The troubled launch of Health Care.gov has raised plenty of questions about whether young, healthy people will enroll in coverage — and, if they don’t, whether insurance companies will have to raise their premiums or give up on Obama- care’s new insurance markets altogether. But the law’s authors built in a safety net to help guard against that worst-case scenario. In essence, it’s an insurance policy for insurance companies.
The backstop is an approach known as the “three R’s.” And health care experts say that, taken together, the three prongs will help insurers not only grapple with the transition to the new requirements to cover sick people but also ward off a future in which they raise premiums so much that healthy patients stay away. “All three of those significantly shield the plans from adverse selection,” says Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington & Lee University and a fan of the Affordable Care Act.
“Adverse selection” is the technical term for a bad risk pool — too many sick people, and not enough healthy people, signing up. The Affordable Care Act includes tools, like the individual mandate, to get young people into the system in the first place. If enrollment is truly disastrous, the three R’s can’t rescue insurance companies, but if it is merely middling and if the mix of sick and healthy patients is merely worse than expected, they can help insurers bounce back. Here’s how they work.
Reinsurance: The most straightforward “R” is the temporary reinsurance program. It’s a big pot of money from which the Health and Human Services Department will simply reimburse insurers for the cost of covering especially sick consumers. Once patients hit a certain level of spending, the government pays for most of their costs. The law provides $10 billion in re- insurance payments next year, then smaller amounts for the next two years. “That’s going to be huge if plans get a worse-than-expected risk pool, because it’s going to mean they’re sharing an awful lot of the risk,” Jost says. Reinsurance was included because everyone knows that some sick, expensive patients will enroll; this program guarantees that the government will help pay for them.
Risk corridors: This program is designed to protect the overall marketplace if more high-cost patients than expected sign up. If an insurer’s real costs are higher than it planned, the government pays it part of the excess. If its costs are lower than it planned, the insurer pays the government. The ACA is a big transition for insurance companies, and they have to make their best guess about how much it will cost to cover people in the health care law’s exchanges. Risk corridors are there to balance out the overall financial burden in case they guessed wrong. If literally every insurance company underestimated the cost of participating in the exchanges, says Larry Levitt, senior adviser for special initiatives at the Kaiser Family Foundation, they would all be compensated for that mistake. “Risk corridors absolutely would help to cushion the blow,” he says.
Risk adjustment: The goal here isn’t to stabilize the overall market the way risk corridors do. It’s to make sure that one single company doesn’t end up saddled with the most-expensive patients in a state. Under risk adjustment, insurance companies within a state pay each other. Companies with an especially healthy risk pool make a cash payment to companies that ended up with an especially unhealthy one. The federal government sets the parameters in most states, although, as with the exchanges, some states do it on their own.
The three programs are similar but address slightly different risks. The goal is to ensure that as the health-insurance industry transitions into the new marketplaces, individual companies aren’t forced out of the market and that the system generally won’t have to raise premiums next year to offset unexpected costs this year. That could be the beginning of the dreaded insurance “death spiral,” in which sick customers beget premium increases, which makes coverage less attractive to healthier people. The authors of the health care law didn’t want that, and they recognized that the people who sign up for Obamacare first will probably be the sick people who need it most.
Whether the programs are robust enough to handle Obamacare depends on how the enrollment process goes. The mix of sick and healthy enrollees still has to be right — about 40 percent healthy, according to HHS. Right now, it’s not looking great, at least in the 36 states that turned to the federal government to run their marketplaces, but there’s no way to make a prediction yet about the entire six-month enrollment process. “It’s not like it provides 100 percent protection, but I think cushioning the blow is the right analogy,” Levitt says. The three R’s depend on enrollment being just bad enough, rather than the absolute catastrophe its opponents have predicted.
What We're Following See More »
First, it was Sean Spicer. Then Reince Priebus. Now, presidential adviser Steve Bannon, perhaps the administration's biggest lightning rod for criticism, is out. “White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and Steve Bannon have mutually agreed today would be Steve’s last day,” the White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, said in a statement. “We are grateful for his service and wish him the best.” That's not to say the parting of ways isn't controversial. Bannon says he submitted his resignation on Aug. 7, but earlier today, "the president had told senior aides that he had decided to remove Mr. Bannon."
"The Trump administration has ended Operation Choke Point, the anti-fraud initiative started under the Obama administration that many Republicans argued was used to target gun retailers and other businesses that Democrats found objectionable. Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd told GOP representatives in a Wednesday letter that the long-running program had ended, bringing a conclusion to a chapter in the Obama years that long provoked and angered conservatives who saw Choke Point as an extra-legal crackdown on politically disfavored groups."
"Liberal groups are raising questions about a speaking appearance Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch plans to make next month at the Trump International Hotel in Washington. Gorsuch is scheduled to headline a luncheon celebrating the 50th anniversary of conservative group The Fund for American Studies on September 28, days before the next SCOTUS term begins October 2. Steve Slattery, a spokesman for The Fund for American Studies, said Gorsuch had nothing to do with venue choice, which was made long before the group asked Gorsuch to speak."
"The Trump administration has lost a handful of individuals serving in top cybersecurity roles across the federal government in recent weeks, even as it has struggled to fill high-ranking IT positions. The developments present hurdles for the new administration and speak to the longstanding challenge the federal government faces in competing with the private sector for top tech talent." Among those resigning is Richard Staropoli, "a former U.S. Secret Service agent who served as chief information officer (CIO) of the Department of Homeland Security for just three months," and Dave DeVries, the CIO at OPM. Separately, the White House announced today that President Trump has directed that United States Cyber Command be elevated to the status of a Unified Combatant Command focused on cyberspace operations.