Stakeholder Views on the Proposed Short-Term Plan Insurance Rule: Key Takeaways from Our Review of Comment Letters

In February, the Trump administration published a proposed rule to expand the availability of short-term, limited duration insurance by relaxing federal restrictions put in place by the Obama administration. Federal agencies received over 9,000 comments in response. In a four-part blog series, CHIR dug into comments to evaluate the proposed rule’s potential impact on consumers, major medical insurers, states, and sellers of short-term plans. Here’s what we found. Continue reading

Stakeholders Respond to the Proposed Short-Term, Limited-Duration Insurance Rule. Part II: Major Medical Insurers

The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Treasury received over 9,000 comments on their proposed rule, which aims to expand the availability of short-term, limited duration insurance. CHIR reviewed comments submitted by health care stakeholders to better understand industry reactions to the proposal. In part two of this four-part series, CHIR’s Emily Curran analyzes comments from nine major medical insurers and associations. Continue reading

Stakeholders Respond to the Proposed Short-Term, Limited Duration Insurance Rule. Part I: Consumer Advocates

Earlier this year, the Trump administration proposed rules to relax federal restrictions on short-term, limited duration insurance. After a 60-day comment period, the Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Labor (DOL) and Treasury received over 9,000 comments from individuals, organizations, and government officials. To understand the potential impact of the proposals, CHIR reviewed comments from various stakeholder groups. For the first blog in our four-part series, CHIR’s Rachel Schwab examines comments submitted by consumer and patient organizations. Continue reading

A Mother’s Day Gift Basket from Congress and the Trump Administration

This Mother’s Day, both Congress and the Trump administration have put together a special gift basket of policies that continue to threaten access to health care for women, mothers, and families everywhere. From federal funding cuts to weaker benefit requirements, CHIR’s Rachel Schwab and Dania Palanker unwrap the presents and assess their potential impact on coverage. Continue reading

States Leaning In: Washington

Since the Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010, states have embraced the law to varying degrees. While some states have refused to implement the ACA and actively oppose it, other states have leaned in, stepping up to preserve the consumer protections and market rules in the wake of federal actions to weaken the law. CHIR’s Rachel Schwab examines steps that Washington State has taken to ensure that their residents can continue to obtain affordable, high quality coverage, and how other states can do the same. Continue reading

The Future of the Affordable Care Act under President Trump: Stakeholders Respond to the Proposed Association Health Plan Rule. Part V: Departments of Insurance

In this final blog in our series reviewing stakeholder comments on the Department of Labor’s proposed rule to expand Association Health Plans, CHIR’s Emily Curran summarizes responses from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners and nine state departments of insurance (DOI). While the DOIs expressed some areas of support for the proposed rule, their comments were largely negative, with most expressing deep concerns about the rule’s ambiguity. Continue reading

The Future of the Affordable Care Act under President Trump: Stakeholders Respond to the Proposed Association Health Plan Rule. Part III: Insurers

The U.S. Department of Labor received over 900 comments on its proposed rule, which aims to promote the growth of Association Health Plans. In this third blog of our series examining feedback from stakeholders, we summarize comments from ten of the largest health insurers and associations. Continue reading

How Did State-Run Health Insurance Marketplaces Fare in 2017?

In a new Commonwealth Fund issue brief, CHIR’s Justin Giovannelli and Emily Curran interviewed leadership staff of 15 of the 17 state-run marketplaces to understand how states on the forefront of health reform perceived and responded to federal policy changes and political uncertainty in 2017. Their research finds that federal administrative actions and repeal efforts created confusion and uncertainty in 2017 that negatively affected state-run markets. Continue reading

The Future of the Affordable Care Act under President Trump: Stakeholders Respond to the Proposed Association Health Plan Rule. Part I: State Attorneys General

The Trump administration has proposed major changes to the regulation of Association Health Plans (AHPs). To understand the potential impact of these proposals on consumers, employers, insurers, and states, CHIR reviewed comments submitted to the U.S. Department of Labor by various stakeholder groups. For the first blog in our series, CHIR’s Rachel Schwab examines comments submitted by eighteen state attorneys general, officials who, thanks to their consumer protection responsibilities, have unique insights into the potential risks and benefits of AHPs. Continue reading