By Lanhee Chen
Thursday, June 26, 2014
A nightmare for Affordable Care Act supporters has been
the possibility that only the sick would be left to purchase insurance through
its exchanges, driving premiums up and insurers out. While the law’s boosters
have been quick to dismiss the possibility that such a so-called death spiral
could occur, data published in the Wall Street Journal suggest that this chain
of events may not be so far-fetched after all.
The findings are significant not just for what they say
about how Obamacare is working now, but also for their impact on the political
debate over its future.
At its base, the data show that people insured through
the law’s exchanges have higher rates of serious medical conditions. Of the
enrollees who have seen a doctor or other health-care provider in the first
quarter of this year, 27 percent have significant medical problems, including
diabetes, cancer, heart trouble and psychiatric conditions. That rate is
substantially higher than that for patients in nonexchange market plans over
the same period. And it’s more than double the rate of those who were able to
hold onto their existing individual market insurance plans after President
Barack Obama was forced to allow them to keep them.
This outcome should not surprise anyone. The law’s
one-size-fits-all regulatory regime, which requires insurers to offer coverage
to all comers and prohibits pricing of coverage based on an applicant’s health
status, was bound to increase the number of relatively sicker people purchasing
insurance through the exchanges. Moreover, Obama’s executive action, which
effectively allowed many people who had individual market plans to remain in
them through at least 2016, bifurcated the insurance markets such that
healthier people remained in the plans they already had, while relatively
sicker patients were left to acquire coverage through the Affordable Care Act’s
exchanges.
Some of the bad risk in the exchanges has been offset by
the enrollment of relatively healthy people who acquired coverage because of
the law’s generous subsidies. Yet the numbers make clear that the exchanges
remain a haven for those who may consume more medical services than others.
The data portend a vigorous debate over the “risk
corridors” program, which is one of three mechanisms in the law designed to
give insurers incentives to continue to participate in its exchanges even if
they are at risk of significant financial losses. Some Republicans,
particularly Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama
and Representative Fred Upton of Michigan, have decried this program as an
insurer bailout.
The premise behind the risk corridors is that the
financial winners in the Obamacare exchanges would compensate the financial
losers such that the flow of money would make the system self-sustaining. What
may not have been anticipated was what would occur if the financial losers (the
sicker enrollees) far outpaced the financial winners (the healthier ones).
The Obama administration recently issued regulatory
guidance suggesting that if the program wasn’t solvent, billions of dollars in
funds appropriated for other purposes could be used to make the program whole.
But the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has made clear that this
diversion of funds is impermissible under existing law. Meanwhile, Rubio,
Sessions, Upton and others have called for legislation to ensure the
risk-corridors program will remain budget-neutral and not place taxpayers at
financial risk.
This debate will become more vociferous in the period
before the midterm elections in November. The chance that the risk-corridor
arrangement won’t be entirely self-financed puts vulnerable Democrats, who are
already facing strong headwinds created by Obamacare, in an even more
precarious position.
Finally, and notwithstanding the risk-corridor issue, the
data suggest that insurers will respond to having to cover more people who are
relatively sicker by raising premiums in 2015 and beyond. As Chet Burrell, the
chief executive officer of CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield, concluded, “Over a
period of time, the rates have to go up to catch up with the reality of who
enrolled.” If that reality didn’t look good for Obamacare in 2014, it isn’t
likely to improve in 2015, either.
So while Obamacare’s exchanges are still some distance
from a death spiral, it’s pretty clear that the path ahead for the law -- and
for the politicians whose fortunes may turn on its success or failure -- is
fraught with peril in the months and years ahead.
No comments:
Post a Comment