Insurers see way to dodge federal healthcare law next year

[eridani]

http://www.healthcare-now.org/insurers-see-way-to-dodge-federal-healthcare-law-next-year

A new fight is brewing over health insurance companies letting millions of Americans renew their current coverage for another year — and thereby avoid changes under the federal healthcare law.

That may offer a short-term benefit for certain consumers and shield some of those individual policyholders from potentially steep rate increases. But critics say this maneuver could undermine government efforts to remake the insurance market next year and keep premiums affordable overall.

At issue is a little-known loophole in President Obama’s landmark legislation that enables health insurers to extend existing policies for nearly all of 2014. This runs contrary to the widespread belief that all health insurance must immediately comply with new federal rules starting Jan. 1, when most provisions of the law take effect.

“Insurers are onto this, and the big question is how many will try to game the system,” said Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, a law professor and health policy expert at Washington and Lee University.

Some of the nation’s biggest health insurers are looking to take advantage of this delay, and Arkansas officials are encouraging companies to do this by resetting customers’ renewal dates for the end of December. There’s also concern that some insurers and agents could rush to sell more individual policies before year-end so they could be extended in 2014.

Some policy experts are expressing concern about this practice for fear that insurers will focus on renewing younger and healthier policyholders and hold them out of the broader insurance pool next year. Their absence could leave a sicker and older population in new government insurance exchanges, driving up medical costs and premiums there.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Of course they know about it! They wrote it! nt

[UnrepentantLiberal]

6. +1

[ProfessionalLeftist]

9. +1 n/t

[ProSense]

17. Except for this

...provision:

<...>

Vermont also intends to be the first state in the U.S. with a single-payer health-care system, in which the government pays all of its residents’ medical bills and insurance companies are unnecessary. The state legislature passed a law in 2011 to steer the state toward adopting such a system in 2017, the soonest possible under the federal health-care law.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-01/vermont-s-first-look-at-insurance-exchange-rates-shows-savings.html

Vermont Insurance-Exchange Rates Show Savings From Health Law
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022602134

...and expanding Medicaid:

HHS finalizes rule guaranteeing 100 percent funding for new Medicaid beneficiaries
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022584523

[Maven]

19. +1

[Yo_Mama]

20. Hmmm. A good point. They did write a lot of it. n/t

[Cal Carpenter]

2. "little-known loophole"

Right.

Little-known to the general public because they aren't putting this sort of detail (loophole) into the HHS press releases, which seem to be the only thing that the press is actually printing most of the time with this bill.

Possibly little-known to the legislature which passes bills without even fucking reading them.

Well-known by the insurance cos, whose lobby was intimately involved in writing this bill.

Meh.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

7. Yep.

[graham4anything]

3. Because of Pres. Obama,my monthly has decreased from $3100 to $1500. That is 53%less.

I was for first time able to switch companies, NO lifetime cap, NO fear about any prior.
I couldn't do this last year, did it this year (family plan).
AND it has less split after deductible now 70 to 30 instead of 50/50.

Three cheers for President Obama!
Because of him, I was able to have my insurance freedom and be happy about it.

(self insured family plan).


(and its funny, the above is stating consumers will pay less, but it is a bad thing.
The detractors really hate when the customer saves money I guess.)

[Cal Carpenter]

4. How do you feel about the millions of Americans

who will still have no access to affordable health care when this is fully implemented?

[graham4anything]

5. France's system is perfect. Pay it forward, no worry retirement, higher taxes when well.

Have a much higher starting tax when working all across the board.

When ill, ZERO bills, 100% healthcare that is perfect, no payment needed, no social security
as retirement has benefits paid in advance

And here, everyone should pay the same too. Would be nice.
Now, the poorest should be given for free, the ones who have been getting FREE healthcare benefits by paying a mere pittance by their corporations, maybe they have to pay a teensy bit more, but cry me a river as they were getting FREE benefits

Why should the selfemployed get to finance those that work for a company

Maybe the big firms should do away with their insurance, and everyone gets their own like the selfemployed?

After all, you all whine about companies, but the 99% of the corporation is just regular people with one hell of a great health plan the last 30 years seemingly with no concern of the selfemployed.

And there is NO reason for no insurance, as everyone can get vouchers for it who cannot work. Insurance should be manditory for all. After all, those without insurance cost those with more, and those who refuse to listen to wellness programs, should also pay more.
One can guzzle a 4000 calorie triple whopper, but why should I pay for their on coming health care while they guzzle 48 ounce sodas?

BTW, once the great people who are in limbo are made citizens, then all 11 million will pay into the system creating more money available making it even better.

All those who work and are well, should like the French, pay more in starting taxes and pay it forward, so there is ZERO costs when sick. System works better.
Tis a pity the French as so hated by some. Not by me.

And thank God for Wellness.

[zipplewrath]

8. You might want to read closer

"And there is NO reason for no insurance, as everyone can get vouchers for it who cannot work. Insurance should be manditory for all."

You do realize that the Obamacare you love so much spells out EXACTLY who is not required to have insurance, and it is entirely because of their inability to afford it, and the governments unwillingness to provide them with "vouchers".

[Capt. Obvious]

11. Galloping Gish

Well played

[caledesi]

21. France is rated number 1 by the World Health Organization. The dirty little secret by the US

All we hear ALL of the time are TAXES but... we don't hear:

They have have a HIGHER minimum wage they can LIVE ON
They live longer (it certainly isn't their diets )
They ger health care, education etc.
They don't WORRY!
They work a 35 hour week
They go on Holiday in August - businesses shut down
Ambulances are fully equipped for surgery - physician is onboard
House calls & at NIGHT!
They don't WORRY!


Been there, up close and personal.

They don't WORRY!

[AAO]

15. I thought prior conditions didn't kick in until 2014 for adults

[graham4anything]

16. Guess horizon is doing it now. They didn't 12 months ago.

Some in New Jersey at least have started early.

[AAO]

18. Good for them!

And good for you!!!

[ProfessionalLeftist]

10. All this is a symptom of our "healthcare" system being a for-profit system in US

Morally, economically, logistically, ethically - it should not be. That it remains so makes no sense except for two things: Unmitigated CORPORATE GREED and corporate control of the U.S. gov't which should have long ago switched to a single-payer system or Medicare for all.

[Maineman]

12. Exactly !!

[loudsue]

13. That's a good site.

I wish more people had access to the information about health care in the good ole usa.

[ProSense]

14. Not only is this

<...>

These health plans “would not be required to comply with the (Affordable Care Act) market reforms until 12/31/2014,” according to the Arkansas bulletin.

<...>

Other states may oppose that approach, further underscoring the uneven implementation of the federal healthcare law across the country. Oregon Insurance Commissioner Louis Savage said these renewals could be problematic and his office issued a rule barring any extension beyond March 31, 2014.

"We want to get as many people as possible into the exchange," Savage said. "I think having renewals go deep into 2014 is counterproductive to the goals of the federal healthcare law."

...simply a delaying tactic, putting off the inevitable, but it also only applies to those states that will allow it. Since the federal government will be running the exchanges in most of the states likely to take advantage of this, the federal government gets to set the rules for participation in the exchange.