Come for the "Death Panels," stay for the "Policy Cancellations"

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

I think most of you know all about this, but as a public service to those DUers who have Tea Party uncles or rightwing friends on Facebook, let's unpack this issue a bit.

One of the early (and important) changes of the Affordable Care Act was insurance reform. Insurance companies for years have been offering "junk" policies with such limited coverage that they're hardly worth the low insurance premiums customers are paying. Moving forward, if insurance companies want to sell a product called "health insurance" they have to offer a product that meets specific minimum requirements. However, because of a grandfather clause in the ACA, these same companies may continue offering the "junk" policies, provided they make no changes and don't enroll any new customers. Consumers who already have these policies may continue this coverage and still be considered compliant with the ACA.

Hence, "If you like your current plan, you can keep it."

What's happening now is that many insurance companies, despite the fact that there is no statutory requirement to do so, are deciding to drop these policies. Why? Because it's less expensive to offer a compliant plan to a growing number of potential customers than to offer a noncompliant plan to a pool of customers that will be constantly dwindling, particularly if you plan to offer a compliant plan in addition to a noncompliant one. Companies are probably looking at their customer mix and seeing that, for many of them, obtaining compliant coverage (and a federal subsidy) is cheaper than maintaining their noncompliant plan. So rather than let their customers wander off to a competitor, they're simply switching their customers to a compliant plan.

Oh, yeah. And some companies are just using the ACA as a smokescreen to dump their high-risk customers.

In any case, there is not one syllable in the Affordable Care Act that requires insurance companies to stop offering these plans or to drop coverage for those enrolled under them. This is entirely at the discretion of the insurance company and it has nothing to do with any mandate of the ACA.

[TeeYiYi]

1. I've been uninsured for about three years...

...but I am registered with a temp agency that offers insurance. When I looked into it several years ago, the people who work there told me not to bother; that it would be better to put my money into a savings account.

I received a letter from the temp agency about a month ago informing me that their insurance program was unable to compete with ACA and that I should shop on the exchanges.

Insurance is and always has been a racket.

TYY

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

2. Insurance may be a racket...

but not having insurance can be a disaster.

Perhaps look into health insurance offered by a non-profit entity? That's not to say that it will be more affordable or that their CEO isn't making a gargantuan salary. But a story in Consumer Reports last year showed that non-profit providers tended to offer better coverage.

[TeeYiYi]

3. I agree. Not having health insurance...

...is a dangerous position to be in. It has had a terrible impact on me personally. I look forward to the opportunity to be insured once again through the ACA.

TYY