Get Health Insurance Through Your Employer? ACA Repeal Will Affect You, Too

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/01/11/get-health-insurance-through-your-employer-aca-repeal-will-affect-you-too/

Close-up photograph of an employee group health insurance application form.

Much of the recent attention on the future of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has focused on the fate of the 22.5 million people likely to lose insurance through a repeal of Medicaid expansion and the loss of protections and subsidies in the individual insurance market. Overlooked in the declarations of who stands to lose under plans to “repeal and replace” the ACA are those enrolled in employer-sponsored health plans — the primary source of coverage for people under 65.

Job-based plans offered to employees and their families cover 150 million people in the United States. If the ACA is repealed, they stand to lose critical consumer protections that many have come to expect of their employer plan.

It’s easy to understand the focus on the individuals who gained access to coverage thanks to the health reform law. ACA drafters targeted most of the law’s insurance reforms at the individual and small-group markets, where consumers and employers had the greatest difficulty finding affordable, adequate coverage prior to health reform. The ACA’s market reforms made coverage available to those individuals with pre-existing conditions who couldn’t obtain coverage in the pre-ACA world, and more affordable for those low- and moderate-income families who couldn’t afford coverage on their own.

Less noticed, but no less important, the ACA also brought critical new protections to people in large employer plans. Although most large employer plans were relatively comprehensive and affordable before the ACA, some plans offered only skimpy coverage or had other barriers to accessing care, leaving individuals—particularly those with costly, chronic health conditions—with big bills and uncovered medical care. For that reason, the ACA extended several meaningful protections to employees of large businesses.

In Inaugural Speech, Trump Silent on Health Care

https://morningconsult.com/2017/01/20/in-inaugural-speech-trump-administration-silent-on-health-care/

Related image

President Donald Trump did not mention health care in his inaugural address Friday, and the new administration’s website did not have any immediate details on its health policy.

Trump has said he would put forth his own health care plan once his nominee to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), is confirmed and in office.

Overhauling the Affordable Care Act has been cited as the top priority for both congressional Republicans and Trump, making its absence from Friday’s speech noteworthy. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wore a lapel pin that read “#ProtectOurCare” at the inauguration, an ode to the Democratic Party’s efforts to defend former President Barack Obama’s signature health care law.

It’s still not clear when Price could be confirmed as HHS secretary. He’s scheduled to testify before the Senate Finance Committee, which will vote on his nomination, Tuesday.

Trump is expected to sign executive orders related to health care in the first days of his presidency.

The Problems With ‘Repeal And Delay’

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/01/03/the-problems-with-repeal-and-delay/

Image result for problem

Republican leaders in Congress and the incoming Trump administration have said that they plan to move quickly to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in the early weeks of 2017, with a delay in the date of when key aspects of the repeal would become effective until perhaps 2019 or 2020. This is the so-called “repeal and delay” option. They have also pledged to replace the law in separate legislation, or a series of bills, that would come later, although it is not clear what the replacement would look like or when it would pass.

We do not support this approach to repealing and replacing the ACA because it carries too much risk of unnecessary disruption to the existing insurance arrangements upon which many people are now relying to finance their health services, and because it is unlikely to produce a coherent reform of health care in the United States. The most likely end result of “repeal and delay” would be less secure insurance for many Americans, procrastination by political leaders who will delay taking any proactive steps as long as possible, and ultimately no discernible movement toward a real marketplace for either insurance or medical services.

Congress should instead roll back elements of the ACA in the same legislation that moves U.S. health care more deliberately toward a functioning marketplace that is less dependent on federal coercion and control. This approach provides the best chance of constructing a replacement plan that moves decisively in a better direction without unnecessarily creating chaos during the transition.

Universal Access And Delegation To States: Examining Two Currents In ACA Replacement Plans

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/01/20/universal-access-and-delegation-to-states-examining-two-currents-in-aca-replacement-plans/

As we draw nearer to the time when the Trump administration may unveil its proposals for reforming the Affordable Care Act and the Republicans in Congress may coalesce around a single repeal and replace proposal, two ideas are surfacing that should be addressed and explored—setting a goal of “universal access” rather than “universal coverage” and shifting responsibility for ACA replacement to the states. This post looks at the challenges involved in operationalizing these concepts.

ACA Changes Favored 2 to 1 by Healthcare Leaders Over Repeal and Replace

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/leadership/aca-changes-favored-2-1-healthcare-leaders-over-repeal-and-replace

Image result for aca repeal

As the Trump administration officially begins later this week, a new HealthLeaders Media survey shows that healthcare industry leaders support changes to the existing law rather than replacing it. Two-thirds of respondents (66%) say the best option for the healthcare industry regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is to make some changes but otherwise retain it.

At the opposite ends of the spectrum, 27% favor full repeal and replacement, while only 7% of respondents say keep it as it is, indicating the extent of dissatisfaction with the PPACA.

Interestingly, a greater share of health systems (78%) than hospitals (66%) and physician organizations (65%) favor making some changes to the PPACA.

On the other hand, a greater share of hospitals (28%) and physician organizations (27%) than health systems (17%) prefer full repeal and replacement. This is perhaps an indication that health systems are less able than other providers to accept full repeal and replacement because of their greater complexity as organizations.

Among the 66% of respondents who say that the best option for the PPACA is to make some changes, the top three changes they advocate are adding a public health insurance option (61%), eliminating the excise tax on high-cost employer health benefit plans (‘Cadillac tax’) (50%), and eliminating the individual mandate and noncompliance penalty (37%).

The two changes receiving the fewest responses are eliminating Medicaid expansion (10%) and abandoning the focus on value-based care and reimbursement (16%).

Healthcare Leaders Split on Incoming Trump Administration

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/leadership/healthcare-leaders-split-incoming-trump-administration?spMailingID=10260830&spUserID=MTY3ODg4NTg1MzQ4S0&spJobID=1081571803&spReportId=MTA4MTU3MTgwMwS2#

Trump logoTrump logo

While 41% of executives are generally positive about the potential impact of a Trump administration, nearly as many (37%) are generally negative about the prospects. The figures regarding Tom Price at HHS and Seema Verma at CMS are similar in a HealthLeaders Media survey.

An Association Of Health Funders And The Changing Political Landscape

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/01/19/an-association-of-health-funders-and-the-changing-political-landscape/

As the professional association for health foundations and corporate-giving programs, Grantmakers In Health (GIH) connects the hundreds of health funders who are spread across the American landscape, keeping them up-to-date on rapidly changing developments and providing opportunities for them to share what they’re learning and doing in their respective communities.

Times like now—when dramatic changes to the health care landscape are anticipated—accentuate the importance of this role. In 2017 it will be especially important that we help funders understand, and respond to, significant expected changes in public policies and programs that affect the communities they serve.

We will not simply be in crisis mode, however. Our concern for both informing and shaping the bigger picture of philanthropy’s health and health care priorities is ongoing.

As the year begins, the future of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is naturally a high priority for us. Health funders are rightly anxious to understand the changes that are likely with a new Congress and presidential administration. Many grantmakers have invested for years at a national or state level to support the implementation of the ACA. They are keenly aware that rolling back the law will have consequences not only for people’s access to health care services, but also, more broadly, for jobs and state economies.

In an immediate response to these concerns, GIH has organized a series of webinars for its membership that offers the perspectives of a range of policy experts. Immediately post-election, these topics included strategies for adapting health reform–related grant making, the future of Medicaid, and the election’s implications for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and other children’s coverage. Upcoming webinars will include bipartisan views of the new Trump administration’s health priorities and plans, the implications of a possible repeal of the ACA without implementing an immediate “replace” strategy, and the 2016 election’s possible effects on the health of immigrant communities.

Other ACA-related programming will include activities taking place at our annual conference in June, as well as meetings, calls with funders, and publications, including in-depth interviews about foundation strategies. Because changes to the ACA, Medicaid, and other programs will heighten the importance of state-level actions, our 2017 programming will pay special attention to elevating what funders are doing in states and sharing this information nationally.

In addition to this focus on policy changes that will affect access and coverage, we also want to identify health investment areas in which the new administration seems to be interested. We anticipate that addiction, delivery system reform, veterans’ health, and rural health will be on that list.

Interstate Insurance Sales: Wishful Thinking, Or A Viable Policy Option?

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/01/18/interstate-insurance-sales-wishful-thinking-or-a-viable-policy-option/

Anyone who followed the recent election cycle knows that President-elect Donald Trump made “repeal and replace” a cornerstone of his campaign — referring, of course, to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). He, like Mitt Romney and John McCain did in their respective bids for the presidency, has proposed permitting insurers to sell insurance plans across state lines as a possible alternative to the ACA, or at least as a component of a potential alternative.

In this post, we’ll take a look at the possible advantages of allowing interstate insurance sales, as well as the reasons opponents say such a policy simply won’t work. First, though, let’s take a closer look at the current situation.

The ACA Already Allows Interstate Insurance Sales

A provision in section 1333 of the Affordable Care Act allows states to establish what are called “health care choice compacts,” which permit insurers to sell policies to individuals and small businesses in any state that participates in the compact — provided they abide by specific rules. And several states have explored the possibility. In fact, a few have even enacted statutes pertaining to interstate compacts.

But as of yet, nothing has materialized. Several explanations point to why:

  • Complacency on the part of regulators, at both the federal and state level
  • Lack of interest among insurers
  • Lack of demand from consumers
  • Prohibitively restrictive regulations
  • Insufficient time so far for the concept to take root

Whatever the reason or combination of reasons may be, the upshot is that interstate insurance sales are already legal under certain conditions.

It’s also important to note that most large companies are self-insured, which means they are not affected by state regulations and this whole discussion of selling insurance across state lines doesn’t apply to them.

Top 10 healthcare trends for 2017

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/top-10-healthcare-trends-2017-steve-valentine?trk=hb_ntf_MEGAPHONE_ARTICLE_POST

Image result for Top 10 healthcare trends for 2017

2017 will be a transition year shaped by changes proposed by President-elect Donald Trump and a Republican Congress. Chief healthcare concerns include legislative proposals to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act (ACA), along with the continued movement to implement alternative payment models (APMs) as called for in the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (MACRA). We will address the potential changes ahead when it comes to shifting health benefits, provider supply, new care models, transparency, and the continued growth of consumerism. 2017 will be a dynamic year as we pivot and move in a new political direction.

Repealing Obamacare without replacement would hike premiums 20% and leave 18 million uninsured, report says

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-obamacare-repeal-costs-20170117-story.html

Image result for Repealing Obamacare without replacement would hike premiums 20% and leave 18 million uninsured, report says

Repealing Obamacare without a replacement would result in higher costs for consumers and fewer people with insurance coverage, according to a report Tuesday from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

In the first year, insurance premiums would jump by 20% to 25% for individual policies purchased directly or through the Obamacare marketplace, according to the report. The number of people who are uninsured would increase by 18 million.

Those numbers would only increase in subsequent years. Premium prices would continue to climb by 50% the next year, with the uninsured swelling to 27 million, as full repeal took effect, the report said.

Americans may be beginning to worry about such costs. For the first time, more Americans view the Affordable Care Act as a “good idea,” rather than a bad one, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll also released Tuesday.