In About-Face, Aetna Backs Away from State-Based Exchanges.

 
 

At least one big insurer is rethinking its plans to sell healthcare policies through the state and federal online marketplaces next year.

Aetna has dropped plans to offer health policies through the insurance exchanges in Ohio and its home state of Connecticut, the company revealed last week.

The Buckeye and Nutmeg state exchanges are the latest to join a growing list of local markets in which the carrier has reversed course and decided not to participate. Since June, it has also backed off plans to sell coverage via the exchanges in six other states, including California, Georgia, Maryland, New York, Tennessee and Texas.

In the case of Connecticut, at least, the decision was made “reluctantly,” according to a letter to the state’s Insurance Department signed by Bruce Campbell, Aetna’s senior actuary. “Please be assured this is not a step taken lightly, and was made as part of national review of our Exchange strategy,” Campbell wrote.

As in some other states, Aetna abandoned its plans after Connecticut regulators questioned the rates it proposed to offer through the state’s exchange, known as Access Health CT or AHCT. Three insurers will still offer individual coverage through AHCT, including Anthem, ConnectiCare and the nonprofit HealthyCT.

“The good news today is that consumers and businesses will retain several, high quality choices, and today’s decision also shows we at AHCT are doing our best to hold rates down,” Kevin Counihan, the chief executive of AHCT, said in a statement. “Our goal is clear: we want to bring affordable, quality health care to Connecticut’s residents and small businesses.”

The story is similar in Maryland, where the insurer said the state’s requirements for rate reductions would force it to operate at a loss. “Unfortunately, we believe the modifications to the rates filed by Aetna and Coventry would not allow us to collect enough premiums to cover the cost of the plans,” Aetna said in a letter to insurance commissioner Therese Goldsmith. Eight other carriers will continue to offer individual policies through Maryland’s web-based insurance market.

In Ohio, Aetna said it’s withdrawing from the individual exchange market for 2014, but plans to continue offering its individual products from its Coventry subsidiary on the exchange. The carrier also said it will continue to provide its individual product in Ohio’s off-exchange market.

Aetna’s decision will leave 12 companies offering 200 individual health insurance plans on the Ohio exchange.

WSJ Rips New Obamacare Exemption for Congress.

The administration’s new rules that allow members of Congress and their staffs to escape the healthcare exchanges under Obamacare represent a double standard, according to a Wall Street Journal editorial.

It boils down to “illegal dispensations for the ruling class, different rules for the hoi polloi,” the Journal said Thursday.

Obamacare stipulates that “the only health plans that the federal government may make available” to Congress are the ones that are part of the law’s insurance exchanges.

But that requirement set off complaints among members and their aides, “because they won’t qualify for Obamacare subsidies and they’ll lose employer contributions they now receive under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP),” the Journal said.

The Journal criticized President Barack Obama for personally instructing the Office of Personnel Management to retain the congressional benefits.

“The eat-your-own-cooking provision begins with the phrase ‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law.’ The feds now interpret that clause as a loophole to mean that the Affordable Care Act did not change the 1959 law that created the FEHBP.”

That means congressional employees can remain enrolled in the FEHBP at the same time that they use Obamacare exchanges.

“The feds then ‘clarify’ — their euphemism — that the regulatory meaning of health benefits in the FEHBP can be Obamacare plans. Voila, taxpayers will continue to chip in $4,900 for individual and $10,000 for family coverage,” the editorial continued.

The lawmakers and their aides will still have to use the exchanges, as required by law, but only because it would have been “too explosive politically” not to, the Journal said.

The Journal said Congress would have done better to create a law offering its workers a raise to make up for the loss of government benefits and subsidies.

“But that would mean an ugly political fight that voters might notice. It’s so much easier to slip through this political fix in August when Congress is out of session and the press corps can’t wait to hit the beach,” the newspaper said.

House Passes Bill To Keep IRS From Enforcing Obamacare.

House Passes Bill To Keep IRS From Enforcing Obamacare

Today, the House passed the Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act of 2013. The purpose of the bill, H.R. 2009, as introduced by Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), is simple: to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury from enforcing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

Labor unions are having problems with the way Obamacare harms their gold-plated health benefits .

Labor unions are having problems with the way Obamacare harms their gold-plated health benefits http://bit.ly/1cG4Zfr The Apothecary, With Avik Roy   Forbes.   Insights into health care and entitlement reform.

Experts: Obamacare will lead to massive spying on US health records.

Jul 24, 2013 The federal government may be  one step closer to keeping tabs on consumers’   health care information with a  new data hub under Obamacare.
dailycaller.com/2013/07/24/experts-obamacare-will-lead-to-massive-spying-on-u-s-health-records/

 

Delay of employer penalties will cost gov’t $10 Billion.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration’s surprise decision to delay a key requirement of the health care law for employers will cost the government $10 billion, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday.

While that’s a big number, the report from the official budget scorekeeper for Congress also put the administration’s recent move within a wider perspective. Overall, the delay for employers and other changes will raise the cost of the expanding coverage for the uninsured by less than 1 percent over 10 years from the budget agency’s previous estimate in May, CBO said.

The White House announced earlier this month that it would delay a requirement for employers with 50 or more workers to offer affordable coverage, or face fines. Instead of going into effect next year, the provision was put off to 2015. A major concession to business groups, the delay took administration allies and adversaries by surprise.

Opponents of the health care law saw the delay as a sign that the implementation of the measure had run into serious problems, and some labor unions denounced it as a handout to big business. But employers welcomed the unexpected respite from complicated reporting rules that the administration concedes will require more time to work out. The White House says the rest of the law’s provisions will roll out without delay.

Uninsured people without access to coverage at work will be able to start shopping for a health plan Oct. 1. Middle-class people will be able to pick from a range of private insurance plans, with new federal tax credits to help pay their premiums. Low-income people will be steered to an expanded version of Medicaid, in states that accept it. Coverage takes effect Jan. 1.

At the same time, most Americans will face an individual requirement to carry health insurance or pay fines. That’s designed to expand the number of healthy people in the pool, since the law forbids insurers from turning away people with pre-existing health problems.

All told, about 13 million of nearly 50 million uninsured U.S. residents are expected to gain coverage in 2014, according to the latest CBO estimates. That number is expected to gradually increase to between 25 million and 30 million people.

The budget office said fewer than half million people will have to forgo coverage as a consequence of the delay in the so-called employer mandate. The delay “will have only a negligible effect on sources of insurance coverage,” the report said.

The government will lose $10 billion in fines that would have collected from employers in the first year of the requirement, the report said. Other last-minute changes by the administration are estimated to add another $2 billion in costs, for a total increase in the cost of $12 billion over 10 years.

However, the impact on the bottom line does not appear to be major — at least in terms of the federal budget.

CBO estimated that the cost of expanding coverage under the law will rise to $1.375 billion from 2014-2023, an increase of less than 1 percent from the agency’s previous cost estimate of $1.363 billion.

Detroit Looks to Obamacare to Cover Pensioners’ Health Care.

Detroit is hoping to lean on the Affordable Care Act to pick up its massive  retiree health care tab as it tries to dig it out of bankruptcy.

The Motor City is reportedly considering shifting its unfunded $5.7 billion in health-care costs of  retired workers that aren’t yet eligible for Medicare to the health insurance  exchanges that are set to hit the market next year under Obamacare.

The $9 billion in pension liabilities to 21,000 retirees is the greatest cost  to the city, which is currently $18 billion in debt, according to the Detroit  Free Press.

If the current pension health-benefits are cut, the majority of retirees will  either receive care via Medicare if they are at least age 65, or through online  insurance exchanges. Those who are at or below 400% of the federal poverty limit  will be eligible for subsidies.

“It will actually be discriminatory,” says Gary Burtless, labor expert at the  Brookings Institute. “Suppose you are a retiree and you believe you had access  to Detroit-provided health insurance plans, but your family income is over  four-times the poverty line.  You will not get any subsidy and will have to  pay for the full cost of the plan without any help of the government, in any  form, whatsoever.”

He adds that Detroit retirees are lucky in one sense, since they are Social  Security-eligible. In some states, including Massachusetts, public workers  cannot collect Social Security benefits because they do not pay into the system.  With that said, Detroit retirees depending on a pension might be forced to claim  Social Security benefit early, and thus reducing their payments.

But what may be good news for Detroit retirees who are eligible for the  health-care subsidy, is bad news for taxpayers, who are helping pay for this  coverage for an unnamed amount of pensioners in the city who are not yet  Medicare eligible, says Michael Tanner, Cato Institute senior fellow.

“It’s a shift of the cost to these [retired] workers and to the taxpayers at  large,” Tanner says. “If Detroit went to Congress and asked them to pay for  their plans, Congress would say, ‘no.’ They are getting a bailout from  taxpayers.”

The average pension check, per month for a retiree in Detroit is under $1,200  according to the Detroit Free Press. Using the Kaiser Family Foundation’s subsidy calculator, a single,  63-year-old worker receiving a $1,200 check per month, or $14,400 pre-tax per  year, would be at 125% of the federal poverty level.  This worker seemingly  does not smoke, and has no children or other family members on the health-care  plan.

Kaiser’s calculator has the unsubsidized annual premium for our fictional  worker at $3,018, and the worker paying $288 for care per year.

Other cash-strapped cities and municipalities are watching the situation in  Detroit closely, as it may provide financial options to unfunded pension  systems, says Tanner.

“This is being talked about in a number of cities,” he says. “The fact is  that Detroit will have to cut its health-care plans and this is a way of  shifting those costs.”

And if Detroit pulls this off successfully, Burtless thinks many other cities  will follow suit.

“If Detroit pulls this off, why shouldn’t other cities and states not evade  their responsibilities and commitment?”

Whether this is the solution the city opts for will all depend on its  bankruptcy restructuring plan, Tanner says. City Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr has  discussed a potential $120 allowance for retirees who were set to receive full  health-care benefits before the Chapter 9 filing, says Steven Kreisberg,  director of collective bargaining at Detroit’s AFSCME union.

Kreisberg says if the shift occurs, it will bring a reduction in benefits for  retirees.

“The ACA has various ranges of coverage, but it will depend on what the  retirees are willing to pay,” he says. “You are moving from a situation where  employees earned the right to retiree health care to [a situation] where that  will be completely withdrawn.”

Solutions to the city’s pension and retiree benefits are still very much in  the “discussion” phase, says Kreisberg.

“It’s a significant loss,” he says. “The coverage employees had was seamless  from employment to retirement and was very comprehensive. “

 

The benefits and pitfalls of buying insurance on health-care exchanges.

The benefits and pitfalls of buying insurance on health-care exchanges. 

As the state health insurance marketplaces, also called exchanges, get set to launch in October, many people have questions about the coverage that will be offered there. Here are a few that were posed to me recently:

Q. Are there unintended consequences of shopping through an exchange? For example, are the benefits of a plan with a lower monthly premium less comprehensive than the benefits of an expensive plan? And are there plans available only to people who qualify for subsidies, so that once income increases, the consumer must switch to a different plan?

A. All plans sold on the exchanges must cover 10 so-called essential health benefits, including prescription drugs, emergency and hospital care, and maternity and newborn care.

For the most part, the plans will differ not in which benefits they cover but in the proportion of costs that consumers will be responsible for paying.

There will be four basic types of plans: Platinum plans will pay 90 percent of the cost of covered medical services, on average; gold plans will pay 80 percent; silver plans will pay 70 percent; and bronze plans, 60 percent. Premiums will vary based on those percentages, so platinum plans generally will be pricier than bronze ones.

Individuals and families with incomes up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level ($45,960 for an individual and $94,200 for a family of four in 2013) may be eligible for federal tax credits to help pay premiums.

Consumers “can use the premium subsidy to purchase any plan,” says Edwin Park, vice president for health policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

If your income increases during the year, you may no longer qualify for the same level of assistance, but you won’t have to switch plans. However, you may have to repay any overpayments that were made to insurers if your projected income turns out to be higher than your actual income. On the other hand, if your income falls, you may be eligible for a larger tax credit. That’s why it’s important to report any income changes to the exchange promptly.

A second type of subsidy available on the exchanges will reduce the amount that people owe in co-payments, deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs. The cost-sharing subsidy is available to individuals and families with incomes up to 250 percent of the poverty level ($28,725 for an individual and $58,875 for a family of four in 2013). To qualify for this subsidy, you must buy a silver plan, Park says. If your income changes, however, you won’t be responsible for any overpayments.

 

Once the exchanges open, how much will an insurer be allowed to increase premiums annually? And are those increases based on claims?

Premium increases are driven by many factors, including medical costs and the health of the people covered by a particular plan.

The Affordable Care Act discourages insurers from imposing unreasonable premium increases in a couple of ways. Insurers in the small-group and individual markets that want to raise premiums by 10 percent or more must submit data, projections and other information to justify the increase to state or federal regulators, who review the requests and make the information available to the public at. Asking insurers to justify why they want to increase rates should act as a deterrent to unreasonable increases, experts say.

But the law doesn’t give regulators new authority to refuse rate increases, says Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Va. It does, however, provide funding for states to beef up their rate-review processes.

The Department of Health and Human Services says that increased scrutiny of insurance rates has led to a decrease in rate increases, says Jost, “and that’s probably true.”

In addition, the law requires insurers to spend at least 80 percent of the money they collect in premiums on medical claims and quality improvements rather than on administrative activities such as marketing. If they exceed that limit, they must rebate the excess to consumers. Insurers will return $500 million to 8.5 million consumers — about $100 per eligible family — by mid-August of this year for overcharges in 2012, according to the Obama administration. Rebates may come in various ways, including a check or a reduction in the following year’s premium.

 

My parents are legal immigrants over 65 but not yet eligible to buy into Medicare because they haven’t lived in the United States for five years. Will they be able to buy health insurance on the federal exchange?

Yes, legal immigrants will be able to shop for coverage on the exchanges, where they may be eligible for premium tax credits if their income is no more than 400 percent of the federal poverty level ($62,040 for a couple in 2013). Immigrants living in the United States illegally, on the other hand, are not permitted to buy coverage on the exchanges even if they wish to pay the entire premium out of pocket.

Labor Unions: Obamacare Will ‘Shatter’ Our Health Benefits, Cause ‘Nightmare Scenarios’

Labor Unions: Obamacare Will ‘Shatter’ Our Health Benefits, Cause ‘Nightmare Scenarios’

Labor unions are among the key institutions responsible for the passage of Obamacare. They spent tons of money electing Democrats to Congress in 2006 and 2008, and fought hard to push the health law through the legislature in 2009 and 2010. But now, unions are waking up to the fact that Obamacare is heavily disruptive to the health benefits of their members.

Last Thursday, representatives of three of the nation’s largest unions fired off a letter to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, warning that Obamacare would “shatter not only our hard-earned health benefits, but destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.”

The letter was penned by James P. Hoffa, general president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters; Joseph Hansen, international president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union; and Donald “D.” Taylor, president of UNITE-HERE, a union representing hotel, airport, food service, gaming, and textile workers.

“When you and the President sought our support for the Affordable Care Act,” they begin, “you pledged that if we liked the health plans we have now, we could keep them. Sadly, that promise is under threat…We have been strong supporters of the notion that all Americans should have access to quality, affordable health care. We have also been strong supporters of you. In campaign after campaign we have put boots on the ground, gone door-to-door to get out the vote, run phone banks and raised money to secure this vision. Now this vision has come back to haunt us.”

‘Unintended consequences’ causing ‘nightmare scenarios’

The union leaders are concerned that Obamacare’s employer mandate incentivizes smaller companies to shift their workers to part-time status, because employers are not required to provide health coverage to part-time workers. “We have a problem,” they write, and “you need to fix it.”

“The unintended consequences of the ACA are severe,” they continue. “Perverse incentives are causing nightmare scenarios. First, the law creates an incentive for employers to keep employees’ work hours below 30 hours a week. Numerous employers have begun to cut workers’ hours to avoid this obligation, and many of them are doing so openly. The impact is two-fold: fewer hours means less pay while also losing our current health benefits.”

What surprises me about this is that union leaders are pretty strategic when it comes to employee benefits. It was obvious in 2009 that Obamacare’s employer mandate would incentivize this shift. Why didn’t labor unions fight it back then?

Regulations will ‘destroy the very health and wellbeing of our members’

The labor bosses are also unhappy, because of the way Obamacare affects multi-employer health plans. Multi-employer plans, also called Taft-Hartley plans, are health insurance benefits typically arranged between a labor union in a particular industry, such as restaurants, and small employers in that industry. About 20 million workers are covered by these plans; 800,000 of Joseph Hansen’s 1.3 million UFCW members are covered this way.

Taft-Hartley plans, they write, “have been built over decades by working men and women,” but unlike plans offered on the ACA exchanges, unionized workers will not be eligible for subsidies, because workers with employer-sponsored coverage don’t qualify.

Obamacare’s regulatory changes to the small-group insurance market will drive up the cost of these plans. For example, the rules requiring plans to cover adult children up to the age of 26, the elimination of limits on annual or lifetime coverage, and the mandates that plans cover a wide range of benefits will drive premiums upward.

But the key problem is that the Taft-Hartley plans already provide generous and costly coverage; small employers now have a more financially attractive alternative, which is to drop coverage and put people on the exchanges, once the existing collective bargaining agreements are up. That gives workers less reason to join a union; a big part of why working people pay union dues is because unions play a big role in negotiating health benefits.

So the labor leaders are demanding that their workers with employer-sponsored coverage also gain eligibility for ACA subsidies. Otherwise, their workers will be “relegated to second-class status” despite being “taxed to pay for those subsidies,” a result that will “make non-profit plans like ours unsustainable” and “destroy the very health and wellbeing of our members along with millions of other hardworking Americans.” ‘The law as it stands will hurt millions of Americans’

The leaders conclude by stating that, “on behalf of the millions of working men and women we represent and the families they support, we can no longer stand silent in the face of elements of the Affordable Care Act that will destroy the very health and wellbeing of our members along with millions of other hardworking Americans.”

President Obama, of course, pledged that “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan.” But the labor leaders say that, “unless changes are made…that promise is hollow. We continue to stand behind real health care reform, but the law as it stands will hurt millions of Americans including the members of our respective unions. We are looking to you to make sure these changes are made.”

Avik Roy, Contributor  Forbes, July 15, 2013

New California Health Insurance Exchange Marketplace.

In the next few months you will be hearing about “Exchanges” for businesses & individuals on TV
and radio.  The California health insurance exchange will begin to offer plans and enrollment after October 1st. with coverage taking effect January 1, 2014.  The new marketplace will offer California Exchange and Off-Exchange health plans in addition to existing private plans.   All new health plans will be offered on a guaranteed acceptance basis with all pre-existing conditions covered.   More Exchange & Off-Exchange benefit details and rates should be available by August .   It usually will only make sense for you to move to a health plan in the State Exchange if you are eligible for a tax subsidy.  The Cal State exchange premium assistance offered is only for those who fall between 133% to 400% of the Federal Poverty Level based upon household income.
You can count on us!  We’re your key health reform and exchange resource.  We are ready to assist you every day–on the phone and in person providing you with time and cost saving programs.  Please call us before  you do anything with your current coverage and I will advise you on the best course of action that will provide quality coverage and save you money.

You may be better off keeping your existing health plan or alternatively consider the Off-Exchange and California Health Insurance exchange plans which may save you money and provide enhanced benefits.  Our services will assist you in applying for a possible tax subsidy, selecting the best health plan, and enrollment process.

Thank you again for the pleasure of being of service and for your business!

Kind Regards,
Frank West

For fast online quotes, benefit details, & applications for health,
group health, medicare supplement, dental, and life insurance
please visit: https://frankwestinsurance.com

Frank West Insurance Services, LLC     Ca Lic. # OG23770
“Service You Can Count On Since 1982”
P.O. Box 721090 San Diego, Ca  92172

800-726-9525 858-484-1894    Fax: 858-484-1668 

Check Out The Following Informative Summaries: 
Health Care Reform: What is a health insurance
exchange?

https://frankwestinsurance.com/health-care-reform-what-is-a-health-insurance-exchange/#comments

Individual Health Care Mandate Q&A
https://frankwestinsurance.com/individual-health-care-mandate-qa/#comments

Individual Health Insurance

Frank West Insurance Services | Individual Health Insurance, Family Health Insurance, HTH Travel Insurance, CA Medical Insurance, Affordable San Diego Health Insurance, Insurance Quotes, Whole & Term Life Insurance Policies, Medicare Supplement Insurance, Medigap Plans, San Diego Medical Insurance, Medical Coverage, Health Care Reform & Affordable Care Act Assistance, CA Health Insurance Exchange, Group Health Insurance, Business Health Plans, Health Care Insurance, Long Term Care, Group Health Insurance, Employee Benefits, Dental Insurance, Disability Insurance, San Diego Life Insurance, Anthem Blue Cross, Aetna, Blue Shield of CA, Cigna, Health Net, Kaiser Permanente, San Diego, Coronado, La Jolla, Pacific Beach, Rancho Penasquitos, Poway, Rancho Bernardo, Oceanside, Solano Beach, Pacific Beach, Cardiff-by-the-Sea, Encinitas, Carlsbad, Carmel Valley, Del Mar, Olivenhain, Rancho Santa Fe, Aviara, Lakeside, San Diego County CA, Southern California | 309 Miami Trail, Oxford OH 45056 | (858) 484-1894