Earlier this month the state Senate sent to the governor’s desk a bill that would create a health exchange in New Jersey. Chris Christie has not yet said whether he’ll sign the bill.
...
You probably haven’t read much about this issue for a simple reason: It’s incredibly complicated. The exchange in question would have to coordinate buyers with insurers in a system relying on federal tax credits that could vary from month to month based on the insured person’s income.
Already insured? You’re not off the hook. The exchange would have the power to regulate your current policy and could impose a surcharge to cover the cost of running its operations.
...
Think of that system and you will have a good idea of where these exchanges could end up – but with one big difference. Americans will accept limits on their cars, but not on their bodies.
...
Huh? Medicare is a single-payer system that is just one stop short of socialized medicine. Obamacare, for all its faults, relies on the market to a much greater degree than Medicare. That’s why that Romney guy supported it back when he was governor of Massachusetts.
The real threat is not that Obamacare will take over Medicare. It’s the other way around, says Mike Cannon, a health-care expert with the free-market Cato Institute in Washington.
“These exchanges are built to fail,” said Cannon. “They’ll drive private insurance companies out of the market. When they do, the whole thing will collapse.”
http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2012/03/obamacare_health-insurance_exc.html
Hat Tip: The Star Ledger
Showing posts with label Editorial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Editorial. Show all posts
Monday, March 26, 2012
Opinion- New Yorkers Need a Health Insurance Exchange
New York has experienced a rapid increase in the number of people without health insurance. For the uninsured, particularly those suffering from chronic illnesses, the consequences can be devastating. However, there is hope: New York could create a health insurance exchange to enable those without health coverage and small businesses to purchase affordable, high quality insurance.
According to the U.S. Census, over 2.5 million New Yorkers are uninsured. The exchange would negotiate with health insurers to offer affordable, high quality insurance. The concept of a health exchange is not new. Massachusetts created one in 2006 and now more than 98 percent of its residents have health insurance coverage. The Massachusetts system was the model for the federal health care reform law. For those states that set up exchanges, the federal government will pick up the tab for start-up costs.
Fourteen states have already created exchanges, including most recently in Mississippi where the Republican insurance commissioner stated, "It's not a Republican idea. It is not a Democratic idea. It is a universal idea, and it has been around a long time.” In our neighboring state New Jersey, the legislature just passed an exchange bill and sent it to Gov. Chris Christie for his consideration.
...
The main issue for the Senate is that an exchange “costs too much.” According to the Senate Majority Leader, “Federal health reforms could cost (New York) taxpayers more than $65 billion for the Medicaid portion alone.” That cost estimate is based on exaggerated figures from a think tank, The Cato Institute. One example of how the cost is inflated is that The Cato Institute averages “cost per enrollee” based on current spending and assumes cost will be the same for all new Medicaid enrollees. Studies have shown that those who are eligible but not enrolled in Medicaid tend to be healthier and, once covered, cost less than those covered previously.
...
Creation of an exchange is vitally important to the American Cancer Society because about 10 percent of all cancer patients lack health insurance when they are diagnosed. As a result, they may choose to delay treatment, thus facing more debilitating therapies later with dim prognoses. No one should have to choose between paying the rent and getting life-saving cancer treatment.
For the estimated 1 million New Yorkers who will get health insurance through the exchange, arguments don’t matter. They need coverage, not rhetoric. Action to create a health exchange is the first step of many that must be accomplished soon if the state will be ready to begin enrolling the uninsured and offer low-cost insurance for small businesses in 2014. The governor and Assembly have done their part. It’s time for the Senate to do its part and include the exchange in its final budget.
http://www.lohud.com/article/20120325/OPINION/303250079/New-Yorkers-need-health-insurance-exchange
Hat Tip: LoHud.Com
According to the U.S. Census, over 2.5 million New Yorkers are uninsured. The exchange would negotiate with health insurers to offer affordable, high quality insurance. The concept of a health exchange is not new. Massachusetts created one in 2006 and now more than 98 percent of its residents have health insurance coverage. The Massachusetts system was the model for the federal health care reform law. For those states that set up exchanges, the federal government will pick up the tab for start-up costs.
Fourteen states have already created exchanges, including most recently in Mississippi where the Republican insurance commissioner stated, "It's not a Republican idea. It is not a Democratic idea. It is a universal idea, and it has been around a long time.” In our neighboring state New Jersey, the legislature just passed an exchange bill and sent it to Gov. Chris Christie for his consideration.
...
The main issue for the Senate is that an exchange “costs too much.” According to the Senate Majority Leader, “Federal health reforms could cost (New York) taxpayers more than $65 billion for the Medicaid portion alone.” That cost estimate is based on exaggerated figures from a think tank, The Cato Institute. One example of how the cost is inflated is that The Cato Institute averages “cost per enrollee” based on current spending and assumes cost will be the same for all new Medicaid enrollees. Studies have shown that those who are eligible but not enrolled in Medicaid tend to be healthier and, once covered, cost less than those covered previously.
...
Creation of an exchange is vitally important to the American Cancer Society because about 10 percent of all cancer patients lack health insurance when they are diagnosed. As a result, they may choose to delay treatment, thus facing more debilitating therapies later with dim prognoses. No one should have to choose between paying the rent and getting life-saving cancer treatment.
For the estimated 1 million New Yorkers who will get health insurance through the exchange, arguments don’t matter. They need coverage, not rhetoric. Action to create a health exchange is the first step of many that must be accomplished soon if the state will be ready to begin enrolling the uninsured and offer low-cost insurance for small businesses in 2014. The governor and Assembly have done their part. It’s time for the Senate to do its part and include the exchange in its final budget.
http://www.lohud.com/article/20120325/OPINION/303250079/New-Yorkers-need-health-insurance-exchange
Hat Tip: LoHud.Com
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Tennessee- Insurance Exchanges Explained
Health insurance exchanges are critical components of the 2010 Affordable Care Act.
...
Tennessee is one of seven states (Idaho, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Kentucky, and Delaware are the others) that have not passed enabling legislation. Our state has obtained some federal funding to begin the planning of an exchange. Governors of South Carolina, Florida, Louisiana, and New Mexico have vetoed legislation that would permit the establishment of exchanges in their states.
...
Through the experiences of patients, I have seen health insurance plans in the past that bordered on fraud. Through convoluted language these plans set lifetime limits on coverage. Minor health issues in childhood could be resurrected to block payments for adult illnesses. Coverage for cancers and other catastrophic illnesses could be canceled in midtreatment. These practices are banned by the ACA and the exchanges established under the legislation.
Most states are well along in preparing for exchanges. Those states that are not assume either that the Supreme Court will rule the ACA unconstitutional or that a new Congress will repeal it. I think this plays roulette with the health of citizens of those states, including Tennessee.
Competition in health care succeeds when consumers are given readily understandable facts that allow them to make informed choices. A state-based exchange is the eminently sensible way to achieve this goal.
http://timesfreepress.com/news/2012/mar/08/insurance-exchanges-explained/
Hat Tip: Chattanooga Times Free Press
...
Tennessee is one of seven states (Idaho, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Kentucky, and Delaware are the others) that have not passed enabling legislation. Our state has obtained some federal funding to begin the planning of an exchange. Governors of South Carolina, Florida, Louisiana, and New Mexico have vetoed legislation that would permit the establishment of exchanges in their states.
...
Through the experiences of patients, I have seen health insurance plans in the past that bordered on fraud. Through convoluted language these plans set lifetime limits on coverage. Minor health issues in childhood could be resurrected to block payments for adult illnesses. Coverage for cancers and other catastrophic illnesses could be canceled in midtreatment. These practices are banned by the ACA and the exchanges established under the legislation.
Most states are well along in preparing for exchanges. Those states that are not assume either that the Supreme Court will rule the ACA unconstitutional or that a new Congress will repeal it. I think this plays roulette with the health of citizens of those states, including Tennessee.
Competition in health care succeeds when consumers are given readily understandable facts that allow them to make informed choices. A state-based exchange is the eminently sensible way to achieve this goal.
http://timesfreepress.com/news/2012/mar/08/insurance-exchanges-explained/
Hat Tip: Chattanooga Times Free Press
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
CO-OPs- Nebraska: Health Care CO-OP Could Benefit
The Obama administration last month announced that it would bankroll formation of a nonprofit health care cooperative, similar to the farm co-ops familiar in rural states, to serve Nebraska and Iowa.
Midwest Members Health would give consumers something unusual in these parts -- welcome competition for the giant companies that dominate the market.
The American Medical Association last year ranked Nebraska the sixth least competitive market among the states.
The new cooperative is Iowa-centric in that its leaders are based in Iowa. Heading the new venture are former Iowa state insurance commissioner David Lyons, Cliff Gold, a former executive at Wellmark Blue Cross Blue Shield in Iowa, and Iowa venture capitalist Steve Ringlee.
The new co-op won a loan for $112,612,100 out of $640 million awarded to six plans for co-ops. Other states to be served by the new co-ops are Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Wisconsin.
The concept proposed by Midwest Members Health is particularly promising in several aspects.
Most importantly, the new co-op plans to utilize Midlands Choice, an existing network of doctors and hospitals, rather than embarking on the massive task of trying to create its own provider network. Midlands Choice already has contracts with all hospitals in Nebraska and Iowa, and 90 percent of physicians.
...
Past efforts to set up health co-operatives do not inspire confidence. Attempts in the 1990s to set up health cooperatives in Florida, Texas and Colorado were unsuccessful. The Government Accountability Office said in 2000 that small cooperatives did not have enough leverage to provide savings for consumers.
The Obama administration, in fact, predicted itself that 40 percent of the loans it just issued to set up new health insurance co-ops would not be repaid.
Lyons said that if the nonprofit insurance co-op couldn't work in Iowa and Nebraska, it probably wouldn't work anywhere. That may not be the most glowing endorsement one could make for the concept, but it has the ring of truth.
http://journalstar.com/news/opinion/editorial/columnists/editorial-health-care-co-op-could-benefit/article_7fc03a20-37f0-52b8-ad21-13536b93d9fa.html
Hat Tip: Lincoln Journal-Star
Midwest Members Health would give consumers something unusual in these parts -- welcome competition for the giant companies that dominate the market.
The American Medical Association last year ranked Nebraska the sixth least competitive market among the states.
The new cooperative is Iowa-centric in that its leaders are based in Iowa. Heading the new venture are former Iowa state insurance commissioner David Lyons, Cliff Gold, a former executive at Wellmark Blue Cross Blue Shield in Iowa, and Iowa venture capitalist Steve Ringlee.
The new co-op won a loan for $112,612,100 out of $640 million awarded to six plans for co-ops. Other states to be served by the new co-ops are Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Wisconsin.
The concept proposed by Midwest Members Health is particularly promising in several aspects.
Most importantly, the new co-op plans to utilize Midlands Choice, an existing network of doctors and hospitals, rather than embarking on the massive task of trying to create its own provider network. Midlands Choice already has contracts with all hospitals in Nebraska and Iowa, and 90 percent of physicians.
...
Past efforts to set up health co-operatives do not inspire confidence. Attempts in the 1990s to set up health cooperatives in Florida, Texas and Colorado were unsuccessful. The Government Accountability Office said in 2000 that small cooperatives did not have enough leverage to provide savings for consumers.
The Obama administration, in fact, predicted itself that 40 percent of the loans it just issued to set up new health insurance co-ops would not be repaid.
Lyons said that if the nonprofit insurance co-op couldn't work in Iowa and Nebraska, it probably wouldn't work anywhere. That may not be the most glowing endorsement one could make for the concept, but it has the ring of truth.
http://journalstar.com/news/opinion/editorial/columnists/editorial-health-care-co-op-could-benefit/article_7fc03a20-37f0-52b8-ad21-13536b93d9fa.html
Hat Tip: Lincoln Journal-Star
Monday, March 5, 2012
Pennsylvania- Gov. Tom Corbett Wants Health Insurance On His Terms
Recently, there have been negative comments on Gov. Tom Corbett’s decision to establish a Health Insurance Exchange and on legislators who intend to introduce enabling legislation.
It is suggested that the administration and General Assembly are endorsing the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA, also known as Obamacare).
To suggest that conservative Republicans in Pennsylvania have suddenly decided to help President Obama shows a lack of understanding of this issue.
Pennsylvania is not legitimizing PPACA by establishing a Health Insurance Exchange.
Instead, Corbett and leaders of the General Assembly are looking at the range of choices and deciding that whatever we design will be better suited than whatever the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services imposes on us if Pennsylvania does not pass enabling legislation by Jan. 1, 2013.
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2012/03/gov_tom_corbett_wants_health_i.html
Hat Tip: PennLive.Com
It is suggested that the administration and General Assembly are endorsing the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA, also known as Obamacare).
To suggest that conservative Republicans in Pennsylvania have suddenly decided to help President Obama shows a lack of understanding of this issue.
Pennsylvania is not legitimizing PPACA by establishing a Health Insurance Exchange.
Instead, Corbett and leaders of the General Assembly are looking at the range of choices and deciding that whatever we design will be better suited than whatever the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services imposes on us if Pennsylvania does not pass enabling legislation by Jan. 1, 2013.
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2012/03/gov_tom_corbett_wants_health_i.html
Hat Tip: PennLive.Com
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Montana- Health Co-Op is a Good Idea for Uninsured Montanans
Critics of the 2-year-old Affordable Care Act don't like it — we're not sure they'd like anything that might actually work during a presidential election year — but it was heartening to see that Montana was on the short list of states to benefit from the first round of funding for health care co-ops.
Montana Health Cooperative got word last week that it would get $58 million in loans over a period of time to get started in the health insurance marketplace that will be created in the state and elsewhere in the next couple of years.
...
The recent Assets & Opportunity Scorecard of the states by the Corporation for Enterprise Development said the state ranks 40th overall in uninsured rate, 48th in uninsured low-income parents and 45th in uninsured low-income children.
Some of those folks are the ones who stand to benefit by creation of the co-op.
John Morrison, former state insurance commissioner who helped form the Montana co-op and now is president of the National Alliance of Health Cooperatives, said the Montana organization "will be consumer-governed and will be responsive to consumer needs."
...
But lo and behold two years after passage of the act — and about nine months after the newly formed Montana Health Cooperative announced that it planned to seek financial assistance under the act — the state co-op joins similar organizations in seven other states as the first federal loan recipients.
...
Critics don't like the injection of government money into the health insurance system, but we'd wager most of them are either wealthy or have decent insurance mostly paid for by their employers.
The Montana Health Co-op won't be able to serve a large portion of the thousands of uninsured Montanans, but it might help create a marketplace that will be more accessible to them.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20120228/OPINION/202280306
Hat Tip: Great Falls Tribune
Montana Health Cooperative got word last week that it would get $58 million in loans over a period of time to get started in the health insurance marketplace that will be created in the state and elsewhere in the next couple of years.
...
The recent Assets & Opportunity Scorecard of the states by the Corporation for Enterprise Development said the state ranks 40th overall in uninsured rate, 48th in uninsured low-income parents and 45th in uninsured low-income children.
Some of those folks are the ones who stand to benefit by creation of the co-op.
John Morrison, former state insurance commissioner who helped form the Montana co-op and now is president of the National Alliance of Health Cooperatives, said the Montana organization "will be consumer-governed and will be responsive to consumer needs."
...
But lo and behold two years after passage of the act — and about nine months after the newly formed Montana Health Cooperative announced that it planned to seek financial assistance under the act — the state co-op joins similar organizations in seven other states as the first federal loan recipients.
...
Critics don't like the injection of government money into the health insurance system, but we'd wager most of them are either wealthy or have decent insurance mostly paid for by their employers.
The Montana Health Co-op won't be able to serve a large portion of the thousands of uninsured Montanans, but it might help create a marketplace that will be more accessible to them.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20120228/OPINION/202280306
Hat Tip: Great Falls Tribune
Monday, February 27, 2012
New Hampshire- NH Should Create its Own Exchanges
An exchange focuses competition on price. And the exchanges are intended to bring sunlight and transparence to the world of health insurance.
Exchanges will be designed as a place where individuals, small employers and eventually larger employers can shop and compare health insurance options.
The law requires that all states have an exchange in place by 2014. States can create their own or choose to let the federal government set the design.
Our New Hampshire Legislature and Executive Council have been stalwart in putting obstacles to a state-designed and implemented exchange.
This year, the Legislature has chosen to table a Senate bill that would set a process for a New Hampshire-designed exchange and made a committee recommendation to pass a leadership-sponsored bill (HB 1297) that New Hampshire “shall not plan, create, participate in or enable a state exchange for health insurance.”
Insurers, providers and small businesses support the concept that New Hampshire design an exchange that is unique to us, one best for New Hampshire. So why isn’t it happening?
Although Republicans can take credit for initiating the idea of an exchange – the conservative Heritage Foundation first touted the idea – many Republicans, and most certainly those extreme members of the Legislature, find all things “Obamacare “objectionable, apparently whether good policy or not.
Let’s look for the silver lining. If our Legislature persists on its current path, the federal government will design an exchange for us. Perhaps given the lack of leadership in our Legislature, that might turn out to be a good thing.
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opinionperspectives/951510-263/nh-should-create-its-own-exchanges.html
Hat Tip: Nashua Telegraph
Exchanges will be designed as a place where individuals, small employers and eventually larger employers can shop and compare health insurance options.
The law requires that all states have an exchange in place by 2014. States can create their own or choose to let the federal government set the design.
Our New Hampshire Legislature and Executive Council have been stalwart in putting obstacles to a state-designed and implemented exchange.
This year, the Legislature has chosen to table a Senate bill that would set a process for a New Hampshire-designed exchange and made a committee recommendation to pass a leadership-sponsored bill (HB 1297) that New Hampshire “shall not plan, create, participate in or enable a state exchange for health insurance.”
Insurers, providers and small businesses support the concept that New Hampshire design an exchange that is unique to us, one best for New Hampshire. So why isn’t it happening?
Although Republicans can take credit for initiating the idea of an exchange – the conservative Heritage Foundation first touted the idea – many Republicans, and most certainly those extreme members of the Legislature, find all things “Obamacare “objectionable, apparently whether good policy or not.
Let’s look for the silver lining. If our Legislature persists on its current path, the federal government will design an exchange for us. Perhaps given the lack of leadership in our Legislature, that might turn out to be a good thing.
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opinionperspectives/951510-263/nh-should-create-its-own-exchanges.html
Hat Tip: Nashua Telegraph
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Opinion- Iowa: Utah or Massachusetts? No, it’s Iowa
We met recently with two groups pushing for establishment of health insurance exchanges in Iowa. One of the 2010 federal Affordable Care Act’s central requirements is for each state to establish an exchange, where individuals, businesses and organizations can select from a variety of insurance options. It’s supposed to encourage competition among insurers and give consumers more affordable choices.
Both the Iowa Health Alliance and the Iowa Health Advocates want the Iowa Legislature to authorize work on an exchange sooner than later. They argue that waiting until July for the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the ACA’s mandate that every individual must have health insurance coverage is too late.
We agree. Legislators have to authorize a plan by Jan. 1; otherwise, the federal government will do it for us. Yes, depending on the November election outcome, Congress could throw out the exchange requirement, as well as any other or all parts of the ACA regardless of how the high court rules on the mandate.
But waiting because of the uncertainties doesn’t seem wise.
...
Each plan provides some lessons. But Iowa should not get hung up on any other state’s model. Our exchange’s governing body should be transparent, independent and represent both consumer and business interests. We also see merit in having the insurance industry serve in an advisory capacity only to avoid conflicts of interest.
Bottom line: Devise a plan to fit Iowans’ needs.
http://thegazette.com/2012/02/19/utah-or-massachusetts-no-its-iowa/
Hat tip: The Gazette
Both the Iowa Health Alliance and the Iowa Health Advocates want the Iowa Legislature to authorize work on an exchange sooner than later. They argue that waiting until July for the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the ACA’s mandate that every individual must have health insurance coverage is too late.
We agree. Legislators have to authorize a plan by Jan. 1; otherwise, the federal government will do it for us. Yes, depending on the November election outcome, Congress could throw out the exchange requirement, as well as any other or all parts of the ACA regardless of how the high court rules on the mandate.
But waiting because of the uncertainties doesn’t seem wise.
...
Each plan provides some lessons. But Iowa should not get hung up on any other state’s model. Our exchange’s governing body should be transparent, independent and represent both consumer and business interests. We also see merit in having the insurance industry serve in an advisory capacity only to avoid conflicts of interest.
Bottom line: Devise a plan to fit Iowans’ needs.
http://thegazette.com/2012/02/19/utah-or-massachusetts-no-its-iowa/
Hat tip: The Gazette
Opinion- Idaho: Will Playing Politics Really Pay Off?
Two months ago, state legislators by and large declared health insurance exchanges would become the big issue of this session.
Now, as a bill on the matter finally emerges, the question becomes how the Legislature will treat this issue in an already-shrill election year: politically, or in the practical way it deserves?
For several months, Rep. Fred Wood, R-Burley, and Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, have worked on legislation that would establish a state-operated health insurance exchange, one of the provisions of the federal health care reforms dubbed “Obamacare.”
Meanwhile, Idaho is one of many states that has sued over Obamacare and now awaits a decision this summer from the U.S. Supreme Court. Idaho Falls state Rep. Janice McGeachin is throwing down as many roadblocks to the process as she can, this week proposing the Legislature create a committee to ponder the issue for a while. House opposition has led Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter to drop plans to use federal funding to help start the exchange, putting more pressure on an already-tight state budget. Otter worries the state doesn’t have enough time to set its exchange up by the federal due date anyway.
The clock is ticking. What’s a legislator to do?
...
Legislators trying to ignore the health reforms should ask themselves this: If Idaho’s lawsuit doesn’t go their way, will the state be prepared to make the best of the federal law? Or in attempting to reject a perceived federal overreach, are they setting the state up to possibly lose both its court case and any control over its insurance exchange?
Right and wrong are always in the eye of the beholder. For some in Boise, it’s apparently hard to see much of anything at all.
http://magicvalley.com/news/opinion/editorial/our-view-will-playing-politics-really-pay-off/article_29e72c7c-9fed-59ad-948a-2c86a5849c6f.html
Hat tip: Magic Valley Times-News
Now, as a bill on the matter finally emerges, the question becomes how the Legislature will treat this issue in an already-shrill election year: politically, or in the practical way it deserves?
For several months, Rep. Fred Wood, R-Burley, and Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, have worked on legislation that would establish a state-operated health insurance exchange, one of the provisions of the federal health care reforms dubbed “Obamacare.”
Meanwhile, Idaho is one of many states that has sued over Obamacare and now awaits a decision this summer from the U.S. Supreme Court. Idaho Falls state Rep. Janice McGeachin is throwing down as many roadblocks to the process as she can, this week proposing the Legislature create a committee to ponder the issue for a while. House opposition has led Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter to drop plans to use federal funding to help start the exchange, putting more pressure on an already-tight state budget. Otter worries the state doesn’t have enough time to set its exchange up by the federal due date anyway.
The clock is ticking. What’s a legislator to do?
...
Legislators trying to ignore the health reforms should ask themselves this: If Idaho’s lawsuit doesn’t go their way, will the state be prepared to make the best of the federal law? Or in attempting to reject a perceived federal overreach, are they setting the state up to possibly lose both its court case and any control over its insurance exchange?
Right and wrong are always in the eye of the beholder. For some in Boise, it’s apparently hard to see much of anything at all.
http://magicvalley.com/news/opinion/editorial/our-view-will-playing-politics-really-pay-off/article_29e72c7c-9fed-59ad-948a-2c86a5849c6f.html
Hat tip: Magic Valley Times-News
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Opinion- Nebraska: Insurance Exchanges Need to Work for Rural Nebraskans
The Nebraska Legislature will soon be debating the merit of the development of a health insurance exchange in Nebraska. Rural places and their residents have unique circumstances that must be considered and addressed in the development of Exchanges. It is important to note that rural patients face the most daunting of health care challenges: they are older, poorer and sicker. Rural America is less healthy due to too much smoking, drinking and eating, and too little exercise, education, jobs and income.
...
Health insurance exchanges must assure rural relevant risk sharing. We understand and support the value in the pooling of risk amongst insurers that occur amongst qualified plans for sales both inside and outside of the exchange. By pooling risk across a larger portion of the population relative to the individual market, exchanges will spread risk and create a much more stable market place. Exchanges can both reduce premium costs for residents and attract a greater volume of health plans to the market. In the past, many health plans have competed on who was best at avoiding sick people. The elimination of medical underwriting is hugely important to this principle, but it could be lost if the individual mandate and accompanying tax credits is eliminated as a consequence to adverse action by the courts.
...
We realize that some have argued that national health plans are antagonistic to individual state exchanges and much prefer to compete within the context of a single set of rules determined by the Federal government as default for those states who do not establish an exchange by 2014. However, we believe that there are many high-value in-state insurance products that have developed and that these products will better continue to flourish with state-based exchanges. We believe the quality of products will increase more if exchanges facilitate a consistent set of metrics that are the focus of any incentives by health plans within the exchange.
The Nebraska Rural Health Association sees the exchanges as a critical tool for expanding access to health insurance coverage, while fostering value-based competition among private plans to promote quality and efficiency. Exchanges are particularly important in rural communities as they are in general more dependent on the individual and small group markets. To the detriment of rural communities, many have seen these markets as being less functional than the market for larger employers.
http://www.journaldemocrat.com/ag_news/x440451529/OPINION-Insurance-Exchanges-Need-to-Work-for-Rural-Nebraska
Hat tip: Syracuse Journal-Democrat
...
Health insurance exchanges must assure rural relevant risk sharing. We understand and support the value in the pooling of risk amongst insurers that occur amongst qualified plans for sales both inside and outside of the exchange. By pooling risk across a larger portion of the population relative to the individual market, exchanges will spread risk and create a much more stable market place. Exchanges can both reduce premium costs for residents and attract a greater volume of health plans to the market. In the past, many health plans have competed on who was best at avoiding sick people. The elimination of medical underwriting is hugely important to this principle, but it could be lost if the individual mandate and accompanying tax credits is eliminated as a consequence to adverse action by the courts.
...
We realize that some have argued that national health plans are antagonistic to individual state exchanges and much prefer to compete within the context of a single set of rules determined by the Federal government as default for those states who do not establish an exchange by 2014. However, we believe that there are many high-value in-state insurance products that have developed and that these products will better continue to flourish with state-based exchanges. We believe the quality of products will increase more if exchanges facilitate a consistent set of metrics that are the focus of any incentives by health plans within the exchange.
The Nebraska Rural Health Association sees the exchanges as a critical tool for expanding access to health insurance coverage, while fostering value-based competition among private plans to promote quality and efficiency. Exchanges are particularly important in rural communities as they are in general more dependent on the individual and small group markets. To the detriment of rural communities, many have seen these markets as being less functional than the market for larger employers.
http://www.journaldemocrat.com/ag_news/x440451529/OPINION-Insurance-Exchanges-Need-to-Work-for-Rural-Nebraska
Hat tip: Syracuse Journal-Democrat
Opinion- Maryland: Health Exchanges Will Benefit Maryland Families
It's no wonder Maryland families are so hard pressed to find good, affordable health insurance — premiums have outpaced earnings, and the field of insurance options is confusing. Even if a family is fortunate enough to have coverage, it's hard to know if what you're paying for is going to be there for you when you need it. That's why our Health Care for All Coalition is so excited about Gov.Martin O'Malley's health care bill (SB 238). By setting up a competitive insurance marketplace for private health insurance, also known as an exchange, this bill will give Marylanders more choice, more control and more peace of mind about their health care.
In Maryland, the average premium for family coverage in an HMO went up 42 percent in just six years, from $9,573 in 2004 to $13,613 in 2010. At the same time, the median family income declined 2 percent (adjusted for inflation). As a result of this disparity, 14.5 percent of non-elderly Marylanders, or 720,000 people, are uninsured. Given the recent economic turmoil, this would have been even worse but for the expansion of health care coverage in recent years to more than 300,000 Marylanders, funded in large part by a lifesaving increase in the state tobacco tax.
Fortunately, the federal health care law known as the Affordable Care Act has created a tremendous opportunity for states to make health care more affordable by creating exchanges that are better marketplaces for private health insurance. The O'Malley administration's bill takes advantage of this opportunity and leads the country in implementing a stronger, redesigned health care system.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-health-exchange-20120215,0,731307.story
Hat tip: Baltimore Sun
In Maryland, the average premium for family coverage in an HMO went up 42 percent in just six years, from $9,573 in 2004 to $13,613 in 2010. At the same time, the median family income declined 2 percent (adjusted for inflation). As a result of this disparity, 14.5 percent of non-elderly Marylanders, or 720,000 people, are uninsured. Given the recent economic turmoil, this would have been even worse but for the expansion of health care coverage in recent years to more than 300,000 Marylanders, funded in large part by a lifesaving increase in the state tobacco tax.
Fortunately, the federal health care law known as the Affordable Care Act has created a tremendous opportunity for states to make health care more affordable by creating exchanges that are better marketplaces for private health insurance. The O'Malley administration's bill takes advantage of this opportunity and leads the country in implementing a stronger, redesigned health care system.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-health-exchange-20120215,0,731307.story
Hat tip: Baltimore Sun
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Opinion- Florida: Missed Opportunities to Improve Health Care
Despite the hostility of Gov. Rick Scott and the Republican-controlled Legislature to the federal health care reform law, Florida organizations have received $119.6 million in funds from it over the last two years. A new study shows that money largely went to nongovernmental groups to fund essential health services while the state lost out on tens of millions because of the governor's opposition. So while private groups prepare, Tallahassee fiddles.
One of those missed opportunities is the money that flowed to states that started developing their own state-based health insurance exchanges. Scott's decision not to prepare for 2014, when the state exchanges are fully operational, likely means the federal government will have to establish Affordable Insurance Exchanges for Floridians instead.
...
The point of states developing their own exchange is to allow for flexibility and innovation, giving each state the opportunity to meet the needs of its own residents. But Scott is intent on having Florida watch from the sidelines, even as other states with Republican governors such as Alabama prepare. Alabama received more than $8.5 million in federal exchange establishment grants after an exchange study commission, created by the Republican governor who opposes the federal law, issued recommendations for implementation.
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/floridas-missed-opportunities-to-improve-health-care/1215293
Hat tip: Tampa Bay Times
One of those missed opportunities is the money that flowed to states that started developing their own state-based health insurance exchanges. Scott's decision not to prepare for 2014, when the state exchanges are fully operational, likely means the federal government will have to establish Affordable Insurance Exchanges for Floridians instead.
...
The point of states developing their own exchange is to allow for flexibility and innovation, giving each state the opportunity to meet the needs of its own residents. But Scott is intent on having Florida watch from the sidelines, even as other states with Republican governors such as Alabama prepare. Alabama received more than $8.5 million in federal exchange establishment grants after an exchange study commission, created by the Republican governor who opposes the federal law, issued recommendations for implementation.
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/floridas-missed-opportunities-to-improve-health-care/1215293
Hat tip: Tampa Bay Times
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Hi! The Goal! The Plan! & Fair Use!
Hi. This is my first post. My goal is to try to bring together all of the different news coming out from the various states concerning the Health Care Exchanges to be implemented through the PPACA. Obviously with 50 states and exchanges this will not be fully comprehensive. Readers (other than myself) can submit any link and it will be published as soon as humanly possible. This is more of an academic exercise. I am currently in the SLU Law Health program and tracking these changes intersects my two current interests of politics and policy implementation. This site is not intended to be a political blog. Rather it is trying to be informative and link to local news stories covering important market developments. The Health Care Exchanges can be a innovative market based attempt to bring insurance costs down for consumers and try to bend the overall costs of health care downward. Documenting and tracking the various ways each State handles this program will allow for quicker comparisons and more knowledge about how policy choices affect consumers. Each post will be cross-indexed by State name so that previous posts concerning those States can be quickly brought up for comparison. Hopefully this goes well and is useful to someone other than yours truly.
The use of these articles is for news and academic purposes only. No competition is intended with any source. Every source will have a link to the original article and include a thank you, 'hat tip' to that source.
Each posting will limit excerpts to a limited selection to get the general gist of the news.
All use of copyrighted material is viable under fair use provisions.
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter7/index.html
Local newspapers and reporters are only getting more important as our world is becoming more connected and this blog would not be possible without their work.
Thanks!
The use of these articles is for news and academic purposes only. No competition is intended with any source. Every source will have a link to the original article and include a thank you, 'hat tip' to that source.
Each posting will limit excerpts to a limited selection to get the general gist of the news.
All use of copyrighted material is viable under fair use provisions.
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter7/index.html
Local newspapers and reporters are only getting more important as our world is becoming more connected and this blog would not be possible without their work.
Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)