<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Insurance States of America</title>
	<atom:link href="http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/01/07/35/the-insurance-states-of-america/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/01/07/35/the-insurance-states-of-america/</link>
	<description>Keeping a jaundiced eye on the corporate media.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 01:10:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Amelia</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/01/07/35/the-insurance-states-of-america/#comment-139821</link>
		<dc:creator>Amelia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:01:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/01/07/35/the-insurance-states-of-america/#comment-139821</guid>
		<description>Well I didn't read the whole article but from what I can gather the premise is bunk.  Long term disability carriers and worker's compensation statutes have required claimants to apply for Social Security disability going back in time to forever.  The difference now, which is causing the huge backlog, is the freeze on the budget for SSA, which I believe started in 2002, and has continued through the present.  In the 1990s the average wait time from appeal of a SSDI denial to a hearing was six to eight months.  During the 1990s LTD carriers and WC carriers also required claimants to apply for SSDI, same as now.  But now the wait time from appeal to hearing is 14 to 18 months.  It has nothing to do with the private insurers or the state WC statutes.  As for the WC reqiurement (applicable in only a handful of states, including Colorado--in other states the offset goes in the other direction) it's called coordination of benefits, the principle being that the employer paid one-half of the FICA tax, and so is entitled to one-half of the SSDI benefit to offset worker's compensation.  By the way, there's also an offset between SSDI and non-service connected VA benefits.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well I didn&#8217;t read the whole article but from what I can gather the premise is bunk.  Long term disability carriers and worker&#8217;s compensation statutes have required claimants to apply for Social Security disability going back in time to forever.  The difference now, which is causing the huge backlog, is the freeze on the budget for SSA, which I believe started in 2002, and has continued through the present.  In the 1990s the average wait time from appeal of a SSDI denial to a hearing was six to eight months.  During the 1990s LTD carriers and WC carriers also required claimants to apply for SSDI, same as now.  But now the wait time from appeal to hearing is 14 to 18 months.  It has nothing to do with the private insurers or the state WC statutes.  As for the WC reqiurement (applicable in only a handful of states, including Colorado&#8211;in other states the offset goes in the other direction) it&#8217;s called coordination of benefits, the principle being that the employer paid one-half of the FICA tax, and so is entitled to one-half of the SSDI benefit to offset worker&#8217;s compensation.  By the way, there&#8217;s also an offset between SSDI and non-service connected VA benefits.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Snarki, child of Loki</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/01/07/35/the-insurance-states-of-america/#comment-139794</link>
		<dc:creator>Snarki, child of Loki</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:30:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/04/01/07/35/the-insurance-states-of-america/#comment-139794</guid>
		<description>This is just reprehensible.  I sure hope that the prospect of triple damages gets the ins. companies to change their ways, although I expect a cacophany of whining to result.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is just reprehensible.  I sure hope that the prospect of triple damages gets the ins. companies to change their ways, although I expect a cacophany of whining to result.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
