Posted on 08/11/2016 10:45:56 AM PDT by Red Badger
The next president could be dealing with an ObamaCare insurer meltdown in his or her very first month.
The incoming administration will take office just as the latest ObamaCare enrollment tally comes in, delivering a potentially crucial verdict about the still-shaky healthcare marketplaces.
The fourth ObamaCare signup period begins about one week before Election Day, and it will end about one week before inauguration on Jan. 20. After mounting complaints from big insurers about losing money this year, the results could serve as a kind of judgment day for ObamaCare, experts say.
“The next open enrollment period is key,” said Larry Levitt, senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation.
The Obama administration has struggled for several years to bring young, healthy people into the marketplaces, which is needed to offset the medical costs of older and sicker customers.
These problems are coming to light this year, as insurers get their first full look at ObamaCare customer data. Some, like UnitedHealth Group, say they’ve seen enough and are already vowing to leave the exchanges.
Levitt and other experts warn that if the numbers don’t improve this year, more insurers could bolt. That would deal a major blow to marketplace competition while also driving up rates and keeping even more people out of the exchanges.
Already, many insurers this year are proposing substantial rate hikes with the hopes of making up for higher recent medical costs. The average premium increase next year is about 9 percent, according to an analysis of 17 cities by the Kaiser Family Foundation. But some hikes are far higher: Blue Cross Blue Shield has proposed increases of 40 percent in Alabama and 60 percent in Texas.
Levitt said the premium hikes could be “just be a one-time market correction” in the still-new marketplace. But if insurers continue to lose money, it could be a sign of bigger problems.
Republican nominee Donald Trump has vowed to undo ObamaCare, but it could be a tough test for Hillary Clinton, President Obama's potential Democratic successor.
Clinton has already laid out plans to help boost enrollment by making coverage more affordable for people who are still priced out of ObamaCare.
Like Obama, she vowed to invest in advertising and in-person outreach to help more people enroll. Clinton would also increase ObamaCare subsidies so that customers spend no more than 8.5 percent of their income on premiums — down from 9.5 percent under current law.
She has also proposed a tax credit of up to $5,000 per family specifically to offset rising out-of-pocket costs — a side effect of cheaper plans offered under ObamaCare.
But other experts say the problems could lie deeper and that it would take a major shift in ObamaCare’s customer base to offset those massive medical costs.
Insurers have fretted for years about lower-than-expected enrollment through ObamaCare.
Last year, more than 11 million people bought coverage through the exchanges. While that figure beat the Obama administration’s expectations for 2016, it’s a huge drop from the Congressional Budget Office’s initial projections that 21 million would be enrolled by that time.
Now, several high-profile insurers are raising new concerns about the healthcare law’s mix of customers and questioning whether their companies can keep selling ObamaCare plans.
Part of those concerns stem from distrust of the Obama administration after its key marketplace stabilization program — known as risk corridors — was too cash-strapped to pay back the insurers. In the first two years of the healthcare law, more insurers than expected have ended up with balance sheets in the red. As a result, the risk corridor pool was left with only about $1 to cover every $10 in claims.
But those risk corridor payments, as well as from a similar program called reinsurance, have played a major role in controlling costs for insurers.
A recent study by the nonprofit Commonwealth Fund found that medical claims were only 2 percent higher than insurers projected, after taking into account the reinsurance payments.
In some corners, though, insurer complaints are seen as fresh evidence that ObamaCare marketplaces are on the brink.
In the last month, two major insurers — Aetna and Anthem — both reversed course on their plans to expand in the marketplace. Now, all five of the nation’s largest insurers say they are losing money on the exchanges.
“From a policy point of view, we’re basically seeing the exchanges unravel,” said Michael Abrams, a healthcare strategist with Numerof & Associates who consults for insurers including UnitedHealth Group.
“More than anything else, it’s a serious symbolic blow to ObamaCare,” he said.
The two companies’ abrupt decisions to pull back from ObamaCare have baffled healthcare experts. Both Aetna and Anthem had previously been optimistic about the marketplace, unlike UnitedHealth, which had been cautious from the start.
As recently as this spring, Anthem said it was “well-positioned” to stay in the marketplace, and Aetna said it was in a “very good place."
None of the top five companies — which also include UnitedHealth, Cigna and Humana — had been major players in the ObamaCare marketplace and are unlikely to cause sudden rate hikes for most customers. They’re also unlikely to have a major effect on competition next year, though some people could see rate hikes in the local markets where the carriers are exiting.
Some experts say the insurers’ moves this year could be part of a strategy to drive more changes to the marketplace over time.
“I’ve been dealing with insurance companies for many years, and it is often the case that insurance companies say, ‘Gee, things are horrible, business is horrible, we’re going to pull out,” said Leighton Wu, a professor of health policy at George Washington University.
“Some of it is a posturing thing, this is what companies do,” added Wu, who also sits on the board of the D.C. Health Exchange.
"Some insurers will say, ‘We’re unhappy, we’d like to get paid better.’”
Sure, all good ideas. Now see what you can do about implementing them. Trump has a workable plan.
I hope you will stay reasonably in good health. I consider myself fortunate in discovering daily exercise when I was still in my 50’s and was able to walk without problems. I am convinced it is the best method to stay healthy for seniors. Push yourself the best you can to stay active. The body is an amazing machine which can heal and get stronger.
I have health insurance from ex-employer and it also covers my 2 kids who are still under age 26. The premiums have gone up from $85 to $431 over 17 years. It does cover dental also. We are quite happy with it when compared to Obamacare and it’s high deductibles.
We both are on Medicare and Tricare Life as hubby is Navy Ret. SCPO over 65. I’m 68 and he’s 77. We still get ads for enrollment into one of these failing programs every few days. It’s worse around the open enrollment time. Still get those aarp enrollment things too, despite my sending them back full of their crap and some extra to raise postage cost to them. Even the dead get them.
Don’t send them back.
Use them for a pleasant cookout fire starter..............
>
I can’t find the article that says states can’t make laws that medical services cannot be denied, because that is the law in 50 states. I just love how you purest completely ignore reality, but then it has worked so well for you so far, eh?
>
Ah, yes, the ‘purists’. That’s the problem in today’s world...not ENOUGH govt intervention in our lives, biz, etc. or people fighting against the same. The ‘reality’ of using govt to STEAL, by end of a gun. Yep, the *horror* of expecting our inalienable Rights to be protected and upheld.
How’s that going for the taxpayers when States meddle\create monopolies: ‘win. wage’, ‘welfare’, sanctuary cities, utilities\cable, sports, public-unions, etc. Democracy is GREAT, no?! Kelo was such a ‘success’, right?
Don’t recall, after making establishing religion X (back in the day), making the same MANDATORY too (as the 1st *only* states that CONGRESS cannot). As you suggest, they have the *right*, let alone the POWER, no?
In this case, Fed AND States create ‘minimum standards’ for a product, NOT of their making, that takes from one to give to another, not of the choosing of either party and regardless of the costs to either. It’s the reason insurance plans for males contain contraception\birth, all contain minimums for ‘mental health’\abuse and the like. WHY again are these forced upon the supplier and the end-user?? BECAUSE OF GOVT.
How much CHEAPER *COULD* insurance be if govt got the hell out of the way?
The ‘reality’ is we no longer adhere to the Constitution. Yet, you expect those being fleeced to enjoy the forced submission (I’ll presume it’s your bull being gored some way\shape\matter\form to bring out the pom-poms thusly).
If that’s how the (C) view the Constitution, no wonder the moniker means sh!t.
So now that you realize that you were talking complete crap, once I pointed it out that is. You just bounce off into another tangent about something you know even less about? I’ll not allow you to waste any more of my time.
We don’t sit out, to many stinging bugs I’m allergic to. It’s been so hot and humid even grilling out is rough on seniors, even the 2 dogs don’t like the heat. So much easier and fun to send aarp’s crap back to them with the words commies written on it that they have to pay the postage on, wasting their dollars. Will have to start on the GOP ORGs next.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.