The 2018 midterm election results mean the U.S. House of Representatives will be under new leadership in January. Our CHIR experts get out their crystal balls and consider what this might mean for legislative action on private health insurance next year.
With open enrollment into the Affordable Care Act marketplaces beginning November 1st, there will be considerable divergence among states in the amount of information and personalized assistance consumers receive about coverage options. While the federally run marketplace has dramatically cut back its investments in both advertising and the Navigator program, the state-based marketplaces are making big investments in those activities. In their latest To The Point blog for the Commonwealth Fund, CHIR’s Sabrina Corlette and Rachel Schwab discuss the findings from a new survey of state-based marketplaces.
Last month, the Board of New Mexico’s health insurance exchange voted to transition from HealthCare.gov to a state-based exchange. The state will undertake the task of building its own eligibility and enrollment platform with the hopes of launching a website in time for the 2021 plan year. This is the same exchange that, in 2015, called the federal platform HealthCare.gov the “safest, most risk-free way to proceed.” So, what changed? CHIR’s Rachel Schwab looks at the reasons behind the growing call to leave HealthCare.gov.
Insurers have started to propose some pretty eye-popping premium increases for Affordable Care Act coverage in 2019. CHIR expert Sabrina Corlette dug deep into the companies’ actuarial memos to find out what’s causing the price hikes & found that recent changes in federal policy are making a big difference.
The Trump administration has released a new final rule to govern the Affordable Care Act’s individual and small-group markets, known as the 2019 Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters. The rule includes an expansion of states’ role over the ACA’s health plan benefit and affordability provisions. In her latest Expert Perspective for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s State Health and Value Strategies Program, Sabrina Corlette untangles the rule and its implications for state decision-makers.
Researchers from Georgetown CHIR and the Urban Institute have released a new report documenting the findings from a series of interviews with insurers participating in the Affordable Care Act marketplaces. We share a summary of key takeaways here.
For decades, elite “concierge” practices have been providing easy access to primary care in return for several thousand dollars in retainer fees. Recently we’ve seen the emergence of more affordable versions of this arrangement, with monthly fees that cost far less than the average ACA marketplace plan premium. At first blush, these arrangements, frequently called “direct primary care arrangements” (DPCAs), might seem like a way to ensure access to health care services in the face of rising health insurance premiums. CHIR’s Maanasa Kona explains why this is not always the case.
Last week Blue Cross of Idaho filed the first “state-based” health plans, products that don’t comply with the Affordable Care Act’s requirements for coverage offered on the individual market. When a state can’t or won’t enforce federal law, the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) is supposed to step in. CHIR’s Rachel Schwab outlines HHS’ authority to protect the rule of law and ensure that Idaho consumers continue to receive the benefits they are promised under the ACA.
Idaho has just published rules for new, “state-based” health plans that are exempt from many of the Affordable Care Act protections for people with pre-existing conditions. CHIR’s Sabrina Corlette examines the legality of Idaho’s action, as well as its potential impact on consumers and the health insurance marketplace.
Blink and you may have missed it – open enrollment for HealthCare.gov was much shorter this year and ended on December 15th. But many people will have extra time to sign up if they’re in a plan that’s being discontinued. CHIR’s Sandy Ahn answers some frequently asked questions about consumers’ options if they’re in this circumstance.
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.
