Earlier this summer, the Biden administration announced updated guidance on medical debt. In a new blog post for the Commonwealth Fund, CHIR faculty, Maanasa Kona, reviews recent state action on medical debt and what this landscape looks like moving forward.
A debate is looming for the U.S. Congress – whether or not to extend enhanced premium tax credits for Affordable Care Act insurance coverage. In their latest article for Health Affairs, Jason Levitis, Sabrina Corlette, and Claire O’Brien identify several reasons Congress needs to act as soon as possible to preserve coverage and prevent a spike in premiums.
A recently enacted law creates a streamlined pathway to health insurance for individuals who are found ineligible for Medi-Cal but are likely eligible for Marketplace subsidies. In a recent report, CHIR experts assess the critical policy and operational decisions to implement the program and how these choices have affected consumers’ coverage transitions.
The No Surprises Act (NSA) protects consumers from unexpected medical bills, with disputes between payers and providers settled through independent dispute resolution (IDR). CHIR’s Jack Hoadley and Kennah Watts review the latest results from the IDR process and discuss the ongoing legal and regulatory challenges affecting the NSA.
In response to widespread concerns about the impact of medical debt, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) proposed a rule in June 2024 aimed at limiting the influence of medical debt on credit reports and preventing certain debt collection practices. Despite recent changes by credit agencies to exclude small medical debts from reports, many Americans still face significant medical debt, particularly affecting vulnerable populations. In a recent piece for Health Affairs Forefront, Georgetown experts examine this proposed rule and the effect it could have on consumers.
The 2008 Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) is the primary federal law protecting access to behavioral health care for privately insured Americans. In a new issue brief for the Commonwealth Fund, CHIR experts interviewed insurance regulators in ten states to identify the tools state regulators are using for MHPAEA oversight and enforcement, as well as the barriers they are facing.
Health insurers use of prior authorization appears to be on the rise. A recent report by CHIR researchers examines four states’ prior authorization policies for the commercial market to identify potential reform strategies to ease provider burden and improve patient access without also increasing insurers’ costs.
While there is some movement toward improved health care provider ownership transparency at the federal level and in some states, more attention is warranted given increasingly complex and obscured provider ownership structures and the impact they can have on health care prices, access, and quality. In a recent piece for Health Affairs Forefront, CHIR experts Stacey Pogue and Nadia Stovicek analyze efforts to improve ownership transparency at the state and federal levels.
Last month CHIR soaked up the sun and the latest in health policy research. This month we read studies that examined hospital mergers’ impact on the economy, reviewed insurance coverage rates during various policy periods, and analyzed the benefits of enhanced premium tax credits.
Two national health insurers recently discussed their plans to invest in “ICHRAs,” tax advantaged accounts that workers use to purchase individual market health insurance. CHIR’s Hanan Rakine explores what a greater use of ICHRAs could mean for workers, and for the stability of insurance markets.
The opinions expressed here are solely those of the individual blog post authors and do not represent the views of Georgetown University, the Center on Health Insurance Reforms, any organization that the author is affiliated with, or the opinions of any other author who publishes on this blog.
