Home | About | Donate

US Justice Department Steps In to Halt Health Insurance Mega-Mergers


US Justice Department Steps In to Halt Health Insurance Mega-Mergers

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

The U.S. Department of Justice is suing to block two mega healthcare mergers, saying the acquisitions would "fundamentally reshape the health insurance industry" to the detriment of consumers.

The antitrust lawsuits were announced Thursday by Attorney General Loretta Lynch in response to Anthem's $54 billion proposal to acquire Cigna and Aetna's $37 billion bid to takeover Humana.


Isn't it amazing that Barack Obama never ever considered having his justice dept prosecute the men and corporations who collapsed the economy in 2008, or sued any state for violating the civil rights voting act, or arrested one cop for murdering unarmed people on camera. But once it has been shown that his signature piece of legislation, the ACA, is now marred with ever increasing insurance premiums, he can't have his administration block healthcare mergers fast enough.

Do you suppose he got the the message? Or is he just feathering his nest for life after the White House? I vote the latter.


Even with this so called "competition" the USA has the highest health care costs in the world.

It not the lack of competition leading to those costs. It the very premise that health care should be premised on the purchase of health insurance under for profit market principles.

At the end of the day health care should be a monopoly, one owned collectively by the citizens with a mandate not of profits but of providing heAlth care equitably to all.


The series—which prompted a state ethics probe—documented personal and familial ties between Cigna and Gov. Dannel Malloy’s lead regulator on the deal. It also documented how Cigna and Anthem had pumped significant campaign contributions into Malloy-linked political groups as his administration led the merger review.

Governor Malloy is the Chair of the Democratic Platform Committee, and of course a Hillary supporter. He is obviously for sale, as are most Democrats.

I'm shocked Loretta Lynch is doing her job for once. Maybe the evidence was so overwhelming and the blowback to the Obama administration (and to Hillary) was too much to risk. Kudos to David Sirota for exposing the behind the scenes chicanery.


Not impressed but I will be after we socialize medicine--and everything else.


Health CARE, not insurance!


Malloy has been bought and paid for as have all of Hillary's pals. We've lost the war on greed and will soon be serfs to the oligarchy. If we allow the dem convention to name Hillary we are done for unless we get enough people voting green.


This is what historically happens when an industry is monopolized. When everyone has to have something by gov't mandate, there is no reason for any private businesses to compete. Has not prices tripled since ACA? Why compete when its mandatory? If anyone has taken the most basic economic classes, then this would have been foreseen. But what politician has these classes? Being a lawyer prepares no prsident for this. Political science classes have no reason to discuss this idea. Business classes wpuld lead one to the conclusion that when demand goes up, you raise prices. So how could have any politicians have been prepared for this? As for citizens, we live in a capitalist cpuntry, yet not enough people grasped this idea, mainly because a high school diploma doesnt cover any of this. So how could our citizenship ever get it? I think that in a capitalist country, finance and economics should be the sole focus of all education until college. Science is for countries that care about their childrens future, which aint us or US.


I don't know why this is news. ACA protects us from inflated premiums from price-fixing and mergers. Oops, I see that it doesn't actually do that.

Well, at least we still have the public option.


DOJ's website lists the eleven states. Connecticut opposes the acquisition of Cigna (headquartered in CT) but does not oppose the acquisition of Humana, by Aetna, also headquartered in CT.

Sounds like a classic case of "we demand justice, but we want to get paid, first."


I would challenge you to back up that claim. ACA wasn't primarily about the premiums for those who already had insurance and choices about their level of insurance, but about insurance for everyone. The problem is the profit factor, and that's what has to go away for us to have real health CARE for all of our population.


You answered half of your own challenge. Dont believe me like you believe politicians. Look it up yourself. Find the facts, they are easy to come across. All you have to do is look.


Not my job to make your point. If you make a claim and can't back it up yourself, I call foul.


LOL! The PTB do not want single payer-they want every USan to pay as much as possible to increase the profits of the top few "health providers".


Thats just it though. You cry foul but require no evidence from your side? So, on to the double standard then? Good one. You must be a Trump Chump or are you a Clinton Clown?


You made a specific claim, that "prices [have] tripled" since ACA was enacted. When challenged, you told me to look it up. Name-calling is no answer. But then, that was days ago and nobody else is still watching.


I will say this, at least you admit to your vanity. As for triple prices, you have not been reading or looking at any media for at least a year and a half. Its been on this website, and epi.org specifically. If you chose not to pay attention, then dont act like you do. Must you really be fed your information? I tell you to go find in hopes you gain intellectual insight, like in an academic setting. Also, how do I know your not a troll when you ask questions with this level of ignorance? The industry has been monopolized, thats your hint. Dont believe me...look this up your self and stop being lazy.


Even if the "Dean" in your screen name is an academic title, I am not matriculated in your institution. And the true mark of vanity is your continuing to send me off to do research to back up your point. Never in my extensive academic experience have I seen a footnote that instructed me to look it up for myself.

Yes, I have seen a number of those who've always been comfortably insured complaining about their premiums, and yes, that's counter to the intent of the ACA. But as one who no longer has to fear that, if her husband (still working at 71 to keep me insured) were to die or lose his job, she would be uninsurable because of preexisting conditions, I can hardly describe the relief that came from enactment of the ACA. Yes, I'd rather have Medicare, but this is a HUGE step from where I was before. And no, my husband's portion of the premium has not tripled, and we're with one of the monopolist insurers.

But let's move on to other topics. Even if you won't, I will ignore your further whining.


"Never in my extensive academic experience have I seen a footnote that instructed me to look it up for myself," you are the first academic I've heard or seen that has done no research. So, not one professor ever had you look up something? What a crap school you go to. You just listened and had to nothing else. I bet that led to some easy A's. As for you looking it up, its was obvious from your first comment that you would have never accepted any resources from me, which you have made more obvious with this last bit of rhetoric. As for "whining", you dont know the definition of that word, again, obviously. And yes, you especially, should ignore anyone with a more open mind than yourself.


Should you wish to actually know with whom you're speaking, you can find a summary of my academic background, and of my professional history, at http://bkswrites.com/bkswrites/About-bks.html