Obamacare enrollees on average have one-third fewer choices when it comes to picking doctors and hospitals than those on regular commercial plans, a new study says.
But its authors claim that’s not necessarily a bad thing. And others in the health-care arena believe the findings are misleading and don’t tell the whole story.
The study from Washington, D.C.-based Avalere Health finds that those under Affordable Care Act plans have roughly 66% of the choices compared with those in commercial plans, and the number of options may vary depending on the type of physician needed.
Under Obamacare, enrollees have access to roughly 58% of the oncologists and cardiologists that commercial plan members have. The average goes up when it comes to hospitals, as those using the public exchanges have access to 76% of those care facilities.
Huh. This is kind of weird...two completely different stories, from two different reporters (although both are via the Associated Press) about the latest Medicaid expansion numbers from two of the largest states at opposite ends of the country: California and New York.
This wouldn't be surprising if there had been a major report/press release regarding Medicaid enrollment nationally broken out by state, of course, but as far as I know there hasn't been (the last report from CMS came out in early June, only runs through March and doesn't distinguish between "traditional" and "expanded" Medicaid anyway).
In any event, I'm happy to report that the numbers actually line up pretty closely with what I already had estimated for each state:
It's a quiet Sunday afternoon and everyone (including myself) is focused on Donald Trump's latest blatherings, so I figured I'd throw this in.
I think I read about this guy a couple of years ago, and remembered being impressed, but I didn't actually watch his TED Talk until today.
I'm eternally grateful that I did. He articulates every thought I've had swirling around in my head the past few years about capitalism and economics, but he does so in a far more coherent, comprehensive and logical manner than I could ever hope to. Plus, for me it's just theoretical; he speaks from deep knowledge.
Take 20 minutes out of your day and watch it all the way through without interruption.
Democrats were naturally declared the big winners of last month’s King v. Burwell Supreme Court decision. That ruling, after all, saved the party’s most significant legislative accomplishment in decades: The Affordable Care Act (ACA).
But Obamacare has not simply been an ideological victory for the Democratic Party. The percentage of Democrats with health insurance has increased dramatically since the ACA’s marketplace went online in October 2013, according to weekly surveys conducted by YouGov for the Economist. In fact, the display below suggests that Democrats’ uninsured rates have essentially been cut in half under Obamacare.
Breakthrough — Utah GOP leaders reach a deal on Medicaid expansion
Republican leaders have agreed to a broad, conceptual framework for expanding Medicaid to insure tens of thousands of low-income Utahns with a plan that would call on medical providers to pay for the new health coverage.
The so-called Gang of Six — Gov. Gary Herbert, Lt. Gov. Spencer Cox, Senate President Wayne Niederhauser, House Speaker Greg Hughes, House Majority Leader Jim Dunnigan and Sen. Brian Shiozawa — huddled this week constructing the skeleton of a new Medicaid plan to replace the governor's Healthy Utah and the House's Utah Cares proposals.
On Friday, they announced their agreement, saying it was sustainable and would protect other key areas of the budget.
Before I get into the meat of the headline, I just wanted to point something out (bear with me, there's a reason for this):
Exhibit A:
October, 2013: Several million people receive cancellation notices from their health insurance companies, stating that their current policies will be discontinued effective 12/31/13 because they don't meet the Affordable Care Act's minimum coverage requirements. Much outrage and gnashing of teeth follows because President Obama had repeatedly stated that "If you like your plan you can keep it" (which, as I noted over a year ago, was an absurd thing for him to promise without including any caveats since there's no way of guaranteeing that the company won't go out of business, leave the state or simply decide to discontinue that policy for their own reasons which may or may not have anything to do with ACA compliance).
November, 2013: In response to the "You Can Keep It" brouhaha, President Obama and the HHS Dept. announce a 1-year (later quietly extended to up to 3 years) "transitional" policy for non-compliant plans. Some states take them up on it; some don't.
July, 2015: Republicans and other ACA critics complain that allowing the "transitional" policy extension is partly to blame for significant rate hikes expected to show up in 2016.
CONCLUSION: Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Over at Balloon Juice, Richard Mayhew has posted a great piece illustrating, once again, the importance of looking past the scary headlines to find out 1) what the true picture is (ie, taking all of the rate changes into account--not just the biggest ones--and weighting them by proportionate market share), and 2) what's going on with your situation, not someone else's:
As expected, the initial ask by insurers is being revised down. It is easier for insurers to get state regulators to agree to a lower number from the initial than to get the regulators to agree to a higher number than the initial ask. That allows regulators and their champions to point to a clear example of their effectiveness at protecting the public. This is a bit of a kabuki. In my state, when Mayhew Insurance and our competitors submit rates, there is a de facto implicit fudge factor built into the rates (usually as excess reserve accumulation) that everyone expects to be cut by the third round of review.
Louise Norris has done the heavy lifting for me regarding Rhode Island's 2016 rate change requests. Then again, there's only 3 companies operating on the exchange anyway (and I don't see any other companies operating off-exchange only, so I assume that's it for the state's individual market):
Of the three carriers that offer individual plans in HealthSource RI, only one –UnitedHealthcare of New England – shows up on the rate review tool that HHS is using to publish proposed rate hikes of ten percent or higher. United is requesting an average rate increase of about 11 percent for their Compass individual plans.
Blue Cross Blue Shield had also initially proposed weighted average rate hikes of 11 percent for their individual market plans in RI, but in early July, the carrier revised their projection to a weighted average rate increase of just 7 percent. The lower rate is partially due to the fact that in the FY 2016 budget (see below), the HealthSource RI premium fee is lower than initially proposed.
Alaska Governor Sidesteps GOP-Controlled Legislature, Expands Medicaid On His Own
Alaska will become the 30th state to accept Obamacare’s optional Medicaid expansion, after Gov. Bill Walker (I)announced on Thursday that he will use his executive power to bypass the GOP-controlled legislature and implement the policy on his own.
Walker — a former Republican who has since become an Independent — has been advocating for Medicaid expansion for over a year. Implementing this particular Obamacare provision, which was ruled optional by the Supreme Court in 2012, would extend health coverage to an estimated 40,000 low-income residents in his state. Polling has found that the majority of Alaska residents agree with Walker’s position.
