The Next Big Debate in Health Care

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/06/30/the-next-big-debate-in-health-care/

Image result for The Next Big Debate in Health Care

Source: Kaiser Family Foundation analysis of Truven Health Analytics Market Scan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database, 2004-2014; Bureau of Labor Statistics, Seasonally Adjusted Data from the Current Employment Statistics Survey, 2004-2014 (April to April).

With 91% of the population now covered by some form of health insurance, and the coverage rate higher in some states, the next big debate in health policy could be about the adequacy of coverage. That particularly means rising payments for deductibles and their impact on family budgets and access to care. This is about not just Obamacare but also the many more people who get insurance through an employer.

As the chart above shows, payments toward deductibles by consumers who have insurance through large employers rose 256% from 2004 to 2014; over the same period, wages increased 32%. The chart shows what people actually paid toward their deductibles and other forms of cost-sharing, not just their exposure as deductibles climbed (which is more typically what studies and data report). Deductibles accounted for 47% of cost-sharing payments in 2014, up from 24% in 2004. During the same period some other forms of cost-sharing fell. Payments for co-pays declined by 26%. It’s no wonder that consumers say in polls that deductibles are their top health-cost concern.

Rising payments for deductibles cause people to use less health care and have played a role in the moderation we have seen in recent years in the growth of health spending. That rate of growth has begun to tick up but remains moderate by historical standards. Ever larger deductibles may dampen growth in spending but can also be a significant burden for many family budgets and a barrier to care for the chronically ill.

New Commonwealth Fund Report: Latinos and People with Low Incomes Are Most Likely to Be Uninsured, Despite Significant Gains Under Affordable Care Act

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/press-releases/2016/aug/remaining-uninsured

Latinos Are a Growing Share of the Uninsured

Of the U.S. adult population currently without health insurance, 88 percent is Latino, makes less than $16, 243 a year, is under age 35, and/or works for a small business, according to new Commonwealth Fund survey findings. Half (51%) of the remaining uninsured live in one of the 20 states that had not yet expanded Medicaid at the time of the survey.

The report, Who Are the Remaining Uninsured and Why Haven’t They Signed Up for Coverage?, finds that an estimated 24 million working-age adults were uninsured between February and April 2016, six years after the initial implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010. According to the report, as the number of people without health insurance declined by 20 million since the law went into effect, the composition of the uninsured population has changed: white adults now represent a smaller share and Latinos a larger share.

“About 26 million Americans have gained coverage through the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces and Medicaid expansion,” said Sara Collins, Vice President for Health Care Coverage and Access at The Commonwealth Fund and the report’s lead author. “However, millions of people still don’t have health insurance. That means they are likely to go without the health care they need and are at risk of medical debt or bankruptcy if they get sick.”

The study finds that state and federal policies, varying levels of awareness about the health insurance marketplaces, and concerns about affordability are the primary reasons people remained uninsured.

JAMA Forum: Why Are Private Health Insurers Losing Money on Obamacare?

https://newsatjama.jama.com/2016/08/25/jama-forum-why-are-private-health-insurers-losing-money-on-obamacare/

Uwe Reinhardt, PhD (Image: Jon Roemer/Princeton University)

Uwe E. Reinhardt, PhD, is the James Madison professor of political economy and of economics at Princeton University, where he teaches health economics, comparative health systems, general microeconomics, and financial management. Dr Reinhardt is also the codirector of the Griswold Center for Economic Policy Studies at Princeton University. The bulk of his research has been focused on health economics and policy, both in the United States and abroad. He is a member of the Health and Medicine Division of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) and served on its Governing Council in the 1980s. He is past president of AcademyHealth, the Foundation for Health Services Research, and the International Health Economics Association. He is also a member of JAMA‘s editorial board.

Health spending is highly concentrated among the highest spenders.

The contributions individuals make out of their paychecks toward employer-sponsored health insurance are community rated, which means that they are the same for all employees of the firm, regardless of their health status and even age. So healthy employees are forced to subsidize less healthy colleagues through the premiums they pay. With the ACA, the Obama administration sought to provide the same deal for US individuals purchasing health insurance in the individual market.

For health insurers, however, this approach can be called an unnatural act, because it forces them knowingly to issue policies to very ill people at premiums evidently far below these individuals’ likely claims on the insurer’s overall risk pool. Actuaries and health policy analysts understand that this approach can work only if all individuals, healthy and ill, are mandated to purchase coverage for a defined, basic package of benefits, at the community-rated premium—thereby forcing young and healthy individuals to subsidize with their premiums the health care of individuals with medical conditions in the insurer’s risk pool.

However, for purely political reasons, the ACA mandate for all person in the United States to be insured was rather weak, leading many younger or healthier individuals simply to forgo purchasing health insurance and paying the relatively low fines for doing so. Over time, this practice naturally will drive up the community-rated premiums, inducing even greater numbers of young and healthy individuals to forgo insurance coverage, leaving private insurers with ever-more expensive risk pools.

The result of this adverse risk selection (the scenario in which sicker-than-average people purchase insurance while young and healthy people do not) has been that some private health insurers underpriced their policies on the ACA exchanges, perhaps to gain market share early on or because they simply did not anticipate quite the adverse risk selection that occurred.

Uwe Reinhardt: Adverse risk selection crippling Obamacare

http://www.healthcaredive.com/news/uwe-reinhardt-adverse-risk-selection-crippling-obamacare/425182/

  • The ACA has failed to attract enough younger, healthier people to the public insurance exchanges, causing Aetna and other private insurers to exit the market rather than shoulder the costs of sicker people, according to Princeton economist Uwe Reinhardt.
  • To deal with adverse risk selection — where sicker-than-average individuals buy insurance while younger, healthier ones don’t — some payers plan to raise premiums more than 25% in 2017.
  • That will lead even more young, healthy individuals to forego obtaining ACA coverage, creating even greater adverse risk selection, Reinhardt says.

Presidential election: 4 things managed care should watch

http://managedhealthcareexecutive.modernmedicine.com/managed-healthcare-executive/news/presidential-election-4-things-managed-care-should-watch?GUID=A13E56ED-9529-4BD1-98E9-318F5373C18F&rememberme=1&ts=24082016

As the 2016 presidential election approaches, analysts and experts are advising healthcare executives to watch and monitor certain issues, such as pharmaceutical spending and healthcare reform, which will surely impact the health insurance industry. Here’s a look at what they recommend keeping a close eye on in particular.

ACA Marketplaces: Stressed but Fixable

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/blog/2016/aug/aca-marketplaces-stressed-but-fixable?omnicid=EALERT1087751&mid=henrykotula@yahoo.com

Negative headlines in the past few weeks seem to suggest deep trouble for the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) marketplaces. Several insurance plans have requested double-digit premium increases for 2017—and Aetna is the third major insurer to announce it is pulling out of several state marketplaces next year. But how concerned should we be about these developments and are there policy options to consider?

This year, premium requests by carriers have been higher on average than last year. Part of the reason for the increase is the phase-out of the law’s reinsurance program, which reimbursed carriers for high claims costs. The program has lowered premiums by as much as 14 percent, and without it carriers are raising their premiums to compensate. But even if final premiums in many plans are higher, most people who will enroll in marketplace plans this year will not pay much more than they did in 2015. This is because more than 80 percent of marketplace enrollees receive tax credits to help pay their premiums, which means most of the increase will be absorbed by the credits. Marketplace customers are also highly price-sensitive and will likely shop for the best deal. Last year, people who received tax credits through the federal marketplace experienced an average premium increase of only 4 percent.

Cut Healthcare Spending or Face the Public Option

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/finance/cut-healthcare-spending-or-face-public-option?spMailingID=9394331&spUserID=MTMyMzQyMDQxMTkyS0&spJobID=981810720&spReportId=OTgxODEwNzIwS0#

“If we don’t get a handle on spending at some point, we will have a government-financed system,” predicts the head of the Pacific Business Group on Health.”

Five things that keep health execs up at night

http://managedhealthcareexecutive.modernmedicine.com/managed-healthcare-executive/news/five-things-keep-health-execs-night

 

How rural healthcare organizations are faring in non-Medicaid expansion states.

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/community-rural/risky-business-rural-hospitals?spMailingID=9321746&spUserID=MTMyMzQyMDQxMTkyS0&spJobID=980628370&spReportId=OTgwNjI4MzcwS0

Hospitals in rural areas of the country are feeling a sharp financial pinch in states that have not expanded their Medicaid programs under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Community hospitals in rural counties of Tennessee, one of the states that have opted not to embrace Medicaid expansion, are facing financial pressure that could be relieved if more of their low-resource patients had Medicaid coverage. “In our health systems, they manage it. They have figured it out. Where it’s really hitting is our rural hospitals,” says Craig Becker, president of the Tennessee Hospital Association. “We’ve lost six rural hospitals in the last year, and we’re going to lose another one this year.”

In economically disadvantaged Tennessee communities, many nonelderly adults are either reliant on Medicaid for their health coverage or fall into the “self-pay” category, Becker says. “We only get about 5% of payment for self-pay patients.”

Medicaid is a public form of medical insurance jointly funded by the states and the federal government. Under the PPACA, states can expand their Medicaid programs with federal financial assistance to include all adults in families with incomes below 138% of the federal poverty level.