Talk:AHIP (trade association)

Background Literature
I notice that there are no external references to material describing this organization. Does anyone have anything to add? yes, I agree with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.51.221 (talk) 09:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There are no full-length publications describing this particular corporate lobby; that's true of most of them. You will find some useful background by following the footnoted links to various articles about it. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

AmericanSolution
The AmericanSolution (or more properly AmericanSolution when it gets renamed properly) article should be merged here. When you take the PR spin out of that article, cleanup the trivia & non-notable material, the article will not stand alone, but there a good place here at America’s Health Insurance Plans for the more salient bits. A redirect on AmericanSolution to that merged section would also be useful. -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 19:15, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. This article is nothing more than a PR piece for America’s Health Insurance Plans, an insurance industry organization, and has absolutely no business being included in an encyclopedia. --Goodrule (talk) 04:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This article tells the reader about the AHIP as a lobbying force, and includes some criticism, too. Even if many people disagree with the AHIP, it is an important political force and a source of information. If the article seems slanted, editors are free to make it adhere to a neutral point of view, provided that there are cited sources. (WP:NPOV) --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Questions for Discussion
Is this the group that is funding all the scary commercials about health care reform? Like the ones about rationing health care or not being able to keep your doctor and death panel stuff? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.150.240 (talk • contribs)

Importance
Sorry for the capitalization in lieu of an actual argument. That's pretty much always annoying. I'll endeavor to do better. I think this organization is highly important, and recently has seen increased press coverage. Bryan Hopping T  16:21, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thats fair enough, and sorry if i was snappy. I dont really care what rating you give it for the other projects, but please dont change the politics rating above low. Willy turner (talk) 18:59, 1 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The importance of the AHIP as a political force may be above low, even if many people disagree with what they are lobbying for. The same may be said of AARP and other organizations. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I concur. There's no doubt AHIP has significant political sway, although I don't know how that particular WikiProject prefers to deal with lobbying organizations, or if they have particular criteria for "ranking" them, as it were.  user: J  aka justen (talk) 15:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Critics
If you want to comply with WP:NPOV, you can find lots of well-sourced material at SourceWatch http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=America%27s_Health_Insurance_Plans for example the Harry and Louise ads and their opposition to Obamacare. --Nbauman (talk) 21:05, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

POV and related problems
About 2/3 the article is an extended expression of the own POV on health care reform; the final third is an attack on that position. This sort of pro and con is not what is meant by NPOB: what is meant is neutral description. Neither of them really are about the organization, and both of them are badly outdated, dealing with issues now over 5 years old.I presume they have some more recent activities, which would need to be described.  DGG ( talk ) 06:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on America's Health Insurance Plans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160204215328/https://www.ahip.org/News/Press-Room/2015/AHIP-s-Board-of-Directors-Unanimously-Elects-Marilyn-Tavenner-as-President-and-CEO.aspx to https://www.ahip.org/News/Press-Room/2015/AHIP-s-Board-of-Directors-Unanimously-Elects-Marilyn-Tavenner-as-President-and-CEO.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:20, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

COI edit requests
Hi! AHIP has hired me to request some edits to this article:


 * At beginning of lead, deleting  (which is inaccurate and sourced to broken links) and replacing with
 * Adding to end of lead:  (There should really be a separate History section, but pacing myself here.)
 * Since it has no sources, I recommend simply deleting the "Health care reform" section.
 * Add to Lobbying section:
 * With these changes in mind, I'd also like to revisit what else is necessary to get the neutrality flag removed from the top of the article.

Due to my COI, I won't be editing directly. I appreciate any help or feedback. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 22:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)



Reply 25-DEC-2018
Regards,  Spintendo   11:45, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The above edit request has not received any responses in the past  3  weeks (21 days in total).
 * It was felt by this reviewer that any inadvertent changes made without discussion by local editors may adversely affect the article. As a safeguard, the request has been declined as needing discussion.
 * The COI editor is urged to revive any stalled communications first by making contact with local editor's through their own talk pages, then by moving the discussion to this talk page.
 * The COI editor may also wish to broadcast requests for changes at the talk pages of the various WikiProjects which govern this article. Those projects are normally listed at the top of each article's talk page.
 * Unless being assisted by another review editor, the COI editor is asked to allow for a reasonable amount of time to pass before reactivating any subsequent  templates covering this same issue.


 * Thanks, . Looks like removed a lot of content from the article, superseding a few of my requests, but didn't get a chance to review the remaining requests. As such, I'll update my requests below:
 * At beginning of lead, deleting  and replacing with
 * Adding to end of lead:  (There should really be a separate History section, but pacing myself here.)
 * In the lead, shortening  to   (This also fills in the bare URL.)
 * Restoring the deleted "Lobbying" section with text moved from lead plus more recent information:
 * Filling in the other bare URLs and removing the flag from the top of the article: replacing with, with , and with , all in the "Controversy" section. (The last two may be WP:PRIMARY, but that's not for me to judge.)
 * I'd also like to revisit what else is necessary to get the neutrality flag removed from the top of the article.
 * Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 04:44, 26 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I saw your request on WT:MED and came here to take a look.
 * I immediately went ahead and implemented request #5 in its entirety — that was a no-brainer.
 * I'm not at all comfortable with implementing #1 as-is. While changing of to representing seems relatively fine, I'm not sure if deleting private is reasonable, the second sentence feels a bit too much like an advertisement (although I may be overreacting and I'm not sure that "advertisement" is even the right word for what it feels like), and I'm not sure that citing AHIP on this is fine (also the particular ref you used is really not ideal (if you're going to cite AHIP on this I think it'd be more appropriate to cite one or more of their "about us" pages or something similar, not a press release on membership expansion) and in particular your wording here appears to be taken almost entirely verbatim from said ref (!!) — at the absolute least that has to be a WP:COPYVIO if nothing else).
 * Request #2 seemed okay so I implemented it as-is, however I personally think the previous CEO & President Marilyn Tavenner really should be mentioned (although that would probably better belong in a later history section, so it can probably just wait for that).
 * I'm not sure about request #3 — I did make some corrections to that sentence when I fixed the ref, but I'm uncertain about the appropriateness/relevance of the claim in the first place and feel that shortening it won't solve that fundamental problem and may also be a bit too whitewash-y... Hopefully another editor can weigh in on this item.
 * I'm even more unsure about #4 and don't feel like I'm up to evaluating it in much depth right now, sorry. The same goes for #6, although I will say that I think the neutrality disputed template currently does still belong there because the article is still essentially only focused on covering controversies over AHIP and very little else.
 * I'm not really experienced in dealing with COI edit requests, this is actually the first one I've responded to, and I may have been a bit too conservative (or not, or the opposite) — I'm not really sure, I just tried to follow the guidelines in WP:COI/WP:COIRESPONSE/etc as best as I could. Hopefully this is actually helpful and I didn't screw anything up too badly in here or in my edits to the page related to this! Garzfoth (talk) 12:04, 26 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for coming over here and sharing your feedback! And apologies for my delayed reply. To dig into the individual points...
 * I suggested deleting "private" since AHIP members also provide coverage through Medicare and Medicaid, and I thought that might be confusing, but if you think it makes sense to leave it in, that's fine too. I can't believe I missed the plagiarism, and I sincerely apologize for that. I've added an additional ref and revised:
 * Noted re: Marilyn Tavenner, and I agree.
 * My goal with request #3 wasn't to shorten the information overall, just to move it into its own subsection as outlined in request #4. My hope is that fleshing out a description of the organization's lobbying role – with neutral wording and in-depth sourcing, of course – would help balance out the article's coverage.
 * Open to any feedback, and again, I really appreciate your time and effort here. Mary Gaulke (talk) 22:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)


 * , we don't add advertising copy written by paid agents to our project because to do so might violate the United States laws against native or deceptive advertising. Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind, and once again promotion seems to be your only purpose here. If there is some significant error or omission of verifiable fact in the article please feel free to mention it here, concisely and with a note of the sources that verify it. The content you propose adding to to the lead reads like a press-release; that is hardly surprising, as that is exactly what it is – the text "... members provide health and supplemental benefits to millions of Americans through employer-provided coverage, the individual insurance market, and public programs such as Medicare and Medicaid" is taken directly from this press release or another just like it. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:48, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * An honest mistake, and I apologize. I was already in the process of replying to when you posted this, so leaving my reply above. Mary Gaulke (talk) 22:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Due to the issues raised by Justlettersandnumbers regarding the copyvio and promotional tone I am going to decline to add the full revised edits to the article lead at this time (not comfortable adding them as-is right now even after the revision — it's still too promotional), but I have made the requested wording changes to the first sentence ("of" ==> "representing"; "private health insurance companies" ==> "health insurance companies") and used two of the refs you suggested in your edit request to support the first sentence (replacing the previous cn tag). Sorry about not getting back to this sooner. Garzfoth (talk) 06:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I so appreciate your time and effort. Thank you. If you have any additional thoughts on what can be done about restoring and updating the Lobbying section – which I think provides valuable context on the organization – please let me know. Mary Gaulke (talk) 23:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

2021 COI edit requests
Hi! As noted above, I am a COI editor for AHIP, requesting some updates to this article:

Lead

 * FYI, I updated the logo in the article infobox.


 * Remove – this has been in place for seven years now. As  noted above, the flag was placed in response to the article content at the time, which contained extensive coverage of the debate around healthcare reform that wasn't totally germane to the article. Most of this content has since been removed, and I believe my requests below will help address any outstanding POV issues.


 * The organization is now known simply as AHIP. I think it may make sense to rename (move) this article accordingly, perhaps to AHIP (trade association) since AHIP is occupied. Also, in the infobox, update the "name" parameter to "AHIP" and update "|abbreviation = AHIP" to "|formerly = America's Health Insurance Plans ".

History

 * The third paragraph strikes me as WP:UNDUE in length given there is just one source cited. It may make sense to delete the last sentence: "For instance, an ABC News poll in June 2009 about the cost of health insurance premiums found 23 percent were very satisfied, but a combined 75 percent of consumers were somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied (31 percent somewhat satisfied, 19 percent somewhat dissatisfied and 25 percent very dissatisfied)." Also, correct the spelling of "Politifact" in the second sentence.


 * After
 * AHIP gave more than $100 million to help fund the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's 2009 and 2010 efforts to defeat President Obama's signature health care reform law.
 * add:
 * Later, in 2021, AHIP voiced public support for expanding the Affordable Care Act to help the United States reach universal healthcare coverage.


 * After
 * In 2015, two major American health insurance companies, UnitedHealth and Aetna, left the association; in 2017 a third large insurance company, Humana, also left.
 * add:
 * Humana and Aetna parent CVS Health subsequently rejoined AHIP, and Humana CEO Bruce Broussard was named AHIP board chairman in 2020. CVS Health President and CEO Karen S. Lynch joined the AHIP board in 2021.


 * The Partnership for America’s Health Care Future is mentioned twice; since these mentions are redundant of each other, I think it makes sense to delete one. I suggest the first ("It was a co-founder of the Partnership for America’s Health Care Future in 2018."), since it does not have a source cited.


 * Add to end of section:
 * AHIP's board of directors issued a statement at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic voluntarily agreeing to cover diagnostic COVID-19 tests at no cost to members.


 * AHIP and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association launched the Vaccine Community Connectors program in March 2021 to help provide COVID-19 vaccination to seniors over the age of 65 in at-risk and underserved communities. The program helped vaccinate more than 2 million seniors in its first 100 days.


 * In June 2021, AHIP announced an updated mission and branding that included no longer using the full "America's Health Insurance Plans" title, instead going simply by "AHIP".

I appreciate your help and your time. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 01:54, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅. Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help! If you're able, one more request. In the lead, I'd like to update
 * AHIP (formerly America's Health Insurance Plans) is an American political advocacy / trade association of health insurance companies known for certification of Medicare Advantage and other health plans governed by CMS: Medicare Core Quality Measures.
 * to
 * AHIP (formerly America's Health Insurance Plans) is an American political advocacy and trade association of health insurance companies that offer coverage through the employer-provided, Medicare Advantage, Medicaid managed care, and individual markets.
 * This is more accurate than the implication that AHIP's members focus primarily on CMS coverage. Thank you again! Mary Gaulke (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:04, 15 December 2021 (UTC)