SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Aetna claimed this summer that it was pulling out of all but four of the 15 states where it was providing Obamacare individual insurance because of a business decision — it was simply losing too much money on the Obamacare exchanges.
Now a federal judge has ruled that that was a rank falsehood. In fact, says Judge John D. Bates, Aetna made its decision at least partially in response to a federal antitrust lawsuit blocking its proposed $37-billion merger with Humana. Aetna threatened federal officials with the pullout before the lawsuit was filed, and followed through on its threat once it was filed. Bates made the observations in the course of a ruling he issued Monday blocking the merger.
Aetna executives had moved heaven and earth to conceal their decision-making process from the court, in part by discussing the matter on the phone rather than in emails, and by shielding what did get put in writing with the cloak of attorney-client privilege, a practice Bates found came close to "malfeasance."
Source:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-aetna-obamacare-20170123-story.html
At what point does arbitrarily screwing with the healthcare of millions of people rise to the level of criminality?
(Score: 2) by dry on Wednesday January 25 2017, @02:54AM
While perjury is a crime, it is very hard to get a conviction.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday January 25 2017, @08:31AM
Yes, it is. That doesn't make Aetna's actions any less slimy.
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday January 27 2017, @02:47AM
Yes, and at least here (Canada), miss-leading the court is also a crime that, while not as serious, is easier to get a conviction for and is sometimes pursued and perhaps should have been here.