Laszewski’s Vox interview suggests that industry executives are blaming this death spiral on Trump’s plan to repeal and replace it. If so, it is a false narrative. Hillary Clinton’s election would not have forestalled Obamacare’s collapse. She would have used the crisis as a pretext for making government-run health plans available in the exchanges. Trump’s election offers an opportunity to move instead toward market-based solutions.
A new study by Jonathan Gruber, one of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) chief economic architects, suggests that roughly two-thirds of new Medicaid enrollees in 2014 were eligible for the program under previous state eligibility criteria—meaning that they were not made eligible by the ACA. If accurate, then a much smaller share of new Medicaid enrollees were made eligible for the program by the ACA than Washington experts commonly believe. For example, the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) most recent projection is that only one of six new Medicaid enrollees were eligible for the program before the ACA.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) finally released the 2015 Affordable Care Act (ACA) risk corridor data. The data show the rapid deterioration of the ACA exchanges from 2014 to 2015.
The ACA’s risk corridor program was intended to transfer funds from profitable insurers to unprofitable ones for the first three years of the exchanges (2014 to 2016). The program ran a $2.5 billion deficit for the 2014 plan year as far more insurers incurred losses than made profits. In 2015, the deficit increased to more than $5.8 billion—a 132% increase.
Nearly half of the coverage gains made during Obama’s presidency had nothing to do with ACA provisions and will survive repeal. Many other newly insured people will keep their coverage—if changes are made to health-care financing, and if two popular ACA provisions President-elect Trump has spoken favorably of are retained.
Source: Repeal and Revise | City Journal
Dozens of major regulations passed recently by the Obama administration — including far-reaching changes on health care, consumer protections and environmental safety — could be undone with the stroke of a pen by Donald J. Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress starting in January, thanks to a little-used law that dates back to 1996.And it comes with a scorched-earth kicker: If the law is used to strike down a rule, the federal agency that issued it is barred from enacting similar regulation again in the future.
A new report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that canceling the Obama administration’s expansion of overtime rules would result in a net increase of $2.1 billion in real income for families in 2017. The report said that while scrapping the rule would reduce worker earnings, they would still gain overall due to falling prices and rising profits.
In an ongoing backdoor attempt to pay off insurers burned by President Barack Obama’s signature legislation, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the Obama administration is creating the framework needed to implement a “public option,” the precursor to a single-payer health-care system.Distracted by the presidential election and the news that ACA insurance premiums will increase by an average of 25 percent in 2017, many have failed to notice the administration’s plan to use a special U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) fund, called the Judgment Fund, to funnel billions of dollars to insurers without congressional approval. If it successfully executes this plan, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) will have circumvented Congress to secure a taxpayer bailout for insurers — directly contradicting Congress’s intentions as expressed by multiple spending bills, and possibly violating federal law.