Author Archive: Emily Curran

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

Posted by

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.

States’ Latest ACA Lawsuit Threatens to Reignite “Repeal-Without-Replace” – With Real Consequences for Stakeholders

Posted by

Earlier today, California, along with 15 state attorneys general filed a motion to intervene in the latest ACA lawsuit, where governors and attorneys general from 20 other states are alleging that the law is unconstitutional. CHIR’s Emily Curran explains how the lawsuit, if successful, is tantamount to ACA “repeal-without-replacement,” resulting in significant losses in coverage and financial harm.

State Regulators Keep a Watchful Eye on Healthcare Companies’ Federal Tax Cut “Windfalls”

Posted by

In December, President Trump signed the Republican tax reform bill into law, which among other things, eliminates the health insurance mandate penalty and reduces the corporate tax rate from 35 to 21 percent. The bill provides for $1.5 trillion in tax cuts over the next decade, mostly benefiting high-income earners and corporations, which Republicans hope will stimulate economic growth. Now, a few months into effect health care companies are taking stock of how the tax law benefits their bottom line and how to best invest the savings for future success. CHIR’s Emily Curran looks into how some state regulators are reacting.

States Work to Preserve Affordable Care Act Progress amidst Federal Disorder

Posted by

It’s been a bumpy year for state insurance and marketplace officials, thanks to considerable uncertainty over the future of the ACA. CHIR’s Emily Curran highlights recent action suggesting that some states may be poised to reassert their authority over their insurance markets, as they work to maintain the ACA’s coverage gains and keep their markets stable.

Relaxing the ACA’s Regulations: Stakeholders Respond to HHS’ Request for Information: Part 1—Insurers

Posted by

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services asked this spring for public comments on potential changes to the Affordable Care Act. They received over 3,270 comments from a wide range of stakeholders. To better understand concerns related to the law, CHIR experts pulled a sample of comments from health insurers, state regulators, and consumer advocates. In Part 1 of this three-part series, Emily Curran reviews the recommendations of large and small insurers.

Court Dismisses Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina’s Risk Corridor Lawsuit—What About the Other Risk Cases?

Posted by

On April 18, the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissed Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina’s risk corridor lawsuit, ruling that the insurer’s claim was premature. CHIR’s Emily Curran delves into this and other lawsuits filed by health insurers across the country, all of whom seek to recoup critical premium stabilization funding from the federal government.

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.