Sunday, July 24, 2016
Will
Premium Spikes Announced Week before November
Election Puncture the ObamaCare Balloon?
In
recent years, spring has brought with it a new tradition: headlines about
proposed premium increases under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and predictions
of the law’s demise.
Benjamin
D. Sommers, MD, PhD,”ObamaCare’s Skyrocketing Premiums? Why the Sky Isn’t Falling,” New England Journal of Medicine, July 21, 2016
Insurers are asking for these premium increases in the
following states.
One, in states in which the federal government reviews the
rates, and either accepts or reduces them.
Texas, BCBS, 60%
Oklahoma, BCBS, 49%
Missouri, Humana, 34%
Wyoming, BCBS, 10%
Two, in states in
which state insurance regulators review
and modify rates. These states and insurer rate increase
requests are;
Michigan, Humana, 39%
Oregon, Providence Health Plan, 24%
Tennessee, BCBS, 63%
North Carolina, 32.5%
Not to
Worry
Critics say these requested rate increases indicate a
failure of ObamaCare to deliver on its promise of lower premiums.
Not to worry, retorts,
Benjamin D. Sommers, MD, PhD, of the
Harvard School of Public Health, a
consistent supporter and advocate of ObamaCare.
Why worry?
Well,
First, spring requests for increases are just opening
bids. Rates are likely to be reduced in
the “rate review” process at least 30% of the time.
Second, consumers can
shop for less expensive plans with lower premiums
Third, 80% of
consumers who purchased coverage on the exchanges qualify for ACA’s tax
credits which lower costs of premiums.
Not So
Fast
Not so fast, counter
critics. It is difficult for consumers
to switch . Some states do not offer
credible competite plans. After 2016,
two of the health law’s provisions – risk corridors and reinsurance – expire. And although 12 million people receive tax credits,
an equal number – three million in the exchanges and nine million with
insurance outside the exchanges, will be
forced to buy full unsubsidized care. In
any event, taxpayers will have to foot the bill for exchange subsidies.
Sommers admits premium growth is not “unworthy of policy and
media attenation.” Taxpayers will have to fund subsidies ACA tax credits
and Medicaid expansion , but to scrap the law
would “ignore the devastating effect that repeal would have on the
estimated 20 million who have thus far gained insurance under the law.”
Spoken like a true “redistributionist.” In Sommers’ view, which emphasizes social
justice and compassion, repealing the
ACA is not an option. Only living with
it and refining it is. After promising
in the beginning that the ACA would
lower premiums by $2500 per family per year, you must now live with the reality that the
ACA has systematically raised premiums, often to unaffordable levels for the unsubsidized
beyond the reach of federal largess and
beyond the ability of insurers to sustain lower premiums. In retrospect, lowering premiums was a fool’s
errand. You cannot cover more people
while offering more benefits for less
money and lower premiums. You can fool
most of the people most of the time, but
not all of the people all of the time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment