the state of new york, no matter when we file as to what that file a request is. governments, once approved we have to provide summer between 60 and 90 days' notice. >> very few data on which to base this on. >> thank you. >> i have gone us going.

we are now at the point where you are able to join this conversation. excuse me. we have microphones that you can use to ask questions orally in which case i would ask that you keep it brief, identify yourself and your institutional affiliation if you had one. as i have mentioned, there is a green card in each of your packets you can use to write a question do you have any questions? >> i've got one. thanks to the panel for laying the foundation for really great discussion. several of you talked about variations. also how states regulate and how they operate their private insurance market. there is also quite a bit of variation within states.

reports suggest that maybe variation within states may be increasing. i was wondering if you could take a few minutes and explain what you think is going on and. what contributes to a variation within states. asking themselves when they see one published rate for a state to have a better sense of what that represents. >> start things off. one thing to keep in mind when looking at how rates may change her for a particular insurer in a state and out things very is where were they in 2014 and then where are they in 2015 because you might see some convergence. i know i saw somewhere that there is actually a divergence in some states. some new players coming in.

that can affect some of the rates, but there are some insurers' suit really are expecting a very unhealthy population in 2014 and now they're seeing something. well, maybe we overstated that and will come down a little. every insurer started off at a different place. and it should not be surprising that the rate change is a different because there were starting off at different places >> also add that all lot of health care is still very local. lacrosse to shield, we serve everyone within the entirety of our service area. most of the state's we do business in, we are in the exchange. amongst all the insurers, many of them, the same number best heat but not the same number of gera