That Obamacare ‘Bailout’ Saves Taxpayers $8 Billion

The Congressional Budget Office expects insurance companies to pay in more than they take out.

Marco Rubio listens to Senator Max Baucus as he testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for his confirmation to become the next US ambassdor to China on Capitol Hill in Washington,DC on January 28, 2014.
National Journal
Sam Baker
Add to Briefcase
Sam Baker
Feb. 4, 2014, 8:24 a.m.

The Obama­care pro­gram Re­pub­lic­ans have cri­ti­cized as a “bail­out for in­sur­ance com­pan­ies” will ac­tu­ally save the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment about $8 bil­lion, the Con­gres­sion­al Budget Of­fice said Tues­day.

The pro­gram in ques­tion, known as risk cor­ridors, was de­signed to sta­bil­ize in­sur­ance premi­ums if the pool of people who sign up for cov­er­age is dif­fer­ent than ex­pec­ted.

Many Re­pub­lic­ans, led by Sen. Marco Ru­bio, want to re­peal the pro­gram — per­haps as part of an agree­ment to raise the debt ceil­ing. But the pro­gram will prob­ably save the gov­ern­ment money, CBO said in its re­vised budget fig­ures.

Here’s how risk cor­ridors work: When in­surers’ real-life costs are high­er than what they ex­pec­ted when they set their premi­ums, the gov­ern­ment ab­sorbs some of the losses. When in­surers’ costs are lower than ex­pec­ted, they pay in­to the pro­gram.

In ef­fect, the gov­ern­ment shares in un­ex­pec­ted costs as well as un­ex­pec­ted sav­ings. And the sav­ings will likely be big­ger, CBO said.

In­surers will prob­ably re­ceive about $8 bil­lion in risk-cor­ridor pay­ments, CBO said, but will pay in roughly $16 bil­lion — for a net sav­ings to the gov­ern­ment of about $8 bil­lion.

CBO Dir­ect­or Doug El­men­d­orf said that doesn’t mean re­peal­ing the risk cor­ridors would add $8 bil­lion to the de­fi­cit — in­surers change their be­ha­vi­or be­cause they’re count­ing on these pay­ments, he noted, so re­peal would need to be scored on its own.

Still, today’s es­tim­ate cer­tainly makes it easi­er for vul­ner­able Demo­crats to res­ist any polit­ic­al pres­sure to re­peal risk cor­ridors. It might also re­flect some un­der­ly­ing op­tim­ism about Obama­care en­roll­ment.

Every­one knows over­all en­roll­ment will be some­what lower than ex­pec­ted — CBO says about 1 mil­lion lower — be­cause of the botched rol­lout of Health­ That un­cer­tainty has stoked fears that in­surers will end up with sick­er, more ex­pens­ive pa­tients than they planned, caus­ing them to raise premi­ums next year.

But by pro­ject­ing that risk cor­ridors would save the gov­ern­ment money, CBO is say­ing it ex­pects in­surers’ costs, over­all, to be lower than ex­pec­ted — not high­er.

“Des­pite the tech­nic­al prob­lems that have im­peded en­roll­ment in ex­changes “¦ CBO ex­pects that premi­um bids will still ex­ceed costs,” the budget of­fice said.

Risk cor­ridors wouldn’t save the gov­ern­ment money if in­sur­ance mar­kets na­tion­wide were flooded with sick, ex­pens­ive pa­tients. In a worst-case scen­ario, in­surers would have to pay out far more claims than they an­ti­cip­ated when they set their premi­ums, trig­ger­ing risk-cor­ridor pay­ments from the gov­ern­ment and then premi­um in­creases next year.

By pre­dict­ing sav­ings from the risk-cor­ridor pro­gram, CBO isn’t ne­ces­sar­ily pre­dict­ing that Obama­care’s ex­changes will be health­i­er than ex­pec­ted; there are oth­er reas­ons for spend­ing to be low. But the pro­jec­tion is a sign that CBO doesn’t ex­pect the kind of ex­cep­tion­ally bad risk pool that could threaten the ex­changes’ ba­sic solvency.

El­men­d­orf noted that there is con­sid­er­able un­cer­tainty in CBO’s ana­lys­is of how the health care law will af­fect in­surers and said the $8 bil­lion fig­ure was in the middle of a wide range of pos­sib­il­it­ies. It could save the gov­ern­ment more, he said, or it could end up cost­ing tax­pay­ers.

Catherine Hollander contributed to this article.
What We're Following See More »
Chef Jose Andres Campaigns With Clinton
7 hours ago
White House Weighs in Against Non-Compete Contracts
8 hours ago

"The Obama administration on Tuesday called on U.S. states to ban agreements prohibiting many workers from moving to their employers’ rivals, saying it would lead to a more competitive labor market and faster wage growth. The administration said so-called non-compete agreements interfere with worker mobility and states should consider barring companies from requiring low-wage workers and other employees who are not privy to trade secrets or other special circumstances to sign them."

House Investigators Already Sharpening Their Spears for Clinton
9 hours ago

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz plans to spend "years, come January, probing the record of a President Hillary Clinton." Chaffetz told the Washington Post: “It’s a target-rich environment. Even before we get to Day One, we’ve got two years’ worth of material already lined up. She has four years of history at the State Department, and it ain’t good.”

Clinton Super PAC Enters the House Fray
13 hours ago

Priorities USA, the super PAC aligned with the Clinton campaign, which has already gotten involved in two Senate races, is now expanding into House races. The group released a 30 second spot which serves to hit Donald Trump and Iowa Rep. Rod Blum, who is in a tough race to win re-election in Iowa's first congressional district. The super PAC's expansion into House and Senate races shows a high level of confidence in Clinton's standing against Trump.

House to Vote on Iran Sanctions Renewal in Lame Duck
13 hours ago

Republican House leaders are planning on taking up a vote to renew the Iran Sanctions Act as soon as the lame-duck session begins in mid-November. The law, which expires on Dec. 31, permits a host of sanctions against Iran's industries, defense, and government. The renewal will likely pass the House, but its status is unclear once it reaches the Senate, and a spokesman from the White House refused to say whether President Obama would sign it into law.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.