As I've noted the past few months, unlike most states, the Massachusetts Health Connector has not only seen no net attrition since the end of Open Enrollment, but has actually seen a net increase in enrollment...mainly due to their unique "ConnectorCare" policies, which are fullly Qualified Health Plans (QHPs) but have additional financial assistance for those who qualify and which are available year-round instead of being limited to the open enrollment period.
The amount of the increase depends on which "official" number you start with; the MA exchange claimed 196,554 people as of 1/31/16...while the ASPE report gives it as 213,883 as of the next day. Presumably they didn't have 17,000 people enroll in a mad rush on February 1st, so there's an odd discrepancy here, but whatever.
Health Insurer Aetna Inc on Wednesday said it plans to continue its Obamacare health insurance business next year in the 15 states where it now participates, and may expand to a few additional states.
Coalition cheers Health Insurance Rate Review bill passage
The House followed the Senate’s unanimous approval of SB 865, sponsored by Sen. David Sater, with a 140-6 vote, moving the “Health Insurance Rate Review” bill to the Governor’s desk on Tuesday.
In addition to rate review, the bill will modify provisions regarding licenses issued by the Board of Pharmacy and covered prescription benefits, delineates procedures for PBMs with regards to MAC lists, and requires health carriers to offer medication synchronization services.
The advancement was cheered by Missouri Health Care for All (MHCFA), who believe the bill will bring more transparency to insurance premiums.
As numerous sources have already indicated, after 2 years of (relatively) low average premium rate increases on the individual market (around 5.6% in 2015 and 8.0% in 2016...compared with the 10-12% average rate hikes over the previous decade), it looks like 2017 will finally see the higher rate hikes that ACA critics have been screaming about every year.
So far, Virginia and Oregon have reported requested rate increases of 17.9% and 27.5% respectively, while California may be looking at 8.0% increases (which is high for them).
Chad Terhune reported today that Covered California, the largest state-run ACA exchange in the country, released their 2016-2017 fiscal year projected budget, which includes a mountain of useful enrollment data...some of which is positive, some negative and some of which depends on your POV:
California’s health insurance exchange estimates that its Obamacare premiums may rise 8 percent on average next year, which would end two consecutive years of more modest 4 percent increases.
The projected rate increase in California, included in the exchange’s proposed annual budget, comes amid growing nationwide concern about insurers seeking double-digit premium hikes in the health law’s insurance marketplaces.
...Insurers in California have submitted initial rates for 2017, but the final figures won’t be known until July after state officials conduct private negotiations.
Land of Lincoln Mutual Health Insurance Co. plans to look for outside investors to boost its financial resources after federal regulators indicated they would loosen funding restrictions on consumer operated and oriented plans.
Long-time readers know that ever since I started this project in 2013, I gradually added and enhanced the healthcare coverage data that I was tracking. First it was exchange-based QHPs only; then I added (or separated out) Medicaid expansion, SHOP (small business) exchange enrollment, off-exchange individual policies and so on. The off-exchange numbers were always significant but spotty because most insurance carriers are very cagey about breaking out their membership in too much detail if they don't have to, and many state insurance departments don't bother to track (or at least publicly report) those numbers.
SHOP enrollment, on the other hand, should be very cut and dry. Like exchange-based individual QHP enrollments, there's no reason why these shouldn't be included in every regular exchange enrollment report, and several of the state-based exchanges do just that...although in some cases, even that's a bit fuzzy. For instance:
Just yesterday, the Urban Institute released a detailed analysis of Bernie Sanders's "Medicare for All" plan, which would actually be far more comprehensive than Medicare is, not just in terms of how many Americans it would cover (everyone!) and what percentage of costs it would cover (everything!) but also in terms of what ailments/services it would cover (all of them!).
Their conclusion was that such a policy would cost over twice as much as Senator Sanders claims (around $32 trillion over the next decade on top of what the federal & state governments currently spend, versus the $13.8 trillion that Sanders estimates). Their conclusion was even more expensive than the $24 trillion estimate from a prior analysis by Kenneth Thorpe (the guy who put together Vermont's failed single payer proposal a decade ago).
When UnitedHealthcare announced last month that they were making good on their threat last fall to pull out of the individual market in over two dozen states next year, it caused shockwaves across the health insurance industry. It is an important development, as around 800,000 people will be impacted.
When Humana announced last week that they plan on pulling out of the individual market in at least 5 states next year, it was interesting and a bit of a bummer, but not nearly as earthshattering, because only about 25,000 people will have to shop around and find a new carrier.
Today, it is my duty to announce that Celtic insurance has also decided to pull out of the entire individual insurance market (both on and off-exchange) across at least 6 states, including:
At a campaign stop Monday in Northern Virginia, Hillary Clinton reiterated her support for a government-run health plan in the insurance market, possibly by letting let Americans buy into Medicare, to stem the rise of health-care costs.
