<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The AHIP Freak-Out: PricewaterhouseCoopers Distancing Themselves from Their Own Report</title>
	<atom:link href="http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/</link>
	<description>Firedoglake weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 08:28:03 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DeadLast</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995674</link>
		<dc:creator>DeadLast</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995674</guid>
		<description>I used to be a manager at PwC.  The accounting firms became hired guns back in the 1990s.  The partners were upset that they were not becoming gajillionaires during the dot.com boom.  

Here is &lt;a href=&quot;http://bodurtha.georgetown.edu/enron/Arthur%20Andersen%27s%20Fall%20From%20Grace%20Is%20a%20Sad%20Tale%20of%20Greed%20and%20Miscues.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;an article about Andersen and their leadership&lt;/a&gt; during that time of shift from accounting to advocacy.  It is from the Wall Street Journal, and if they are writing about it, it must have really been bad.  Believe me, the same thing was going on at PwC and KPMG.  I can&#039;t speak firsthand about Deloitte or E&amp;Y.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to be a manager at PwC.  The accounting firms became hired guns back in the 1990s.  The partners were upset that they were not becoming gajillionaires during the dot.com boom.  </p>
<p>Here is <a href="http://bodurtha.georgetown.edu/enron/Arthur%20Andersen%27s%20Fall%20From%20Grace%20Is%20a%20Sad%20Tale%20of%20Greed%20and%20Miscues.htm" rel="nofollow">an article about Andersen and their leadership</a> during that time of shift from accounting to advocacy.  It is from the Wall Street Journal, and if they are writing about it, it must have really been bad.  Believe me, the same thing was going on at PwC and KPMG.  I can&#8217;t speak firsthand about Deloitte or E&amp;Y.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: robspierre</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995544</link>
		<dc:creator>robspierre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995544</guid>
		<description>I agree. We need to get in the habit of making multipronged attacks all at once, on a broad front. Otherwise, we see what we are seeing in the healthcare reform circus. 

When allowed to tackle a single issue at a time, the politicians and lobbyists get to spin it out, rephrase it, turn it into a slogan, and sell the unrecognizable result  back to us with months  of doublespeak. 

But if we can attack health insurance, insurance-company antitust exemptions, medical malpractice by insurance companies, and press for economic reforms like those Hugh enumerated yesterday, we can, perhaps, gum up the political machine--sort of a distributed demand for service attack, to coin a phrase. The one advantage we have is that there are still more of us than there are lobbyists. So we might just be able to keep them all too busy on too many fronts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree. We need to get in the habit of making multipronged attacks all at once, on a broad front. Otherwise, we see what we are seeing in the healthcare reform circus. </p>
<p>When allowed to tackle a single issue at a time, the politicians and lobbyists get to spin it out, rephrase it, turn it into a slogan, and sell the unrecognizable result  back to us with months  of doublespeak. </p>
<p>But if we can attack health insurance, insurance-company antitust exemptions, medical malpractice by insurance companies, and press for economic reforms like those Hugh enumerated yesterday, we can, perhaps, gum up the political machine&#8211;sort of a distributed demand for service attack, to coin a phrase. The one advantage we have is that there are still more of us than there are lobbyists. So we might just be able to keep them all too busy on too many fronts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kassandra</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995535</link>
		<dc:creator>Kassandra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:33:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995535</guid>
		<description>I called my Rep and asked for him to support Weiner AND keep the Kucinich amendment</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I called my Rep and asked for him to support Weiner AND keep the Kucinich amendment</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kassandra</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995534</link>
		<dc:creator>Kassandra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995534</guid>
		<description>Whoa! curiouser and curiouser.............</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whoa! curiouser and curiouser&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blub</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995522</link>
		<dc:creator>Blub</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:15:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995522</guid>
		<description>By the way, why don&#039;t we like this report?  This report IMO is good for us.  It basically says that by assuming no behavioral change on the part of the insurers, they will drastically increase rates with the proposed Baucus Bailout Tax.  We&#039;ve been saying exactly that for months now... using many of the same numbers.  That we need the strong PO for cost containment.. this report confirms exactly what we&#039;ve been arguing - it proves once again that the insurers are incorrigible and the strong PO is a requirement.  I agree wtih Rep. Weiner (D-NY) on this one.  Regardless of AHIP&#039;s misguided motivation, the report basically told the truth.. and that truth is that we need the strong PO.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, why don&#8217;t we like this report?  This report IMO is good for us.  It basically says that by assuming no behavioral change on the part of the insurers, they will drastically increase rates with the proposed Baucus Bailout Tax.  We&#8217;ve been saying exactly that for months now&#8230; using many of the same numbers.  That we need the strong PO for cost containment.. this report confirms exactly what we&#8217;ve been arguing &#8211; it proves once again that the insurers are incorrigible and the strong PO is a requirement.  I agree wtih Rep. Weiner (D-NY) on this one.  Regardless of AHIP&#8217;s misguided motivation, the report basically told the truth.. and that truth is that we need the strong PO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sangemon</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995521</link>
		<dc:creator>sangemon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:15:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995521</guid>
		<description>Wouldn&#039;t it be ironic of this report were used down the line to nail down single-payer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wouldn&#8217;t it be ironic of this report were used down the line to nail down single-payer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MaryCh</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995517</link>
		<dc:creator>MaryCh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:08:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995517</guid>
		<description>The big &lt;strike&gt;8&lt;/strike&gt; &lt;strike&gt;6&lt;/strike&gt; ? accounting firms live and die by their reputations -- look what happened to Arthur Andersen after Enron.  

PWC misjudged their audience (i.e., the degree of scrutiny they hadn&#039;t expected from folks interested in picking it apart), and the optics of what looks like a very public f&#039;up are a lot clearer and bumperstickier than their pointing out that their job didn&#039;t include calculating cost savings.

While this &#039;used and tossed aside&#039; is part of life in the Beltway, this feels a little more like 43&#039;s MO - or maybe I&#039;m just making the R-association jump...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The big <strike>8</strike> <strike>6</strike> ? accounting firms live and die by their reputations &#8212; look what happened to Arthur Andersen after Enron.  </p>
<p>PWC misjudged their audience (i.e., the degree of scrutiny they hadn&#8217;t expected from folks interested in picking it apart), and the optics of what looks like a very public f&#8217;up are a lot clearer and bumperstickier than their pointing out that their job didn&#8217;t include calculating cost savings.</p>
<p>While this &#8216;used and tossed aside&#8217; is part of life in the Beltway, this feels a little more like 43&#8242;s MO &#8211; or maybe I&#8217;m just making the R-association jump&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marcos</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995514</link>
		<dc:creator>marcos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:05:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995514</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;The insurance company post-passage refrain will be “we told you so.”&lt;/blockquote&gt;

That&#039;s a Pyrrhic victory if there ever was one, as it will just result in less affordable health care and set the stage for less business-friendly reforms down the road.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The insurance company post-passage refrain will be “we told you so.”</p></blockquote>
<p>That&#8217;s a Pyrrhic victory if there ever was one, as it will just result in less affordable health care and set the stage for less business-friendly reforms down the road.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blub</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995502</link>
		<dc:creator>Blub</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:45:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995502</guid>
		<description>I think these reports are doctored up and misused quite frequently.  Very few consulting firms have decent follow-up to ensure that doesn&#039;t happen, and with margins as low as what they are for what they do, no financial incentive for them to do so (the mantra is stay 100% billable, don&#039;t even breath unless its billable, don&#039;t hit overhead, etc, etc...).  So every now and then they&#039;ll have messes like this one that come and (quite fairly) back them on the behind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think these reports are doctored up and misused quite frequently.  Very few consulting firms have decent follow-up to ensure that doesn&#8217;t happen, and with margins as low as what they are for what they do, no financial incentive for them to do so (the mantra is stay 100% billable, don&#8217;t even breath unless its billable, don&#8217;t hit overhead, etc, etc&#8230;).  So every now and then they&#8217;ll have messes like this one that come and (quite fairly) back them on the behind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blub</title>
		<link>http://firedoglake.com/2009/10/13/the-ahip-freak-out-pricewaterhousecoopers-distancing-themselves-from-their-own-report/#comment-1995501</link>
		<dc:creator>Blub</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:43:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://firedoglake.com/?p=44819#comment-1995501</guid>
		<description>probably not is my guess.. unless we in the grassroots choose to make it an issue.. Leahy&#039;s tried to push this before, without much success.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>probably not is my guess.. unless we in the grassroots choose to make it an issue.. Leahy&#8217;s tried to push this before, without much success.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.302 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2012-02-18 00:50:11 -->

