Surprise: Aetna Cutting Back Most Involvement In Obamacare

Gee, who could have seen this coming?

(The Hill) In a blow to the health care law, Aetna — one of the largest health insurers in the country — announced Monday that it will significantly scale back its presence on the ObamaCare marketplaces next year.

The company said it will scale back from participating in 15 states this year to just four states in 2017.

“As a strong supporter of public exchanges as a means to meet the needs of the uninsured, we regret having to make this decision,” Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini said in a statement, citing a loss of $200 million in the second quarter.

Of course, Team Obama in no way sees this as a problem, because, let’s face it, they can’t admit that this is a disaster. A disaster that was predicted prior to passage.

Nor should you feel bad for Aetna. Like so many insurance companies, they were cheerleaders for Ocare, thinking they would make some sweet, sweet cash off it.

What this will mean, though, are calls for moving towards single payer, where the government is the insurance company. Really, this was the goal the whole time. They’ll say that since private companies cannot provide coverage, then the government must do it.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

16 Responses to “Surprise: Aetna Cutting Back Most Involvement In Obamacare”

  1. JGlanton says:

    I had Aetna for a while before they left California due to our state’s health insurance went socialist. There were over a dozen good choices for health care providers then so we could shop around for a plan. I liked my insurance but I couldn’t keep it. Then came Obama care and now there are only two choices.

  2. Dana says:

    This was always the plan. The left knew that they couldn’t get single-payer passed, so they came up with a cockamamie scheme to get something through, knowing all along that it would fail. Once it has failed, the left will throw up their hands and say, “See? We tried it the ‘conservative’ way, using the private insurance companies, and it didn’t work, so single-payer is all that’s left.” The option of not having the government responsible for everyone’s health care will not be considered.

    It’s just another fornicating welfare scheme, to take more money from the people who earn it and give it to those who do not.

  3. Hoagie says:

    It’s just another fornicating welfare scheme, to take more money from the people who earn it and give it to those who do not.

    It’s even worse than that Dana. The dems have a plan to create another huge bureaucracy and fill it with unionized government democrat voting drones. All collecting huge salaries, benefits and retirement packages at the expense of the private sector taxes. And all with the ability, efficiency and enthusiasm as your local DMV and all the compassion of the IRS. They then will control who gets what treatment and when they get it. That means our very lives will be in their hands. Plus, as an added incentive they have a whole new huge untouched source of MONEY to distribute to their friends and supporters. All untaxed, unseen, unquestioned and unaudited. A big, fat, juicy barrel of cash.

  4. Jeffery says:

    Explain why US healthcare costs about double per person as in other advanced nations, e.g., Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, England, Finland, France, Israel, Japan, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland etc.

    Conservative’s insistence that doctors, insurance/hospital/pharma execs, insurance salesmen and all their associated investors and shareholders be enriched at the expense of the working classes is why.

    It’s the redistribution of wealth UP the chain. There are better ways to allocate medical resources and Australia, Austria, Belgium etc have all figured it out. But US conservatism insists on transferring $1 trillion or so a year from the working classes to the super wealthy.

    You’re right about one thing. The PPACA will collapse and be replaced by a program similar to Medicare for all. And we’ll save money AND get better healthcare.

  5. Jeffery says:

    They’ll say that since private companies cannot provide coverage, then the government must do it.

    And they’d be right.

    You DO know that systems in other nations (e.g., France, which has the highest rated healthcare system) actually do rely on private insurers. And they serve ALL their citizens AND for about half per person what we pay. Best coverage at a much lower cost. Maybe we Americans can learn something.

    Certain social needs are best met by governments. Defense, police, fire protection, education, and as most nations have discovered, healthcare. Just as you can hire extra security to buttress the police, you can hire extra doctors to probe your prostate.

  6. Dana says:

    American health costs are higher because we have to pay for f(ornicating) lawyers and malpractice insurance.

    Jeffrey wrote:

    Certain social needs are best met by governments. Defense, police, fire protection, education, and as most nations have discovered, healthcare.

    If you want to provide health care for everybody, then you might have a point. But if you want to provide health care only for those who are willing to work to pay for it, then no, government is not the right way. I want health care to be provided for those who have worked to pay for it; if someone is unwilling to work to pay for it, then he shouldn’t get it.

  7. Jeffery says:


    Based on your research In your opinion what percentage of able-to-work Americans choose to live off of “welfare”?

    Lawyers and malpractice add a few percent to the costs. The same with “defensive” medicine. Obviously the trial attorneys oppose single-payer as it eliminates a big source of their income as has been demonstrated in other nations. And the attorneys also bribe contribute to the Dems heavily.

    Should a recently widowed 91 year old woman who never worked outside the home not receive healthcare?

  8. john says:

    one payer? you mean like Israel Switzerland and Germany ? Gosh that sounds horrible Say whatever to those death panels that we were promised ?

  9. Jeffery says:

    Phillip and Heather married straight out of college and Phillip took a position as a staff accountant, was good at it and in a couple of years was making a bit over $50,000 a year. He and Heather decided she would stay at home to start a family, and shortly after their wedding she discovered she was pregnant! Little Phil Jr. was the apple of their eyes even though at 13 months he was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis after repeated trips to the doctor and hospital for lung and GI issues. Tragically, Phil Sr. died in an automobile accident just shy of Jr’s 18 month birthday. Phil should have purchased more life insurance but with a young family and a special needs child there’s never enough money. Heather had worked as a part-time cashier through two years of college but Phil Jr requires nearly full-time care.

    It’s tragic, but let’s be truthful here. Over her 22 years, Heather had hardly worked a day in her life and essentially contributed nothing to America in taxes. Phil’s parents passed away earlier and Heather’s parents live almost a 1400 miles away and can’t help much financially. Understandably Heather is currently devastated, depressed and finding the challenges overwhelming.

    Dana – do you object to the government taking a few shovelsful of your hard work for helping Heather and Phil Jr. at this time, even though they clearly haven’t earned it? Do you think Heather shouldn’t have voted?

    What if Heather and Phillip Sr. were named Shiree and D’Andre and were never married?

    What if Heather and Phillip Sr. were Henry and Phillip and had adopted a little boy?

  10. david7134 says:

    I will answer that one for you. You couple made bad choices, why should others have to pay? In Japan, they would have demanded a check before doing anything. Same in most other countries. US is one of the only places where you would get care without concern for finances before care, until the government got into the equation. Then the cost of medicine went through the roof, just like everything with our government. Get the government out of our lives.

  11. Jeffery says:


    What bad choices did they make?

  12. Jeffery says:

    dave typed:

    Get the government out of our lives.

    Yet, other nations have gov’t regulated healthcare and it’s much cheaper than here.

  13. Liam Thomas says:

    Nice sob story Jeffery.

    Shit happens. Thats life. Tell this story to citizens in probably 125 of the 200 or so countries around the world and see how much sympathy you get.

    Heather and Phillip were doing pretty well by their standards.

    The problem is you and the left keep pushing the bar higher and higher and higher and no matter how much money is thrown at them you guys just push the bar higher and tell us sob stories about the poor hypothetical family struggling to survive.

    Well if it wasnt for the fact that democrats dont want them to survive…..they might all have decent paying jobs with loads of benefits.

    For example my wife is a school teacher….she has healthcare, dental, vision, disability, life insurance, nursing home insurance…..

    Lets see that life insurance costs us 87 CENTS a month. Dental is 6.57 a month, Disability is 1.18 a month…..nursing home care insurance is like 1.21 a month. Her health care costs us 21.00 every two weeks.

    Now before you say yeah but thats government paying it…..I have private insurance from my CORPORATION….with all these same benefits for almost the identical costs.

    We have it so bad.

    Of course there is the poor who have NO OPPORTUNITY FOR A JOB LIKE WE HAVE BECAUSE?

    Because people like you on the left WANT THE POOR TO FAIL to suck the government tit….to remain in poverty forever while blaming those on the right for their plight.

    ITS ABOUT and always has been ABOUT KEEPING YOUR VOTERS IN CHAINS with a dangling CARROT……vote for a dem one more time and your suffering will end.


    Give them just enough to be content with a shitty life……

    Give them just enough to be forced to vote for a (D) because an (R) might give them an opportunity to get a job and work for what the rest of us have.

    I feel sorry for the poor. Black and White….or choose your race….I feel sorry for them because they have been HOODWINKED BY THE LEFT into believing that if they do not vote for a (D) that they will not be able to make it……

    NOT realizing the Democrats drug of choice is POVERTY…..give them crack every so often……just enough… keep them addicted…..just enough….to keep them voting……

    and then blame the right because they hate the poor because they want them to WORK instead of being addicted to the (D)’s drugs.

  14. Dana says:

    Jeffrey asked, with his silly hypothetical question:

    Dana – do you object to the government taking a few shovelsful of your hard work for helping Heather and Phil Jr. at this time, even though they clearly haven’t earned it?


    Your ‘goal’ is to try to embarrass me into saying, ‘Well, no, I wouldn’t not take care of them!’ but I’m not easy to embarrass, and I am perfectly willing to say that no, I am not willing to help them. Putting together sob-story hypotheticals doesn’t work against me.

  15. Jeffery says:


    Thank you for your honest answer. This exemplifies the divide between the far-right extremist minority and the rest of America, and helps us all understand your anger at America and Americans.

  16. david7134 says:

    Because I do not agree with your bizarre attitude to spending other people’s money does not mean I hate. Your seeing hate in other people is called “projection”. That implicates your poor little brain in your observation of the many problems of the world. Many people do not see all the tragic circumstances and many, including me, can see the many tragic circumstances that people like you have caused in your pathetic efforts to “do good”. Now, answer this, why can’t American doctors give your little couple free medical care? It is against the law in the US, but you didn’t know that Hillary and bunch passed that, did you?

Pirate's Cove