As I've plugged new states into my 2016 Rate Increase estimate project, many people have asked me whether I'm seeing any patterns emerging in terms of which states are seeing higher average rate hikes vs. lower ones. The main question being asked is whether Medicaid expansion seems to have an impact (and by extension, is there any sort of red/blue political pattern emerging).

Until now, I've always answered either "no" or "too soon to tell", mainly because there were still lots of states missing or because so many of the estimates are based on requested increases rather than approved. As of today, however, I've managed to put together at least a ballpark estimate for 44 states (+DC), leaving just 6 states left, so I think I have enough included to look for patterns.

Remember: that six states (Alabama, Mississippi, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin) are missing from all of the following graphs.

First, here's the weighted state-wide averages with the states in alphabetical order:

As I just noted re. South Carolina, Louise Norris has picked up the ball on my "weighted average rate hike" project and seems to be filling in some of the missing pieces using my own methodology. Here's what she comes up with for North Dakota:

Rates for 2016 won’t be finalized until late summer or early fall, but of the three carriers that participated in the exchange in 2015, two – Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota and Medica Health Plans – have requested double digit rate increases for 2016. BCBS of ND has proposed an average rate increase of 18.4 percent for their 29,000 individual market policy-holders (including on and off exchange plans) BCBS of ND has 70 percent of the on-exchange market share in 2015.

Medica has proposed an average rate increase of 16.5 percent, for an estimated 4,778 members, including on and off-exchange.

Sanford’s proposed rate increases were less than 10 percent, as they do not appear on Healthcare.gov’s rate review tool.

It's been awhile since I've crunched the numbers for a new state. As I noted a week ago, I've covered 42 states representing 87% of the total population, so any further changes assuming 100% of current enrollees stay with their current policy are likely to be fairly nominal unless various insurance regulators surprise me and slash the approved rate hikes significantly in a few states.

Thankfully, Louise Norris has picked up the ball and seems to be filling in some of the missing pieces using my own methodology, including North Dakota and South Carolina. I'll tackle the Palmetto State first:

Rates have not yet been approved for 2016, but Healthcare.gov’s rate review tool shows proposed rates from carriers that have requested rate increases of ten percent or more.  In South Carolina, that applies to two current exchange carriers:

Among the various provisions of the Affordable Care Act, the one which intrigued me the most was the creation of 23 "Consumer Operated and Oriented Plans", or "CO-OPs". The idea was to create non-profit quasi-public/private healthcare insurance organizations (similar in nature, I believe, to Credit Unions, except for health insurance), to compete with the private, profit-based insurance providers.

Unfortunately, as the Office of the Inspector General noted in a July report (in huge font size for some reason), after two Open Enrollment periods have come and gone, the ACA CO-OPs aren't doing very well for the most part, to put it mildly.

One of them, CoOportunity of Iowa and Nebraska, infamously melted down before the 2nd OE period was even halfway done.

UPDATE 3/9/16: For the love of Pete...the WTSP website still has the same article published on their site today, 6 months later.

A huge shout-out to Matthew Martin (aka hyperplanes) for his double-catch on this ongoing mini-saga.

Last night I posted what seemed, at first, to be a merely-amusing (if a bit depressing) story about a Florida news station website accidentally (?) reposting a year-old AP newswire story about potential security vulnerabilities at Healthcare.Gov:

"Critical" flaw found in HealthCare.gov security

(I was originally going for Albert Brooks' famous quitting scene from "Lost in America"...unfortunately the audio cuts out after the first 30 seconds...)

 

OK, this is kind of cool (though I didn't find out about it until 6 months later)...

The link to this site is below the video at the actual YouTube link, and The Graph only onscreen for a second (and is obviously a bit outdated...the effectuated exchange enrollee number is more like 9.9 million as of now), but it's still pretty nifty.

If you don't know who John Green is, check him out.

This AP Newswire story was published by Tampa Bay/Sarasota station WTSP at 5:23pm yesterday, September 24, 2015:

"Critical" flaw found in HealthCare.gov security

WASHINGTON -- The government's own watchdogs tried to hack into HealthCare.gov earlier this year and found what they termed a critical vulnerability - but also came away with respect for some of the health insurance site's security features.

Those are among the conclusions of a report released Tuesday by the Health and Human Services Department inspector general, who focuses on health care fraud.

The report amounts to a mixed review for the federal website that serves as the portal to taxpayer-subsidized health plans for millions of Americans. Open enrollment season starts Nov. 15.

So-called "white hat" or ethical hackers from the inspector general's office found a weakness, but when they attempted to exploit it like a malicious hacker would, they were blocked by the system's defenses.

I've been debating (pun intended!) how to handle the ongoing 2016 Presidential primary season when it comes to the ACA. While the ACA has barely come up at all in either of the first 2 GOP debates, it's almost certainly going to start popping up sooner or later (and I'll be stunned if it isn't a major topic at the Democratic debates).

I'm gonna try doing an occasional "Candidate Roundup" with the latest ACA-related happenings when it comes to the various candidates...and there have been three major developments this week:

Hillary Clinton:

Pages

Advertisement