Anita Smith resigns as Capital Blue Cross CEO…
|
Comment Commandments:
1) No Personal Attacks. (Debating is encouraged, but be respectful). 2) No Sexual Discussion (unless it specifically pertains to a cited story). 3) No Profanity (Let’s all behave like adults). |
GOLDEN RULE:
Be civil and statesmanlike. You can disagree without being disagreeable. Annoying trolls who break these rules will be blocked from commenting. ***Please don't disable anonymous commenting for everyone else*** |
NOTE TO COMMENTERS: CREATE AN INTENSE DEBATE ACCOUNT
|
-vote comments up or down
-email notifications when someone replies |
-pick a profile picture
-promote your website or blog |
***TOPIC FORUM: 50 STORIES LAST COMMENTED ON***
***LIST OF TOP 50 COMMENTERS***
***LIST OF 50 MOST COMMENTED ON STORIES***
***LIST OF 50 LAST COMMENTS***
.
24 Comments
Seems like Capital Blue Cross made a wise decision. Smith smeened more interested in trying to be a glamorous TV personality than a serious leader (“Thanks Blue Man”).
SS
There must be a “story” behind this story.
I wonder why this happened……
I don’t know anything about her leadership as CEO but she was a heck of a spokesman. She is a PR persons wet dream, she is attractive and well spoken, and makes you think that she truely cares, heck shes a born politican.
If you read the comments posted on PennLive about her they are not very nice, it seems alot of people don’t like her. I for one did, but then all I saw or know of her is what I saw in the commericails.
She is HOT, I loved the commercials…
I’m gonna miss those incredible legs on the commercials….
i’, gonna miss seein those legs
Anita Smith was the leader of an insurance company that was anti-patient and anti-doctor. Ask patients – especially women – who were denied procedures which other companies, including Medicare, covered. I tell everyone that CBC is the evil empire and now its Darth Vader has moved on. Bye!
As a health care professional, A CEO of a major insurance Co should not have an anual comensation of 1.3 million dollars. She was over paid and was wasting money which should have been put to better use………HEALTH CARE FOR PATIENTS.I believe all CEO of health insurance companys are overpaid. Lets put the money back into the company and pay for healthcare, NOT hafty salaries.
I certainly hope you aren’t calling for a government mandate that declares how much people should be paid. That would be up to the board and shareholders to decide.
I hope her next job gives her as much public exposure as the last! Seeing her in a commercial first thing in the morning always got my day off to a good start! What a babe!
She was the CEO of Capital Blue Cross? I thought she was an actress playing the role of a CEO. You know the kind, Hi I’m not a doctor but I play one on TV. If Palin ever tires of playing a vice-presidential candidate McCain should give Anita a try!
the commerials were filmed in california, and she spent company money on personal things while in california. she was “asked” to resign.
SHE USED COMPANY MONEY ON PERSONAL THINGS WHILE FILMING HER COMMERCIALS IN CALIFORNIA. SHE WAS “ASKED” TO RESIGN.
YA MAN SHE WAS A LOOKER,BUT I DONT KNOW HOW SHE WAS AS A CEO.OVERPAID?? MAYBE,BUT SHE GOT THE JOB DONE AND GOT MY ATTENTION.TOO BAD WE DIDNT SEE HER IN TIGHT JEANS…
I agree Anita’s salary could have been put to better use. But I think now that Capital is saving the money it should be used to give scholarships to Mr. William Nasuti and others like him so they can learn to spell compensation (not comensation) and hefty (not hafty). May be Anita was paid that much because she could spell both words and if William could spell, he might be paid more and afford health care.
I’m going to miss the blue man commercials. Those commercials provided much fantasy-fuel for me
. What legs!
Perhaps America will get over its silly fetish of having women run the show. Our job is Motherhood.
I actually heard she was paid 3 million last year. Health care professionals would be happy to get a fraction of that with declining reimbursements, expensive overheads, and rising malpractice costs.
She had tons of cosmetic work done. You should have seen her before…..bad!
This story is so old it is growing hair. Why are you still talking about this? She’s gone. Get over it.
So you’re looking for a possible reason as to why Ms. SMITH abruptly resigned? Someone in another thread of messages for a local newspaper reported that “CBC accounting types” swooped into her office about two weeks after she resigned (paraphrased). IF true, that information points to a possible cause for her resignation…..
So we know there is no public explanation for her resignation, either by the Board of Directors or Ms. SMITH herself. So what are some of the possible reasons that one would resign immediately?
Having been in the life and health insurance business for near 4 decades I can share with you that universally most resignations “without comment” rendered within my industry are predicated upon some sort of malfeasance that has been discovered somewhere by someone.
You all know CBC was in merger talks with another health insurance carrier. So say you are that carrier. What are you likely to do to vet CBC as being a viable merger candidate? What would you do to be sure there are “no surprises”? For starters you’re going to conduct a forensic audit, absent the influence and oversight of CBC people, to determine what the real value of CBC is and whether or not CBC is operating within the strictest of regulatory limitations and mandates.
Therefore, I wonder if CBC was found out to be “cooking the books”? As an example AIG (American Insurance Group) was caught falsifying their records. So what does “cooking the books” mean? It means, among other tactics, a carrier could be falsifying the actual amount of incurred and/or paid medical claims to much higher amounts for the express purpose of increasing their medical claims loss ratio in the hopes of “proving” to regulators that CBC needs more premium, or said another way; CBC needs higher rate increases than would normally be required because of higher, but falsified medical claims. IF an insurance carrier can successfully falsify their mandated records without the suspicion of regulators, that carrier can obtain any amount of a rate increase that they want.
I suggest some citizen and/or investigatory groups (newspapers, state regulators, community action groups) launch an investigation into the financial affairs of CBC going back at least to 2002 and including the tenure of former CBC CEO James MEAD. For starters, it would be a simple matter to ask Mr. MEAD and Ms. SMITH to agree to take a lie detector test and then ask them “is CBC cooking the books”…. You might not like the outcome….
So you’re looking for a possible reason as to why Ms. SMITH abruptly resigned? Someone in another thread of messages for this a newspaper reported that “CBC accounting types” swooped into her office about two weeks after she resigned (paraphrased). IF true, that information points to a possible cause for her resignation…..
So we know there is no public explanation for her resignation, either by the Board of Directors or Ms. SMITH herself. So what are some of the possible reasons that one would resign immediately?
Having been in the life and health insurance business for near 4 decades I can share with you that universally most resignations “without comment” rendered within my industry are predicated upon some sort of malfeasance that has been discovered somewhere by someone.
You all know CBC was in merger talks with another health insurance carrier. So say you are that carrier. What are you likely to do to vet CBC as being a viable merger candidate? What would you do to be sure there are “no surprises”? For starters you’re going to conduct a forensic audit, absent the influence and oversight of CBC people, to determine what the real value of CBC is and whether or not CBC is operating within the strictest of regulatory limitations and mandates.
Therefore, I wonder if CBC was found out to be “cooking the books”? As an example AIG (American Insurance Group) was caught falsifying their records. So what does “cooking the books” mean? It means, among other tactics, a carrier could be falsifying the actual amount of incurred and/or paid medical claims to much higher amounts for the express purpose of increasing their medical claims loss ratio in the hopes of “proving” to regulators that CBC needs more premium, or said another way; CBC needs higher rate increases than would normally be required because of higher, but falsified medical claims. IF an insurance carrier can successfully falsify their mandated records without the suspicion of regulators, that carrier can obtain any amount of a rate increase that they want.
I suggest some citizen and/or investigatory groups (newspapers, state regulators, community action groups) launch an investigation into the financial affairs of CBC going back at least to 2002 and including the tenure of former CBC CEO James MEAD. For starters, it would be a simple matter to ask Mr. MEAD and Ms. SMITH to agree to take a lie detector test and then ask them “is CBC cooking the books”…. You might not like the outcome….
You’re all crazy, get over it, she’s gone.
YOU’RE ALL CRAZY, GET OVER IT, SHE’S GONE!