<p>Uhm, there are already a few pretty big problems.</p>
<p>The problems are going to get bigger if the date changes to dec 2013.</p>
<p>There wont be enough money…I guess we can raise taxes. :)</p>
<p>No, no, the financing problems wouldn’t be governmental. The problem would be the insurance companies, suddenly stuck with a bunch of sick insured people and not enough healthy people in the risk pools.</p>
<p>CF, come on…I skipped a step. Do you really think the insurance companies are going to be left holding the bag?</p>
<p>I dont. I am sure the lobbying has already started. :)</p>
<p>Somewhere in DC tonight there is some crazy politicing going on. Right now the republicans have clean hands on Obamacare. But if they vote with the Blue Dog/vulnerable Dems to extend or modify ACA… well then they were the one who made it finacially unstable.</p>
<p>The conversations going on right now must be facinating. A decade from now we will realize we were living through interesting times.</p>
<p>I wonder what is going on in insurance company boardrooms. Pull out of the exchanges all together in 2015?</p>
<p>
The fiscally smart decision for the insurance companies, even if Congress agrees to change the grandfather date would be to continue on the current course of cancellations. The programming changes these companies would have to make would cost loads of money. Thus, as I said before, this ‘fix’ will have to be a joint effort between Congress and the insurance companies. I fear the average citizen will be the one left holding the proverbial bag, so to speak.</p>
<p>I have heard no proposal so far that involves the Feds reimbursing insurance companies. Can you point me to one?</p>
<p>Well, if I was Queen of the World whoever broke it would be paying to fix it. LOL!</p>
<p>Aren’t the insurance companies currently salivating over subsidies. If they don’t get them, then what? Another fix?</p>
<p>I agree southbel; if you make it optional the insurance companies would continue to cancel policies. I hope they don’t make it optional.</p>
<p>Edit: If had to bet any money on this I would expect it to be some fig leaf solution that doesn’t really fix the problem.</p>
<p>If I were running an insurance company and this “fix” passed I’d pull out of the individual market in 2014. January 1, 2014.That’s it, sorry, all policies cancelled.</p>
<p>CF…come on…</p>
<p>This proposal may not happen. It would be very difficult to enact. </p>
<p>[Can</a> Obama fix Obamacare?](<a href=“Can Obama fix Obamacare?”>Can Obama fix Obamacare?)</p>
<p>Blow me over with an anchovy if there isnt a VP tasked at every one of the top 5 companies who is receiving weekly reports on each state market and plotting ways to make them profitable. With several States pumping $20M+ into marketing there is probably free money to skim. </p>
<p>The board room decision is easy (expect the politics)- jack premiums to the level where the market is profitable. If no one buys… c’est la guerre. If a politician complains, increase donations until he shuts up.</p>
<p>Insurance companies can’t raise prices. They’ve already announced prices.</p>
<p>I think it would be pretty simple to fix this even if the website doesn’t work. Aren’t the insurance companies now selling the same policies available on the ACA website, for the same price? Plus, people don’t need to go on the ACA website to sign up for Medicaid.</p>
<p>Seems like all they’d have to do is put out a calculator for each state to estimate the subsidy (with the caveat that it is merely an estimate). Then tell people to go up and sign up with the insurance companies who are offering the appropriate policies on their websites (which seem to be working just fine), and they can file for the subsidy, hopefully to be processed soon enough, or with the next years taxes. Perhaps they can offer some sort of emergency subsidy to be sent directly to the insurance company, only for those who are desperate and can’t come up with any money.</p>
<p>It seems like these sites aren’t going to be fixed soon enough, but with a minor change like this, at least people would have insurance.</p>
<p>busdriver11 - Who would manage the subsidy? States, federal gov’t? I get that the subsidy is currently managed by the Feds but now the Feds would have to manage it by person instead of through a de facto pre-qualifying site (e.g. healthcare.gov).</p>
<p>Also, by doing it on the back end, I suspect there are many people who would not be able to afford the fully loaded premium cost.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>2014 you naive soul. Large companies haven’t committed themselves to exposure, just to data gathering.</p>
<p>busdriver, I agree with you – the fix is to expand ways that people can sign up for subsidy-eligible policies.</p>
<p>One problem with the law as written is that even if you do not opt for an advance subsidy (and simply want to wait for a possible tax credit or refund when you file your taxes down the line) – you aren’t eligible unless you’ve purchased via the exchange. I don’t know how many middle-income people are aware of that, but that doesn’t really make much sense. I’ve already signed up via my exchange (with subsidy eligibility), but I probably would have been just as happy to let my insurance company go with the automatic rollover to the new policy if my eligibility for a tax rebate was preserved. (Same policy: only difference is that I signed up via Covered California rather than directly with Blue Shield – but I haven’t paid yet because Blue Shield is supposed to bill me, and they haven’t. Who knows how that part will work out.)</p>
<p>So that’s one part of the bottleneck that could easily be resolved, and doesn’t even need advance approval of incomes. It wouldn’t solve the problem for those who literally could not afford to pay for insurance without the advance subsidy, but it certainly would help those who qualify for only small subsidies, or for those who could manage to pay the bills.</p>
<p>
But there are some – busdriver’s suggestion wouldn’t eliminate the problem, but it would relieve pressure – kind of like opening up extra express registers at the supermarket.</p>
<p>Calmom, interesting.</p>