In a soon to be finalized “market stabilization” rule, the Trump Administration has proposed a new approach to the oversight of health plan network adequacy. Sabrina Corlette reviews the administration’s revised stance and what it could mean for state-level enforcement, and for the consumers enrolled in marketplace plans.
For the time being, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is the “law of the land.” But increasing uncertainty about the policy future has left the individual insurance market at risk and could result in fewer choices and higher premiums, In the past, Congress has demonstrated that it can arrive at bipartisan solutions to tackle insurance market challenges and help consumers. CHIR’s Sabrina Corlette outlines what a common sense ACA reform package could look like.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill to promote federally certified association health plans (AHPs) on March 22, 2017. Widely seen as a “second phase” of Affordable Care Act repeal, the AHP proposal poses significant risks for small employers and would hinder states’ ability to protect their consumers. In their latest post for The Commonwealth Fund, Kevin Lucia and Sabrina Corlette take a look at the bill and what it would mean for the small business health insurance market.
While all eyes were on the House reconciliation bill to repeal and replace parts of the ACA, another House committee advanced three bills that could have a far-reaching impact on people with employer-based coverage. CHIR experts take a look.
In February, the Department of Health & Human Services released proposed rules affecting the ACA’s health insurance marketplaces. In response, they received close to 4,000 public comments. In the first of a series of three posts examining reactions among health care stakeholders, CHIR’s Emily Curran assesses the reaction of insurance companies.
State leaders have been heartened by statements from the new President and Congressional leaders that ACA replacement plans will give them more autonomy over their health insurance markets. But is that really true? In a post for the Health Affairs blog, CHIR experts Sabrina Corlette and Kevin Lucia examine the fine print of House and Senate replacement plans and find that they broadly preempt state authority.
As our country grapples with an “unprecedented opioid epidemic,” Congress is taking steps to take away an important tool to fight it — the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In a post for the Health Affairs blog, CHIR expert Dania Palanker and Urban Institute researchers Lisa Clemans-Cope and Jane Wishner assess policies and programs under the ACA that have helped tackle the opioid crisis and what could be lost if they are repealed.
Shortly after the election, Congress asked state officials to provide input on repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act. CHIR expert Sabrina Corlette tracked down 34 of those letters, and found the responses – particularly from states with Republican leaders – to not not always be what she expected. She shared her top takeaways here.
Amid an uncertain future for the Affordable Care Act, insurers face crucial decisions whether to remain in the market and how to price their plans. In their latest issue brief for the Urban Institute, CHIR experts report on interviews with a wide range of insurers participating in the individual market in 28 states.
What will happen if the Affordable Care Act is repealed without a replacement? In their latest article for The Commonwealth Fund, CHIR experts Justin Giovannelli and Kevin Lucia find that it could look a lot like the regulatory landscape that existed in several states that tried to enact health reform in the past. The lessons from those experiences are grim.
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.
