Charles Gaba's blog

So, yesterday I posted my first 2017 Weighted Average Rate Hike entry, using Virginia, since they appear to be the first state to post their requested rate changes for 2017.

As you can see, while the requested rate increases stayed consistent throughout the various updates, the number of enrollees changed dramatically depending on which filing source I used. Case in point: Anthem/HealthKeepers Inc.

The first filing I found for Anthem HealthKeepers made it pretty clear that they're asking for a 15.8% average rate hike next year which is expected to potentially impact up to 122,581 policy holders:

Pretty cut & dry, right? Note that according to the filing that number covers current Anthem HealthKeepers enrollees both on and off the exchange, so it should cover all ACA-compliant policies.

Huh. Here's something unexpected. New Hampshire officially closed out the 2016 Open Enrollment Period with 55,183 exchange-based QHP selections.

As it happens, New Hampshire is, to my knowledge, the only state operating on the federal exchange which has a policy of publicly posting their effectuated exchange-based enrollment numbers every month throughout the year, which is a godsend to me.

Now that we're into April, I decided to take a sneak peak, and was a bit surprised at what I found:

Over the past few days, I've posted two stories which have gotten a lot of attention: One about the 29 million Americans who are still uninsured today; the other about the 2016 average premium rate hikes.

In both cases, I've been criticized either here or via Twitter about the twin problems of high deductibles/co-pays and narrow networks. In response to the first story, people noted that the "actual" number who are uninsured is "a lot more" than 29 million because many people still can't afford the deductibles/co-pays or can't find a doctor/hospital in their network. In response to the second story, people claimed that I'm "hiding" the truth about how much policies cost for the same reasons.

My response is this: Yes, those are serious problems, and worth much discussion. In fact, just yesterday, Lydia Mitts of FamiliesUSA wrote an excellent piece over at healthinsurance.org (where I occasionally post freelance articles) about this very subject:

In light of today's confirmation that the average 2016 premium rate increase ended up only being appx. 8% nationally on the individual market (as opposed to the headlines screaming about 40%, 50%, 60%+ rate hikes being "typical"), I've decided to get a jump on the 2017 rate changes. Someone gave me a heads up that Virginia appears to be first out of the gate this year, with requested 2017 rate filings having already been submitted by at least 8 carriers.

Now, for 2016 there are actually 13 carriers offering individual policies in Virginia (although some of these are available off-exchange only). I'm don't know if the 5 missing carriers have decided to drop out of the VA market or if they simply haven't submitted their 2017 filings yet (it looks like in Virginia the carriers technically have until July 15th to get their requests to the HHS Dept. in states which have their own rate review process, but the state itself presumably has an earlier deadline). It's also possible that some additional carriers might join the exchange and/or start offering policies in the state which don't this year.

In any event, here's what I've found so far for Virginia:

Hey, remember this??

Some Guy, May 19, 2015:

Letting the air out of rate-increase hysteria

The 2016 rate-increase hysteria has already started. Before you freak out, here are four things to remember about premium-hike proposals.

May 15 officially marked the start of the 2016 rate review season. What that means for Americans is that over the next month or so, newspapers and web sites across the country will start running stories with scary-sounding headlines like this:

Some Oregonians could face major insurance rate hikes next year

Health plans request double-digit premium increases

...The articles will throw a bunch of numbers around, saying that the “average” premium rate increase for a given state is expected to be X percent, followed by examples of the highest and lowest increases. There may even be a few “Company Y will actually be reducing their rates!” thrown in.

When the dust settled on the official 2016 Open Enrollment Period, Connect for Health Colorado reported enrolling 153,583 people in exchange-based Qualified Health Plans. However, as I noted at the time:

Colorado lost their Co-Op...and CO is also one of only two states (Oregon is the other one) to drop their "transitional" policies as of the end of 2015. As a result, Colorado has a lot of people who could still potentially enroll by the end of February thanks to the 60-day Loss of Coverage Special Enrollment Period provision.

Louise Norris noted that there were around 39,000 ex-Co-Op members in Colorado (along with some others) who could still potentially enroll during February via the SEP option; I spitballed anywhere from 10,000 - 20,000 more Coloradoans might yet be added. There are also the normal SEPs for things like getting married, giving birth and so forth.

I get a lot of ACA and healthcare-related email, as you might imagine. Sometimes it's a hot tip about some breaking news story or wonky report being released. Sometimes it's a clarification or correction of something I just posted from an industry insider wanting to clear the record. Sometimes it's a borderline illiterate Ted Cruz supporter complaining about how Cruz is shaking supporters down for cash or trash-talking his opponents. Sometimes it's an anti-ACA advocate arguing a point with me. Sometimes it's a scam artist trying to hustle me.

And then there's this:

Submitted on Monday, April 11, 2016 - 11:36am

Name: "Bob"*

Comments/Questions:

New York offers new Special enrollment period (SEP) victims of domestic violence.

Can you believe that ? This is just going to increase cost for everyone on the state exchange !

*Not his real name.

OK, a couple of things:

Thanks to Richard Mayhew for the head's up:

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — The state's health exchange expects to enroll more than 470,000 New Yorkers in its new low-cost option for coverage this year.

Testifying at an Assembly hearing this week, exchange Executive Director Donna Frescatore said New York chose to participate with the Essential Plan. The plan is an option under the federal Affordable Care Act starting in 2016.

It's aimed at adults who don't qualify for Medicaid but have been unable to afford private coverage.

The Essential Plan has no annual deductible before insurance begins paying medical bills.

Premiums are free for those with incomes at or below 150 percent of the federal poverty level.

A couple of weeks ago, I made a bigger splash than I expected in healthcare journalism/wonk circles by posting my best attempt to piece together the current health insurance/coverage status of everyone in the U.S. (and by "current", I mean "as of March 2016", which includes the results of the 3rd Open Enrollment Period). While some of the numbers/estimates are composites of more than one survey/report and therefore may be off here and there, I've been reassured by various industry experts that overall it seems to be pretty close to the mark.

With that in mind, I wanted to highlight an important point. For some time now, Bernie Sanders has been pointing out repeatedly that around 29 million people remain uninsured despite the Affordable Care Act. This has become one of his core bullet point arguments in favor of his Single Payer healthcare plan which, if enacted, would supposedly cover everyone in the country (more efficiently, with more comprehensive coverage, lower overhead, etc etc).

NOTE: To clarify, I'm not saying that Bernie is the one blaming the law for the 29 million, but I keep hearing a lot of other people doing so. I only mentioned him because instead of touting the 20 million people who the law has helped gain coverage, he focuses almost exclusively on the 29 million that it hasn't. A little balanced perspective is what I'm talking about.

I've stated many, many times that in spite of how unimpressed I am with Sanders's plan itself, in the long term I do think that something like it is our best option. However, for the moment I wanted to take a closer look at the breakout of those 29 million people:

  • Uninsured - Medicaid Eligible: 5.0 million
  • Uninsured - CHIP Eligible: 3.0 million
  • Uninsured - Medicaid Gap: 2.8 million
  • Uninsured - Undocumented Immigrants: 4.7 million
  • Eligible for ACA Tax Credits: 6.5 million
  • Ineligible for ACA Tax Credits: 7.0 million

Now, if you want to complain that the ACA is too complicated, pads the insurance carriers's pockets, doesn't keep costs down enough and so forth, those are reasonable arguments.

However, if you're arguing that the ACA is "failing" because it has "only" cut the uninsured rate by about 40% since 2013 instead of down to 0%, that's an absurdly unfair attack for two reasons. First, the ACA itself was never intended to get the U.S. to 100% coverage...nor did anyone ever claim that it would.

Thanks to Sabrina Corlette for the heads up:

UnitedHealth Group will stop offering plans on Arkansas' health insurance exchange next year, a spokesman for the Arkansas Insurance Department said Thursday.

The Minnetonka, Minn.-based insurer offered plans this year for the first time, but it didn't submit plans to the department for 2017, department spokesman Ryan James said.

The deadline for insurers to submit such plans was April 1, he said.

This is hardly unexpected news for a couple of reasons. First, UHC made huge waves last November by making a big, dramatic announcement that they might very well drop out of the ACA exchanges altogether next year after taking large losses on exchange enrollees in 2015. As you may recall, this was a very oddly-timed announcement given that they had issued a glowing quarterly report just a month earlier which made it sound like everything was hunky-dory.

Pages

Advertisement