There are three insurance carriers offering ACA-compliant individual market plans in West Virginia: CareSource, Highmark BCBS and Optum, although Optum has barely any enrollees at all, and the other two combined only total around 26,000 people in the state.
The final, approved average unsubsdized premiums for 2020 haven't changed from the requested rates--the weighted statewide average is a 6.7% increase.
Nothing terribly noteworthy about any of this, except that with that 6.7% increase, West Virginia has just taken the title for Most Expensive Obamacare Premiums in the Country, with average premiums averaging $990/month per enrollee, or nearly $12,000/year apiece.
This record was held by Wyoming last year (prior to that I believe Alaska had by far the highest rates in the country, until they instituted their ACA reinsurance waiver a few years back, which reduced full-price premiums by a good 25% or so).
Back in mid-August, I plugged in the preliminary 2020 individual market rate change requests for unsubsidized enrollees in Texas. Unfortunately, at the time I only had hard enrollment data for some of the carriers, which meant I could only run a "semi-weighted" statewide average, which came in at +0.8%.
Since then, I've managed to find the enrollment data for the rest of the carriers as well...and yesterday CMS posted the final, approved 2020 rate changes, allowing me to run the complete, final, fully-weighted average. In the end rates in Texas are dropping by 1.4%:
Mississippi once again has two carriers offering ACA-compliant individual market coverage in 2020: Ambetter of Magnolia, which holds 58% of the market, and Blue Cross Blue Shield with the other 42%. Earlier this year they were asking for average rate hikes of 3.0% and 2.3% respectively, but Ambetter's final/approved rates are coming in at a 1.1% reduction, bringing the overall average down to a mere 0.3% rate hike.
Not much to this one: Wyoming has just a single carrier selling ACA-compliant individual market policies to their 577,000 residents, Blue Cross Blue Shield...which is raising rates 1.6% on average for 2020. No change from their requested increase a few months earlier.
North Carolina has three individual market carriers in 2019. For 2020, that's increasing to four, as Bright Health Care is expanding into the NC market. The other three carriers (Blue Cross Blue Shield has a near monopoly at the moment) had requested average unsubsidized rate drops of 5.3% previously; in the end the final rates are dropping slightly more, to -5.6%.
Missouri's final/approved avg. 2020 unsubsidized premium rate changes have finally been posted by CMS. For the most part they're following the same pattern as most other states this year with modest increases or decreases and a statewide weighted average decrease of 2.0% year over year. On average, unsubsidized ACA enrollees should pay about $13/month less next year than they are today.
However, what is noteworthy is that not one, not two but three new insurance carriers are entering the MO individual market this fall, bringing the total up to seven operating statewide: Cox Health Systems, Oscar Insurance (which was cofounded by Jared Kushner's brother, FWIW) and SSM Health Insurance.
When I first ran the preliminary 2020 avg. rate hike numbers for Nebraska in August, the sole carrier offering ACA-compliant policies in the state (Medica) was planning on reducing their average premiums by 5.3%. Yesterday the final, approved rates were posted by CMS, and unsubsidized 2020 premiums will be even lower, by 6.9% on average.
For 2020, Bright Health is joining the Nebraska exchange.
I'm not sure how this happened, but it looks like I missed posting about South Dakota's requested 2020 premium rate filings. No matter, though, because the approved avg. rate increases (for unsubsidized enrollees) are exactly the same as what Avera Health Plan and Sanford Health Plan asked for anyway.
Statewide, South Dakota is looking at 6.5% average hikes for 2020.
Utah's final weighted average rate increase is a bit tricky. On the one hand, I have the hard enrollment numbers for three of the five carriers offering ACA-compliant individual market policies. On the other hand, I have no idea what the numbers are for the other two...both of which happen to have the lowest average rate drops in the state (BridgeSpan and Molina).
The weighted average of the other three carriers is a 2.3% reduction. Assuming the other two have, say, 20,000 enrollees apiece, that would knock it down another 1.5 points or so, but until I have a better idea of how many enrollees those carriers have I'll stick with the -2.3% figure.
Oklahoma has three carriers on the Individual Market these days. Once again, all three rate filing memos are redacted, but I was able to dig up the number of current policy holders for one of them (CommunityCare HMO).
The final/approved rate changes are exactly the same as the requested changes from a few months back, but I've managed to lock down the actual enrollment numbers for two of the three carriers. Assuming I'm close on the third one (Medica), the weighted average rate increase statewide should be around 2.7%:
At the time, I concluded that the weighted average change marketwide was a 2.1% reduction in premiums compared to 2019, for around 333,000 Michiganders on the Indy market. This would mean roughly a $10 average premium reduction per unsubsidized enrollee per month, or $122 per year:
Massachusetts, which is arguably the original birthplace of the ACA depending on your point of view (the general "3-legged stool" structure originated here, but the ACA itself also has a lot of other provisions which are quite different), has ten different carriers participating in the individual market. MA (along with Vermont and the District of Columbia) has merged their Individual and Small Group risk pools for premium setting purposes, so I'm not bothering breaking out the small group market in this case.
Getting a weighted average was a bit tricky. On the one hand, only one or two of the rate filings included actual enrollment data. On the other hand, the Massachusetts Health Connector puts out monthly enrollment reports which do break out the on-exchange numbers by carrier. This allowed me to run a rough breakout of on-exchange MA enrollment. I don't know whether the off-exchange portion has a similar ratio, but I have to assume it does for the moment.
There's only 3 states which are looking at double-digit average unsubsidized premium increases on the 2020 ACA individual market: Indiana, Vermont and Louisiana.
There's actually only 3 carriers offering individual market plans in Louisiana, but there's seven listings because two of the carriers have broken out their submissions into several different product lines. Overall, HMO LA, LA Health Service & Indemnity (Blue Cross Blue Shield of LA) and Vantage Health Plan are requesting average premium increases of 11.7% statewide.
I didn't have the actual enrollment data for the individual carriers when I ran the numbers for Kansas in August, so I had to go with an unweighted average unsubsidized 2020 premium rate change. At the time, that came in at a 3.1% reduction.
Since then, I've dug up the hard enrollment numbers, and just this morning CMS finally posted the final, approved 2020 rate changes. The weighted average comes in at a slight increase o 0.3% statewide:
When I ran the numbers for Iowa's preliminary avg. 2020 unsubsidized individual market rate changes, I had to use an unweighted average reduction of around 3.3%. However, knowing the relative market share of each carrier can make a big difference.
Case in point: It turns out that Medica holds something like 97% of Iowa's ACA-compliant market...whcih means the 11.3% rate drop by Medica heavily weighs the overall average. Wellmark is raising their rates by about 4.7%, but that only nudges the statewide weighted average to a 10.8% reduction overall.
When I ran the preliminary 2020 average unsubsidized premium rate change requests for Illinois in early August, I was frustrated because I had no idea what the actual enrollment numbers for the individual carriers were, making it impossible to run a weighted average change. I had to go with an unweighted average increase of 1.4% statewide.
Fortunately, since then, not only have the final rate changes been approved and posted, I've also acquired the enrollment data, allowing for a weighted average. In the end, average unsubsidized premiums are dropping ever so slightly (0.3%)...versus going up ever so slightly (0.1%) statewide.
HMSA's average dropped from a 1.6% reduction to a 3.2% reduction, while Kaiser, which had been asking for a very slight increase, will actually be lowering rates by around 5.4% in 2020.
After several years with four carriers participating in their ACA individual market, the Peach State is gaining not one but two additional carriers this year: CareSource and Oscar are joining Alliant, Ambetter/Centene, Blue Cross Blue Shield and Kaiser.
Today, however, CMS has posted the final/approved rate changes, and three of the four carriers already on the Georgia market (Alliant, Ambetter/Centene and Kaiser) are looking at slightly lower rates than they had requested. The fourth, Blue Cross Blue Shield, is bumping up their rates by an additional percentage point. Overall, Georgia carriers are dropping unsubsidized premiums by 0.9%.
When I ran the preliminary 2020 rate changes for unsubsidized ACA policies in Alaska back in August, it was pretty easy to do...there's only a single carrier offering ACA-compliant individual market policies for 2019, which means no weighting is required. Furthermore, Premera Blue Cross Blue Shield is basically keeping their rates flat for 2020 anyway.
Moda is re-entering the market for 2020, but there's no "rate change" for them since there's no base premiums to measure against year over year.
Anyway, CMS just posted the final, approved rate changes, and Premera's number is ever so slightly higher than it was: They went from a 0.05% reduction to...a 0.03% reduction.
When I first ran the preliminary 2020 ACA premium rate filing requests for Alabama in August, I came up with a weighted average increase of 3.9%.
CMS has just posted the final, approved rates for Alabama's 2 carriers (Blue Cross Blue Shield and Bright Health). Both carriers had their requested rate hikes approved without any changes, but the final weighted average for unsubsidized enrollees still dropped a bit to 3.3%...because I had the wrong market share ratios. It looks like Bright has an even smaller share of the market than I thought (less than 1%), bringing the weighted average down a bit.
Back in March I wrote an analysis of H.R.1868, the House Democrats bill which comprises the core of the larger H.R.1884 "ACA 2.0" bill. H.R.1884 includes a suite of about a dozen provisions to protect, repair and strengthen the ACA, but the House Dems also broke the larger piece of legislation down into a dozen smaller bills as well.
Some of these "mini-ACA 2.0" bills only make minor improvements to the law, or in ways which are important but would take a few years to see obvious results. Others, however, make huge improvements and would be immediately obvious, and of those, the single most dramatic and important one is H.R.1868.
The official title is the "Health Care Affordability Act of 2019", but I just call both it and H.R.1884 (the "Protecting Pre-Existing Conditions and Making Health Care More Affordable Act of 2019") by the much simpler and more accurate moniker "ACA 2.0".
Back in March I wrote an analysis of H.R.1868, the House Democrats bill which comprises the core of the larger H.R.1884 "ACA 2.0" bill. H.R.1884 includes a suite of about a dozen provisions to protect, repair and strengthen the ACA, but the House Dems also broke the larger piece of legislation down into a dozen smaller bills as well.
Some of these "mini-ACA 2.0" bills only make minor improvements to the law, or in ways which are important but would take a few years to see obvious results. Others, however, make huge improvements and would be immediately obvious, and of those, the single most dramatic and important one is H.R.1868.
The official title is the "Health Care Affordability Act of 2019", but I just call both it and H.R.1884 (the "Protecting Pre-Existing Conditions and Making Health Care More Affordable Act of 2019") by the much simpler and more accurate moniker "ACA 2.0".
It's also important to keep in mind that due to how the ACA's subsidy formula is structured (combined with Silver Loading and Silver Switching), a lower benchmark premium will actually result in higher net premiums for many subsidized enrollees (although it's still good news for those who are unsubsidized). Here's why:
Let's say the unsubsidized premiums for a given enrollee in 2019 is $400 for Bronze, $600 for the benchmark Silver and $700 for Gold.
Let's say that enrollee earns exactly $32K/year (256% FPL), meaning they only have to pay 8.54% of their income for the benchmark plan.
That means they qualify for ($7,200 - $2,733) = $4,467 in subsidies ($372/month).
This would leave them paying $228/month for the benchmark Silver...but they can apply that towards a Bronze plan if they wish so they'd only pay $28/month, or a Gold plan so they only pay $328/month.
A week or so ago I noted that several of the 13 state-based exchanges (remember, Nevada split off of HC.gov this year) had opened up their ACA exchange websites for prospective enrollees to window shop for 2020 coverage. One of them, Covered California, actually started allowing people to enroll already; the rest were for comparison shopping only.
Well, as of today, residents of every state can window shop for 2020 healthcare policies, because HealthCare.Gov has followed suit and is now letting you plug in your household & income info to see what plans are available next year, what the unsubsidized premiums are, and (most importantly for a lot of people) what sort of financial assistance you may be eligible for.
There have been some interesting modifications to the interface and workflow of HC.gov this year:
OK, I know, I know, I'm obsessing over this and I promise to stop soon.
Yesterday I noted that due to a surreal, Rube Goldberg-esque series of events dating back to a different lawsuit filed back in 2014 by then-Speaker of the House John Boehner (!), it's looking very likely that the federal government will have to shell out at least $1.6 billion in Cost Sharing Reduction (CSR) reimbursement payments to over 100 health insurance carriers even though those carriers have already made up most of their losses elsewhere in the form of increased premium rates.
As I've noted several times recently, the "break off of HealthCare.Gov & establish your own state-based ACA exchange" train continues to pick up steam, with the following states having committed to either firing up their own, separate exchange website platform or at the very least going halfway by establishing their own exchange entity (which includes a board of directors, their own marketing/outreach budget, the ability to dictate which plans are allowed onto the exchange and so forth) if they haven't already done so.
HEARING ON "SABOTAGE: THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S ATTACK ON HEALTH CARE"
Date: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 - 10:00am
Location: 2123 Rayburn House Office Building
Subcommittees: 116th Congress, Energy and Commerce (116th Congress), Oversight and Investigations (116th Congress)
The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Energy and Commerce will hold a hearing on Wednesday, October 23, 2019, at 10 a.m. in the John D. Dingell Room, 2123 of the Rayburn House Office Building.
Premiums for HealthCare.gov Plans are down 4 percent but remain unaffordable to non-subsidized consumers
Today, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced that the average premium for the second lowest cost silver plan on HealthCare.gov for a 27 year-old will drop by 4 percent for the 2020 coverage year. Additionally, 20 more issuers will participate in states that use the Federal Health Insurance Exchange platform in 2020 bringing the total to 175 issuers compared to 132 in 2018, delivering more choice and competition for consumers. As a result of the Trump Administration’s actions to stabilize the market, Americans will experience lower premiums along with greater choice for the second consecutive year.
It is with profound grief that I announce that our beloved german shepherd Bella, the best, most wonderful, most gentle good girl in the world, died suddenly this morning at around 11am. She was only 9 years old.
The vet told us she had a pericardial effusion caused by a hemangiosarcoma...an aggressive, cancerous tumor near the heart with no advance signs which likely ruptured in the middle of the night, causing bleeding & fluid to build up in turn leading to vomiting and death.
Apparently there was no way for a veterinarian to detect it until it actually burst unless they knew it was there already. She seemed perfectly fine last evening. At around 2:30am she vomited & defecated profusely.
She seemed better after that...was drinking water and responding pretty well. We decided to see how she was in the morning & take her to the vet if necessary. This morning she was sleeping deeply but seemed to be breathing OK.
A little bit later, though, she took a turn for a worse. We rushed her to the emergency animal clinic up the road. I think she died as we were pulling up. The only 'positive' is that the vet said bringing her in a few hours earlier wouldn't have made any difference.
How Pending Decision on Obamacare Could Upend 2020 Campaign
A federal appeals court’s ruling on the Affordable Care Act could be a huge headache for the president and take Democrats’ focus off Medicare for all.
A federal appeals court in New Orleans is preparing a ruling on the Affordable Care Act that could put the law’s future front and center in the presidential race, overwhelming the current Democratic debate over Medicare for all and reigniting the health care-driven worries that helped Democrats win back the House last year.
I noted yesterday that Virginia is the latest state to consider jumping onboard the State-Based Exchange train, joining Nevada, New Mexico, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maine and possibly Oregon in making the move. Every time I've mentioned Oregon, however, I've had to put a bit of an asterisk on it because I wasn't quite sure whether or not their shift back to their own full tech platform was still a go or not.
Like Nevada, Oregon did have their own full exchange once upon a time. Back in the first ACA Open Enrollment Period from 2013-2014, both states were among those which ran their own exchange websites. Nevada's was developed by Xerox; Oregon's was developed by Oracle.
Back in early August, I ran the preliminary average unsubsidized 2020 individual market rate changes in Arizona. At the time, I had the requested rate changes for both the individual and small group markets, but not the actual enrollment numbers for each carrier, so I had no way of calculating the weighted average. I instead settled for a simple unweighted average, which came in at around a 2.4% reduction in premiums on the individual market and a 5.2% increase on the small group market.
A few days ago, the Arizona Insurance Dept. released the final/approved 2020 rate changes, and there was only one significant change: Health Net of AZ (dba Arizona Complete Health), which had requested a 2.9% rate reduction, will instead be keeping their premiums flat year over year on average. With Health Net holding over 50% of the market share, this meant that the statewide average is a bit higher than I had it previously.
Believe me, I was certain that I had finally gotten this year's Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) rebate project out of my system. I really was.
However, there was one other MLR-related issue which I've wondered about for years: The ACA requires that carriers who sell policies in the Individual and Small Group markets spend at least 80% of the premium revenue on actual medical claims (limiting them to a 20% gross margin), and 85% on the Large Group market (limiting them to 15% gross).
That accounts for around 165 million people, give or take...roughly 50% of the total U.S. population...but what about the other private (or at least semi-private) insurance markets? I'm referring, of course, to privately-administered Medicare and Medicaid plans...aka Medicare Advantage and Managed Care Organizations (MCOs).
Governor Northam Signs Executive Directive to Ensure Access to Affordable, Quality Health Care Coverage for All Virginians
RICHMOND—Governor Ralph Northam today issued Executive Directive Five, directing actions to increase the number of Virginians enrolled in quality, affordable health care coverage.
This year, Medicaid expansion is providing access to health coverage for more than 325,000 eligible Virginians who have enrolled, positively impacting their health. But meaningful health coverage remains unaffordable for too many Virginians, due in large part to federal policies that have increased cost and decreased the quality of available coverage.
Back in July, the Pennsylvania Insurance Dept. posted the preliminary/requested 2020 average premium rate changes for the individual and small group markets. The ACA-compliant individual market average increase was around 4.6%; for small businesses, the average was 9.6%.
Today they finally posted the approved rate changes for each...and the indy market average has dropped to a 3.8% increase, while the small group market has gone up just a hair to 9.7%.
(sigh) Regular readers know two things about me when it comes to Sen. Elizabeth Warren:
I'm generally supporting Elizabeth Warren in the Democratic Primary (not a full endorsement, but I've been strongly leaning her way for awhile now)...
...but I'm also not happy with her seeming 180 degree shift on how to best achieve universal healthcare coverage from her brilliant CNN Town Hall response in March to her cut 'n dried "I'm with Bernie" stance since June.
HOWEVER, for the time being at least, that seems to be where she's decided to lay her marker, so it is what it is.
The single biggest headache she's been dealing with all summer and fall, however, has been the "Will You Raise Taxes On The Middle Class" question which keeps popping up in interviews and the Democratic debates. Bernie Sanders has, to his credit or detriment, stated it plainly: Yes, his plan would indeed raise taxes on households earning more than $29,000/year.
I'm not sure how this slipped by me, but in addition to Covered California already having launched their 2020 Open Enrollment Period yesterday, five other state-based ACA exchanges are already partly open as well. That is, you can shop around, compare prices on next year's health insurance policies and check and see what sort of financial assistance you may be eligible for:
I'm not sure when the other 7 state-based exchanges will launch their 2020 window shopping tools, nor do I know when HealthCare.Gov's window shopping will be open for the other 38 states, although I believe they usually do so about a week ahead of the official November 1st Open Enrollment Period launch date.
I also noted that there's two important points for CA residents to keep in mind starting this Open Enrollment Period:
First: The individual mandate penalty has been reinstated for CA residents. If you don't have qualifying coverage or receive an exemption, you'll have to pay a financial penalty when you file your taxes in 2021, and...
Second: California has expanded and enhanced financial subsidies for ACA exchange enrollees:
Until now, only CoveredCA enrollees earning 138-400% of the Federal Poverty Line were eligible for ACA financial assistance. Starting in 2020, however, enrollees earning 400-600% FPL may be eligible as well (around $50K - $75K/year if you're single, or $100K - $150K for a family of four). In addition, those earning 200-400% FPL will see their ACA subsidies enhanced a bit.
While the 2020 Open Enrollment Period doesn't officially start until November 1st across the rest of the country, in California it begins two weeks earlier, for whatever reason:
In most states, open enrollment for 2020 coverage will run from November 1, 2019 to December 15, 2019. But California enacted legislation (A.B.156) in late 2017 that codifies a three-month open enrollment period going forward — California will not be switching to the November 1 – December 15 open enrollment window that other states are using.
Instead, California’s open enrollment period (both on- and off-exchange) will begin each year on October 15, and will continue until January 15. Under the terms of the legislation, coverage purchased between October 15 and December 15 will be effective January 1 of the coming year, while coverage purchased between December 16 and January 15 will be effective February 1.
I posted Wisconsin's preliminary 2020 rate filings in early August. Yesterday the state insurance department posted this press release, which includes the final, approved rate changes. As far as I can tell, nothing has changed (the final statewide weighted average is a 3.2% average premium reduction over last year, thanks primarily to them implementing a fairly robust ACA Section 1332 reinsurance waiver:
Gov. Evers Announces More Health Insurance Options for Wisconsinites in 2020 Ahead of Open Enrollment
Back in July, the Colorado Insurance Dept. announced the preliminary 2020 avg. premium rate changes for the individual and small group markets, including making the important point that their then-pending Section 1332 Reinsurance Waiver program, if approved, would cut down on unsubsidized premiums by over 18% on average (18.2%, to be precise, according to the CO DOI, although my own analysis based on the preliminary rate filings brought it in at a 17.5% reduction).
As you may recall, I managed to acquire all 2,700 MLR template filing spreadsheets from the CMS website a solid month before the data was made available to the public. After spending countless hours digging through them and compiling the data on a state-by-state basis, I concluded that the final breakout was as follows:
Individual Market: $769 million in rebates being paid back to 3.34 million ACA enrollees
Small Group Market: $312 million in rebates being paid back to 2.96 million enrollees
Large Group Market: $290 million in rebates being paid back to 2.31 million enrollees
TOTAL: $1.37 billion in rebates being paid back to 8.61 million enrollees nationally
With the 2020 Open Enrollment Period rapidly approaching (it actually kicks off on October 15th in California, and on November 1st in every other state + DC), it's important to keep in mind that many people who didn't qualify for financial assistance in 2019 may qualify in 2020...and in some cases that could mean a difference of thousands of dollars due to how the ACA subsidy formula works and other factors.
First, a refresher on how the ACA formula works for Individual Market enrollees (that is, people who are looking to buy health insurance for themselves and/or their family who don't receive it through their employer, Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP or some other source).
Getting ready for MNsure's open enrollment period: what to know and how to prepare
Open enrollment runs November 1 through December 23, 2019
ST. PAUL, Minn. — The MNsure open enrollment period begins in less than one month. To ensure Minnesotans are prepared to shop and enroll in coverage starting November 1, MNsure is highlighting some important information:
Open enrollment is shorter this year — don't miss out on coverage
MNsure's open enrollment period for 2020 health and dental coverage will be seven weeks long — beginning November 1, 2019, and ending December 23, 2019. Minnesotans should note that open enrollment is shorter than previous years and all those who enroll during open enrollment will have a start date of January 1, 2020.
MNsure assisters are ready to help — schedule an appointment today
MNsure has a statewide network of expert assisters who can help Minnesotans apply and enroll, free of charge. The assister can be a navigator or a broker.
The South Carolina Insurance Dept. released their final/approved 2020 Individual and Small Group Market premium rate changes a few days ago.
Previously, I only had the unweighted averages, which were a 1.9% decrease on the Indy market and an 11% increase for small group enrollees...but SCDOI has included the weighted averages for each in their approved numbers: A 3.9% drop and 7.6% increase respectively.
It's also worth noting that the Individual market is growing from three carriers to five next year--both Bright Health Co. and Molina Healthcare are joining the South Carolina market for the first time.
I honestly haven't written or read much about this since I wrote about it in April, but the Colorado government is making good on its promise to put forward a serious Public Option proposal.
While Washington is technically the first state to create their own state-based Public Option, the reality is that while I do give them plenty of credit for getting the ball rolling (their PO is scheduled to go into effect starting in January 2021), what they're doing isn't quite what most people have in mind when they think of a PO.
Washington is essentially outsourcing administration of a healthcare plan to an existing carrier, with the state government negotiating the provider network and reimbursement rate levels...which have been set to 160% of Medicare rates. There's nothing wrong with this, and it's an important move forward...but it's only expected to shave perhaps 5-10% at most off of costs because any negotiated rate settings are partly cancelled out by the cost of the private carrier doing the administration.
This Just In, via the New Jersey Dept. of Banking & Insurance...
NJ Department of Banking and Insurance Releases Health Plan Rates
On Average, NJ Individual Market Rates for 2020 Remain 1.4% Lower Than 2018
The New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance today released rates for health insurance plans in the individual market effective January 1, 2020. On average, rates for 2020 will remain 1.4 percent lower than they were in 2018, due to policy actions taken by the Murphy Administration to stabilize the insurance market.
OK, hold up, read that again: 1.4% lower than 2018 premiums, not 1.4% lower than 2019. That's kind of an important distinction. Don't get me wrong, this isn't a bad thing to note, but it's not that impressive considering some other states are seeing rate reductions from 2018. Of course, there's a lot of factors at play which vary from state to state as well.
In case anyone's wondering why I haven't posted anything yet today (I have a huge backlog, believe me!), I'm prepping to moderate a Healthcare Town Hall this evening with my state Representative Mari Manoogian (along with her neighboring House member, Kyra Harris Bolden). The topic? Prescription Drugs:
Please join Representatives Mari Manoogian and Kyra Harris Bolden for a town hall discussion to rein in the runaway cost of prescription drugs. No one should have to choose between paying for their medications and putting food on the table.
A huge part of the controversy about "pure" Medicare for All is tied to the fact that nearly 50% of the population (roughly ~160 million Americans, give or take) currently receives healthcare coverage via their employer. Some of this Employer-Sponsord Insurance (ESI) is pretty damned good, while some of it kind of sucks, but that's how our absurd system currently works for good or bad.
Anyway, most employers cover the bulk of the premiums for their enrollees...but a lot of people (my guess is the vast majority) either have no clue that they do so or at best have no idea how much of their monthly premiums are covered for them by the employer.
Normally I write two separate annual premium rate change filing entries for each state: One when the preliminary/requested rate filings are submitted, and another one when the final/approved rates are published.
In the case of California, it turns out that the rate rview/negotiation process is...more complicated. The press release/report released by Covered California back in July referred to preliminary 2020 premiums only, but it turns out that Covered California exchange personnel had already completed all their negotiations before posting any numbers.
It also turns out (thanks to "Dena M." aka @HealthEDena) that in California, insurance policy premiums are not reviewed/approved by the state insurance department...but by an entirely different department called the Dept. of Managed Health Care, or DMHC.
President Trump is scheduled to issue an order Thursday that expands the private-sector version of Medicare, as he slams some Democratic presidential candidates’ plans to build the program into a government-financed health system.
The order will direct federal health officials to make a set of changes to Medicare Advantage, the private managed care plans currently enrolling 22 million people — one-third of the participants in the federal insurance program for Americans who are 65 and older or have disabilities.
Back in early July, the Indiana Insurance Dept. posted the preliminary requested 2020 rate increases for the carriers participating in the ACA-compliant individual market. Technically there's three carriers there (CareSource Indiana, Celtic/Ambetter and Anthem), though Anthem only has 4 (yes, four) people enrolled in off-exchange policies total.
At the time, the IN DOI stated that the requested rates came in at an average premium increase of 9%:
INDIANA 2020 ACA FILINGS
The overall average rate increase for 2020 Indiana individual marketplace plans is 9.0%. CareSource and Celtic (MHS/Ambetter) have filed to participate in the 2020 Indiana Individual Marketplace. The Department of Insurance anticipates that all 92 counties in Indiana will be covered by both CareSource and Celtic (MHS/Ambetter).
Anthem has filed to offer a 2020 Off-Marketplace plan in Indiana. This plan is a catastrophic plan and is offered only in Benton, Jasper, Newton, Warren and White Counties.
*(Yes, I know, the District of Columbia isn't actually a state, and Vermont's mandate is...well, read on...)
As the 2020 Open Enrollment Period rapidly approaches (it starts November 1st nationwide...except for California, where open enrollment is starting on October 15th), it's time to start getting the word out about some important things to keep in mind this fall.
One of the most critical things to remember for residents of California, the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont is that each of these states* has reinstated an individual healthcare coverage mandate law/ordinance to replace the federal ACA mandate penalty which was zeroed out by Congressional Republicans back in December 2017. This means that if you live one one of them, unless you receive an affordability, hardship or other type of acceptable exemption, you'll be charged a financial penalty when you file your state/district taxes for 2020 in spring 2021 if you don't have qualifying healthcare coverage.
In early August, the Nevada Dept. of Insurance posted the state's preliminary 2020 individual market rate changes. The data was a bit incomplete and confusing, but the bottom line is that average unsubsidized 2020 premiums were only expected to increase about 1.0%.
Today they posted the final/approved rate changes, and unlike most states, the overall weighted average will be slightly higher than the original numbers...although only by a hair:
Nevada Division of Insurance reveals approved 2020 Health Insurance Rates
Carson City, NV – The Division of Insurance (‘Division”) has posted the approved 2020 health insurance rates for all plans in the Individual Health Insurance Market at healthrates.doi.nv.gov and encourages consumers to review this information before the Open Enrollment Period begins.
Long-time readers may remember that back in June 2018, the Trump Administration's Justice Dept. threw all precedence, decency and logic out the window by not only refusing to defend against the idiotic "Texas vs. Azar" lawsuit (aka #TexasFoldEm) brought by 20 Republican state Attorneys General...but went even further by actually agreeing with the plaintiffs that the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act--which is, remember, the federal law of the land which the DoJ is supposed to defend--is unconstitutional.
At the time, there was one strange thing which was buried within the ugly implications of such a complete abdictation of duty by then-U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions: While the Trump DoJ did side with the plaintiffs on the case, they split from the plaintiffs as to what they thought the actual "solution" to the "problem" should be.
Not much to see here...in August, the Idaho Insurance Dept. posted their preliminary 2020 average rate changes for the individual & small group markets; they averaged 7.0% and 4.0% increases respectively. Today they've posted the final/approved rates, and the indy numbers have been whittled down ever so slightly:
Back in July, I noted that the Minnesota Commerce Department announced the preliminary 2020 rate changes for carriers on the individual and small group markets. At the time, the weighted average increases were roughly 1.6% and 5.5% respectively, although the enrollment estimates for each carrier were estimates only.
Today, the MN Commerce Dept. announced the approved rates for 2020, and in both markets, they shaved average premiums down a couple of points. Here's the actual Commerce Dept. press release:
Commerce releases 2020 health insurance rates for Minnesota
Minnesota’s individual and small group health insurance market rates for 2020 reflect stabilized markets, according to information released today by the Minnesota Department of Commerce in advance of the open enrollment period beginning November 1.
