UPDATE 4:30pm: (sigh) As I expected, the stripped-down version of SB897 passed the state House
SB 897, to impose Medicaid work requirements, passed the House 62-47.#mileg
— Lindsay VanHulle (@LindsayVanHulle) June 6, 2018
The revised version of the bill still has to be kicked back over to the state Senate for a final vote, but that's almost certain to pass, so the only thing stopping it at this point is the possibility of Gov. Rick Snyder vetoing it, which is what I figured it would come down to in the the first place.
The past two days have brought a flurry of 2019 premium rate change filings, with Washington, New York, Maine, DC and Pennsylvania putting their preliminary cards on the table. These join 5 other states which had already posted their early numbers, so I now have 10 compiled.
Now that I have a solid amount of state data to work with, I figured I should write up a tutorial to explain my methodology. This has become especially important the past two years since there's some new factors to consider.
Health Insurance Plan Rates Stabilize, Offer More Choice for Consumers Despite Federal Government Sabotage
Harrisburg, PA – Insurance Commissioner Jessica Altman today announced that health insurance rates in Pennsylvania have moderated significantly, counter to the national trend, after Wolf Administration efforts to combat the effects of sabotage on health insurance markets by the federal government and specifically the Trump Administration to dismantle the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Importantly, the filings indicate that rate increases in Pennsylvania will be significantly more modest in 2019 than other states and many consumers will see more choices in their local markets as a result of Pennsylvania's efforts to increase competition.
One important twist: A few months back I remember reading that Maine, like several other states, was considering establishing some type of reinsurance program along the lines of successful programs in Alaska, Minnesota and Oregon. I also remember reading that the Maine version was unusual--it would actually involve reestablishing an old, discontinued state program which was still on the books but had been mothballed for years. However, I never got around to doing a write-up about it.
Hot on the heels of Washington State releasing their preliminary 2019 individual market rate hike request comes a similar press release out of the New York Department of Financial Services...and neither the carriers nor the state regulators are making any bones about the reason for next year's rate increases:
PROPOSED 2019 HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM RATES FOR INDIVIDUAL AND SMALL GROUP MARKETS
Health insurers in New York have submitted their requested rates for 2019, as set forth in the charts below. These are the rates proposed by health insurers, and have not been approved by DFS.
OLYMPIA, Wash. – Eleven health insurers filed 74 health plans for Washington state’s 2019 individual and family health insurance market, with an average proposed rate increase of 19.08 percent. There are no bare counties, although 14 counties will have only one insurer selling through Washington’s Exchange, Washington Healthplanfinder.
Several quick tidbits out of the District of Columbia from the DC Health Benefit Exchange Authority May board meeting:
Their preliminary 2019 premium rate filings were originally due by May 1st, but this was bumped out until June 1st. Not available publicly yet, however.
The board voted unanimously to restrict Short-Term, Limited Duration plans to no more than 3 months at a time and to make them non-renewable in order to prevent them from further damaging the ACA individual market. They basically went with the parameters laid out under the newly-signed Maryland law. This won't become official unless the DC Council approves it, however (which I strongly suspect will happen).
I just received the following from a healthcare broker, who I trust from past communication exchanges, who wishes to remain anonymous. I'm presenting it as sent, with the only changes being breaking it out into paragraphs for readability & with their state's identifying information removed.
Over the past few weeks I've noted that a half-dozen states or so (Maryland, New Jersey, Vermont, Hawaii, California and Illinois) have been pushing through a long list of bills/laws at the state level to either protect the ACA from sabotage or even strengthen it. Meanwhile, other states have either expanded Medicaid under the ACA (Virginia, of course) or have locked in ballot measures to do so this fall (Utah, Idaho). Finally, several states have announced they're joining dozens of others to take advantage of "Silver Loading" or full-on "Silver Switching".