Affordable Care Act Scene 2 - Insurance Premiums

<p>

</p>

<p>Linky? And do I understand this correctly, that the CBO predicts that there will be 4 million formerly uninsured people who signed up on the exchanges?</p>

<p>Of course I have a linky. For something like this I have to have a linky. :slight_smile:
Page 3.
<a href=“http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43900-2014-02-ACAtables.pdf”>http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43900-2014-02-ACAtables.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>There is rounding which is why the numbers dont add up. Some people are going to go to medicaid. I dont think it is a big number.</p>

<p>These deductions in newly insured were always there. I forgot about them. :slight_smile:
We are very close to CBO projections. I think we are higher than the 6 million obviously. Otherwise, I wouldnt have bet more than 6.3 million. We also have newly insured signing up off exchange.</p>

<p>The paid number is around 90 percent now for those that have bills due. The number is going to dip pretty good because we are going to have well over 1 million sign ups the last 15 days of March. Their bills are not due until the Apr 26 or so. </p>

<p>So, if we read about the paid percentage not being high enough, we know the writer is ignorant or a liar. Or both.</p>

<p>By far the most interesting number in that document is the prediction of the rise in total number of people covered. CBO predicts 13 million more people are covered this year, rising to 25 million the third year. (Page 3, Effects of the Affordable Care Act on Health Insurance Coverage). </p>

<p>As dstark points out, the CBO predicts a drop of 2 million in the people covered by off-exchange private insurance. Most of those people would be people who had insurance last year, and and bought on the exchange this year because they are eligible or might be eligible for subsidies.</p>

<p>This is getting into the weeds, but I wondered how much someone could save by getting a Catastrophic plan instead of a Bronze plan.</p>

<p>I picked a few cities off the top of my head: Princeton NJ, Palo Alto CA, Boscobel WI, Minneapolis MN, Tampa FL, Reno NV, Spokane WA, Anaheim CA, Austin TX, McAllen TX, El Paso TX. I make no claim that these are representative.</p>

<p>I looked at the prices of Catastrophic Plans for all these areas, for a 25 year old non-smoker, and compared them to the prices for the cheapest Bronze plan offered by the same insurer. I computed the ratio of Catastrophic to Bronze.</p>

<p>The median ratio was 86%, and the average ratio was also 86%. This suggests to me that the actuarial value of a Catastrophic plan is about 50%, and it is impossible (on average) to offer a plan with an actuarial value of less than about 50% and still cover what the law requires to be covered. </p>

<p>Other notes: Minneapolis is the cheapest area of the ones I picked. In Minneapolis, the cheapest Catastrophic was $77 and the cheapest Bronze $91; the next cheapest was McAllen, $93/$129.</p>

<p>For several companies, Catastrophic was no cheaper than Bronze. Florida Blue’s Catastrophic was 9% more than their cheapest Bronze. Kaiser sells Bronze and Catastrophic for the same price in both the Kaiser areas I looked at. </p>

<p>Blue Cross Blue Shield Texas sells their Catastrophic plans for about 30% more (!) than their cheapest Bronze plans. I suspect those Catastrophic plans might be GP-style plans, with great provider networks, whereas the Bronze plans have narrower networks.</p>

<p>[edited to add three Texas cities including notoriously expensive McAllen, which is not expensive for health insurance]</p>

<p>One reason why a law like obamacare can actually get enacted and even defended by one political party and its devotees is because we have a uninformed, poorly educated electorate that has no idea the harm this law is inflicting on the country. </p>

<p>In a study published the other day, 42% of people surveyed could not describe a deductible and 39% didn’t understand the relationship between a premium and a deductible. I suppose when you have an immigration policy (or lack of policy) that brings the poorest and most uneducated people to this country and a public educational system that routinely graduates kids who are functionally illiterate, it is not surprising we end up with laws like this.</p>

<p><a href=“Health insurance basics stump many Obamacare shoppers, survey finds”>Health insurance basics stump many Obamacare shoppers, survey finds;

<p>Most of us struggle though aspects of this. Or our taxes, retirement, college choices, mortgage scenarios, etc. it’snot just the province of one segment of society. In some of your anecdotes, people didn’t fully understand, either. So if you really care you educate. Not throw out the baby. </p>

<p>Have a look at the US states graph on this page:</p>

<p><a href=“https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/affordable-care-act/price-index”>https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/affordable-care-act/price-index&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>State private insurance prices:</p>

<p>Low: Minnesota, Utah, Kansas, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Hawaii, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan
Medium low: Oregon, Texas, New Mexico, Idaho, Nebraska, Arizona, Missouri, West Virginia, North Carolina, Virginia, Nevada, Louisiana, Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Missouri
Medium: California, Washington, South Carolina, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Ohio
Medium high: New York, Indiana, New Hampshire, Wisconsin
High: Alaska</p>

<p>This just seems random to me. Minnesota is low, Michigan is low, but right between them Wisconsin is one of the highest, and Indiana is also one of the highest. </p>

<p>High cost of living states tend to be higher on the list, but then look at Hawaii, one of the highest cost of living states, but with one of the lowest insurance costs.</p>

<p>CF, I wonder how if it makes a difference who is the biggest insurer in that state. Here in MI, it’s BCBS which has been cheaper and better than most of its competitors for at least the last 10 years. </p>

<p>Blue Cross and Blue Shield aren’t even the same insurer in California. Anthem (Wellpoint) has the Blue Cross franchise, and then Blue Shield of California has the Blue Shield franchise.</p>

<p>Huh, that’s interesting. I didn’t know that. I knew that they used to be two separate agencies (IIRC, one for hospitals and one for doctors) but I thought that they had merged everywhere. </p>

<p>In that case, it does seem strange how random they are. </p>

<p>All of those states have high prices, some are just higher than others. The map was comparing prices; it was not meant to suggest that any of the premiums were actually low on an absolute basis. Whether I am paying $600 or $700 a month, they’re both high. It would be interesting to compare the sufficiency of the networks, but that’s another issue.</p>

<p>I wasn’t commenting on whether the premiums were too high. We can debate that. </p>

<p>But it’s indisputable that people are paying more for insurance for insurance in Wisconsin than in Michigan or Minnesota. Why? I suspect they were paying more in Wisconsin pre-ACA. Why? Georgia is cheaper than South Carolina. Why?</p>

<p>Deleted</p>

<p>D2, a senior, got a job offer today. Crappy starting pay, she’ll work hard, but she liked what she saw. After some period, they will offer her insurance. I’ve already replayed the numbers, to see the impact on the rest of the family. Also ran into another friend today who is going to look at the exchange tomorrow (nothing like last minute, eh?) She’ll qualify for Medicaid. </p>

<p>LF - congratulations to your D. A job is a job is a job!</p>

<p>What is the new standard on the wait, used to be 90 days? I am not sure it makes that much more difference anymore since preexisting condition has been phased out of insurance clauses.</p>

<p>My daughter’s insurance started immediately at her first job out of college - she had insurance as of day #1. But for her next job, she had to wait until the first of the month following a full intervening month – that is, she was told that if she started work the last week of August, she could have coverage effective October 1, but if she waited until the first week of September to start, her coverage wouldn’t start until Nov. 1. That was a problem at the time, because my d. had wanted to give more notice to employer #1 before leaving – fortunately my d… was able to work it with some flex time & overlap in employment – but it was an issue at the time, as the COBRA payment would have been quite hefty.</p>

<p>I’m just mentioning this because this is also one area where ACA might change the dynamic somewhat as people take on new employment or switch employers. It does take some pressure off both the employee and the employer. </p>

<p>I don’t know if any of the posters are aware of this but today the US Court of Appeals heard oral arguments for a case that could be the death knell for Obamacare. The case, Halbig v. Sebelius, will decide if the law intended for subsidies to be given to enrollees of the federal exchanges. The law was written so that only state-run exchanges qualified for federal subsidies. The govt said it was the intention of the law to provide subsidies to all exchanges regardless of how it was drafted. </p>

<p>Interestingly, of the three judges who will decide this case (based on their responses to the oral arguments) two are clearly dubious of the govt’s arguments, and the third is supportive. This could be a game-changer.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/03/federal-appeals-court-hearing-oral-arguments-on-the-legality-of-millions-of-obamacare-subsidies/359536/”>http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/03/federal-appeals-court-hearing-oral-arguments-on-the-legality-of-millions-of-obamacare-subsidies/359536/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>GP - As I foreign born naturalized citizen I should not be the one telling you about how the American judicial process works but a verdict from an appeals court and a dollar will buy me a cup of coffee at McDonalds.</p>

<p>Nothing will be decided until Supremes decide it.</p>

<p>Texas, I agree but a loss for the supporters of the law at the Court of Appeals level will carry some weight.</p>

<p>Whatever the Court of Appeals’ decision is, the Supreme Court could refuse to hear the case. That would mean the Court of Appeals’ decision would hold.</p>