GOP Has Limited Options to Keep Health Exchanges Stable

Lawmakers are contemplating different policies to firm up the individual marketplace, but all have their downsides.

AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
Erin Durkin
Add to Briefcase
Erin Durkin
May 23, 2017, 8 p.m.

Hill Re­pub­lic­ans who hope to sta­bil­ize the in­di­vidu­al health in­sur­ance mar­ket­place are find­ing their op­tions are lim­ited—and the choices they do have may not go down well with con­ser­vat­ives.

State in­sur­ance com­mis­sion­ers and com­pan­ies are press­ing law­makers to guar­an­tee the pay­ments of the Af­ford­able Care Act’s cost-shar­ing-re­duc­tion sub­sidies—which help lower-in­come people af­ford out-of-pock­et costs—or else risk sub­stan­tial rate hikes or in­surers drop­ping out.

Un­less there’s an over­haul of the en­tire sys­tem, law­makers can’t really work around fund­ing the cost-shar­ing-re­duc­tion pay­ments, said Chris Sloan, seni­or man­ager at Avalere Health.

“In the short term, fund­ing the cost-shar­ing-re­duc­tion sub­sidies is key to sta­bil­ity,” said Larry Levitt, seni­or vice pres­id­ent for spe­cial ini­ti­at­ives at the Kais­er Fam­ily Found­a­tion. “Some kind of re­in­sur­ance pro­gram could also be­gin as early as next year, like un­der the [Amer­ic­an Health Care Act’s] sta­bil­ity fund, though it is get­ting late in the year to put that in place in time.”

Re­pub­lic­an Sen. John Ho­even said law­makers are dis­cuss­ing “something like” the cost-shar­ing sub­sidies as part of trans­ition policies. “We’re talk­ing about fig­ur­ing how we do that so that in­sur­ance com­pan­ies don’t all va­cate the ex­changes and leave people without an op­tion while we’re trans­ition­ing to a new plan,” Ho­even said.

The pay­ments are the sub­ject of a law­suit that House Re­pub­lic­ans brought against the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion ar­guing that the sub­sidies were paid without an ap­pro­pri­ation from Con­gress. A dis­trict judge sided with the law­makers, and the ad­min­is­tra­tion ap­pealed. On Monday, the Trump White House asked for an­oth­er delay in the court case, leav­ing the door open for con­tinu­ing the pay­ments.

But leav­ing the court case un­re­solved and fund­ing not as­sured could mean tur­moil for the ex­changes. The Na­tion­al As­so­ci­ation of In­sur­ance Com­mis­sion­ers has said that even if car­ri­ers de­cide to par­ti­cip­ate, un­cer­tainty about this fund­ing could add a 15-20 per­cent load to the rates.

For any areas left without in­sur­ance op­tions on the ex­changes, Sens. Lamar Al­ex­an­der and Bob Cork­er of Ten­ness­ee have de­veloped a pro­pos­al to al­low people to use their sub­sidies off the ex­changes.

But Cork­er told Na­tion­al Journ­al the bill would be only a “stop­gap if noth­ing else were to oc­cur.”

“If everything failed and there was no solu­tion for those people who found them­selves in places where there were no ex­change plans … I would think it would be something that could be­come pretty pop­u­lar,” said Cork­er.

In­surers have also said that en­for­cing the in­di­vidu­al man­date is im­port­ant for shor­ing up the mar­ket­place. But main­tain­ing this mech­an­ism could be a chal­lenge for Re­pub­lic­ans, as it is one of the most hated parts of Obama­care.

Morn­ing Con­sult re­por­ted that Sen­ate Fin­ance Com­mit­tee Chair­man Or­rin Hatch said he wouldn’t be op­posed to delay­ing the re­peal of the in­di­vidu­al man­date. He told Na­tion­al Journ­al: “I don’t think I’ve come out that defin­it­ively, but I’m look­ing at it.”

But Sloan said this would not likely be a short-term solu­tion. “It’s a very poor vehicle for sta­bil­iz­a­tion. … From an eco­nom­ics per­spect­ive, the in­di­vidu­al man­date is the stick that pushes people in­to the mar­ket, but in prac­tice this par­tic­u­lar man­date just doesn’t work,” he said.

Car­oline Pear­son, seni­or vice pres­id­ent of policy and strategy at Avalere Health, said keep­ing the in­di­vidu­al man­date could have a lot to do with im­prov­ing the Con­gres­sion­al Budget Of­fice score. The ini­tial score of the Amer­ic­an Health Care Act es­tim­ated that 14 mil­lion more would be un­in­sured in 2018, mostly due to the re­peal of the in­di­vidu­al man­date. (A CBO score of the re­vised bill is due to be re­leased Wed­nes­day.)

Mean­while, mod­er­ate GOP Sen. Susan Collins said that she and Sen. Bill Cas­sidy are look­ing at their own pro­pos­al to shore up the in­di­vidu­al mar­ket­place.

“One idea that Sen­at­or Cas­sidy and I are ex­plor­ing is: In those states that took the Medi­caid ex­pan­sion, could you com­bine the ex­pan­sion pop­u­la­tion with the in­di­vidu­al mar­ket, which would give you a broad­er pool, and would that help sta­bil­ize the mar­kets?” said Collins. “We’re still look­ing at that. We don’t know the an­swer to it.”

Sen. Mike Rounds said such a change would take time. “Re­mem­ber, no mat­ter what we do, this has got to be look­ing at a goal of a prob­ably some­where between late 2019 and 2020 time peri­od, simply be­cause it takes that long for the mar­ket to start to re­build again,” Rounds said.

Levitt said the ef­fect­ive­ness of this idea would de­pend on the de­tails.

“With the AHCA’s tax cred­its, which don’t scale by in­come, there’s no way most Medi­caid be­ne­fi­ciar­ies would af­ford in­di­vidu­al mar­ket plans,” Levitt said. “… Sig­ni­fic­antly en­hanced tax cred­its for low-in­come people, plus cost-shar­ing sub­sidies, could make cov­er­age more af­ford­able for low-in­come people now covered un­der Medi­caid and po­ten­tially provide some sta­bil­ity.”

What We're Following See More »
TRUMP CONTINUES TO LAWYER UP
Kasowitz Out, John Dowd In
3 days ago
THE LATEST

As the Russia investigation heats up, "the role of Marc E. Kasowitz, the president’s longtime New York lawyer, will be significantly reduced. Mr. Trump liked Mr. Kasowitz’s blunt, aggressive style, but he was not a natural fit in the delicate, politically charged criminal investigation. The veteran Washington defense lawyer John Dowd will take the lead in representing Mr. Trump for the Russia inquiry."

Source:
ALSO INQUIRES ABOUT PARDON POWER
Trump Looking to Discredit Mueller
3 days ago
THE LATEST

President Trump's attorneys are "actively compiling a list of Mueller’s alleged potential conflicts of interest, which they say could serve as a way to stymie his work." They plan to argued that Mueller is going outside the scope of his investigation, in inquiring into Trump's finances. They're also playing small ball, highlighting "donations to Democrats by some of" Mueller's team, and "an allegation that Mueller and Trump National Golf Club in Northern Virginia had a dispute over membership fees when Mueller resigned as a member in 2011." Trump is said to be incensed that Mueller may see his tax returns, and has been asking about his power to pardon his family members.

Source:
INCLUDES NY PROBE INTO MANAFORT
Why Yes, Mueller Is Looking into Trump Businesses
3 days ago
THE LATEST

In addition to ties between Russia and the Trump campaign, Robert Mueller's team is also "examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates, according to a person familiar with the probe. FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development in New York with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow, and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008, the person said. The investigation also has absorbed a money-laundering probe begun by federal prosecutors in New York into Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort."

Source:
Mueller Expands Probe to Trump Business Transactions
3 days ago
THE DETAILS

Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team is "is examining a broad range of transactions involving Trump’s businesses as well as those of his associates", including "Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008."

Source:
ANALYSIS FROM CBO
32 Million More Uninsured by 2026 if Obamacare Repealed
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"A Senate bill to gut Obamacare would increase the number of uninsured people by 32 million and double premiums on Obamacare's exchanges by 2026, according to an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The analysis is of a bill that passed Congress in 2015 that would repeal Obamacare's taxes and some of the mandates. Republicans intend to leave Obamacare in place for two years while a replacement is crafted and implemented."

Source:
×
×

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.

Login