Filling the need for trusted information on national health issues…

Why Deductibles Would Rise Under the GOP Health Care Plan

This inaugural Drew Altman column for Axios examines how the GOP House bill would impact deductibles for people who buy insurance in the non-group market. A KFF analysis for the column shows deductibles in a typical non-group plan would be about $1550 higher under the American Health Care Act compared to the Affordable Care Act.

Column/Op-Ed Read Post

The Republican Health-care Plan the Country Isn’t Debating

In this Washington Post op-ed, Drew Altman discusses how Republicans’ ideas to change Medicaid and Medicare and repeal the Affordable Care Act would fundamentally change the federal role in health, calling it: the biggest change in health we are NOT debating.

Column/Op-Ed Read Post

High-Risk Pools as Fallback for High-Cost Patients Require New Rules

In this Wall Street Journal Think Tank column, Drew Altman examines how Republicans would “split the risk pools” between the healthier and the sick in their Affordable Care Act replacement plans, using state high risk pools as a fallback for higher cost patients, and examines the steps that would be necessary to make them effective based on prior experience in the states.

Column/Op-Ed Read Post

Obamacare Debate: Where GOP Governors Stand on Repeal and Replace

As congress prepares to vote on repeal of the Affordable Care Act, Drew Altman discusses whether Republican governors and congressional Republicans will be at odds over key issues when it comes to repealing and replacing the law in this Wall Street Journal Think Tank column.

Column/Op-Ed Read Post

The Health Care Plan Trump Voters Really Want

In a New York Times op-ed, Drew Altman draws on observations from focus groups in rust belt states of people in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplaces who voted for President-elect Trump and say they may not like their coverage under the ACA but could like Republican replacement plans even less.

Column/Op-Ed Read Post

Understanding Who Opioid Users Are Underscores Challenges

The 21st Century Cures Act provided a billion dollars in new funding for opioid prevention and treatment. In this Wall Street Journal Think Tank column, Drew Altman looks at the challenges based on a new Kaiser-Washington Post survey of long term opioid users.

Column/Op-Ed Read Post
ES_WP_Query Object
(
    [es_map:protected] => Array
        (
            [post_meta] => meta.%s.value.raw_lc
            [post_meta.analyzed] => meta.%s.value
            [post_meta.long] => meta.%s.long
            [post_meta.double] => meta.%s.double
            [post_meta.binary] => meta.%s.boolean
            [post_meta.date] => post_meta.%s.date
            [post_meta.datetime] => post_meta.%s.datetime
            [post_meta.time] => post_meta.%s.time
            [post_meta.signed] => post_meta.%s.signed
            [post_meta.unsigned] => post_meta.%s.unsigned
            [term_id] => taxonomy.%s.term_id
            [term_slug] => taxonomy.%s.slug
            [term_name] => taxonomy.%s.name.raw_lc
            [term_tt_id] => terms.%s.term_taxonomy_id
            [category_id] => category.term_id
            [category_slug] => category.slug
            [category_name] => category.name.raw
            [category_tt_id] => terms.%s.term_taxonomy_id
            [tag_id] => tag.term_id
            [tag_slug] => tag.slug
            [tag_name] => tag.name.raw
            [tag_tt_id] => terms.%s.term_taxonomy_id
            [post_author] => author_id
            [post_date] => date
            [post_date.year] => date_token.year
            [post_date.month] => date_token.month
            [post_date.week] => date_token.week
            [post_date.day] => date_token.day
            [post_date.day_of_year] => date_token.day_of_year
            [post_date.day_of_week] => date_token.day_of_week
            [post_date.hour] => date_token.hour
            [post_date.minute] => date_token.minute
            [post_date.second] => date_token.second
            [post_date_gmt] => date_gmt
            [post_date_gmt.year] => date_gmt_token.year
            [post_date_gmt.month] => date_gmt_token.month
            [post_date_gmt.week] => date_gmt_token.week
            [post_date_gmt.day] => date_gmt_token.day
            [post_date_gmt.day_of_year] => date_gmt_token.day_of_year
            [post_date_gmt.day_of_week] => date_gmt_token.day_of_week
            [post_date_gmt.hour] => date_gmt_token.hour
            [post_date_gmt.minute] => date_gmt_token.minute
            [post_date_gmt.second] => date_gmt_token.second
            [post_content] => content
            [post_content.analyzed] => content
            [post_title] => title
            [post_title.analyzed] => title
            [post_excerpt] => excerpt
            [post_password] => post_password
            [post_name] => post_name
            [post_modified] => modified
            [post_modified.year] => modified_token.year
            [post_modified.month] => modified_token.month
            [post_modified.week] => modified_token.week
            [post_modified.day] => modified_token.day
            [post_modified.day_of_year] => modified_token.day_of_year
            [post_modified.day_of_week] => modified_token.day_of_week
            [post_modified.hour] => modified_token.hour
            [post_modified.minute] => modified_token.minute
            [post_modified.second] => modified_token.second
            [post_modified_gmt] => modified_gmt
            [post_modified_gmt.year] => modified_gmt_token.year
            [post_modified_gmt.month] => modified_gmt_token.month
            [post_modified_gmt.week] => modified_gmt_token.week
            [post_modified_gmt.day] => modified_gmt_token.day
            [post_modified_gmt.day_of_year] => modified_gmt_token.day_of_year
            [post_modified_gmt.day_of_week] => modified_gmt_token.day_of_week
            [post_modified_gmt.hour] => modified_gmt_token.hour
            [post_modified_gmt.minute] => modified_gmt_token.minute
            [post_modified_gmt.second] => modified_gmt_token.second
            [post_parent] => parent_post_id
            [menu_order] => menu_order
            [post_mime_type] => post_mime_type
            [comment_count] => comment_count
        )

    [es_args] => Array
        (
            [filter] => Array
                (
                    [and] => Array
                        (
                            [0] => Array
                                (
                                    [terms] => Array
                                        (
                                            [post_type] => Array
                                                (
                                                    [0] => perspective
                                                    [1] => page
                                                )

                                        )

                                )

                            [1] => Array
                                (
                                    [terms] => Array
                                        (
                                            [post_status] => Array
                                                (
                                                    [0] => publish
                                                )

                                        )

                                )

                            [2] => Array
                                (
                                    [or] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => Array
                                                (
                                                    [term] => Array
                                                        (
                                                            [meta.kff_author.value.raw_lc] => 49507
                                                        )

                                                )

                                            [1] => Array
                                                (
                                                    [term] => Array
                                                        (
                                                            [meta.included_on_page.value.raw_lc] => 105174
                                                        )

                                                )

                                        )

                                )

                        )

                )

            [sort] => Array
                (
                    [0] => Array
                        (
                            [date] => desc
                        )

                )

            [fields] => Array
                (
                    [0] => post_id
                )

            [from] => 0
            [size] => 6
        )

    [es_response] => Array
        (
            [results] => Array
                (
                    [total] => 160
                    [max_score] => 
                    [hits] => Array
                        (
                            [0] => Array
                                (
                                    [_index] => kaiserfamilyfoundation.wordpress.com-9
                                    [_type] => post
                                    [_id] => 50276312-p-212370
                                    [_score] => 
                                    [fields] => Array
                                        (
                                            [post_id] => 212370
                                        )

                                    [sort] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => 1490165708000
                                        )

                                )

                            [1] => Array
                                (
                                    [_index] => kaiserfamilyfoundation.wordpress.com-9
                                    [_type] => post
                                    [_id] => 50276312-p-208742
                                    [_score] => 
                                    [fields] => Array
                                        (
                                            [post_id] => 208742
                                        )

                                    [sort] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => 1486676233000
                                        )

                                )

                            [2] => Array
                                (
                                    [_index] => kaiserfamilyfoundation.wordpress.com-9
                                    [_type] => post
                                    [_id] => 50276312-p-206797
                                    [_score] => 
                                    [fields] => Array
                                        (
                                            [post_id] => 206797
                                        )

                                    [sort] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => 1485177221000
                                        )

                                )

                            [3] => Array
                                (
                                    [_index] => kaiserfamilyfoundation.wordpress.com-9
                                    [_type] => post
                                    [_id] => 50276312-p-205864
                                    [_score] => 
                                    [fields] => Array
                                        (
                                            [post_id] => 205864
                                        )

                                    [sort] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => 1484043534000
                                        )

                                )

                            [4] => Array
                                (
                                    [_index] => kaiserfamilyfoundation.wordpress.com-9
                                    [_type] => post
                                    [_id] => 50276312-p-205438
                                    [_score] => 
                                    [fields] => Array
                                        (
                                            [post_id] => 205438
                                        )

                                    [sort] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => 1483603496000
                                        )

                                )

                            [5] => Array
                                (
                                    [_index] => kaiserfamilyfoundation.wordpress.com-9
                                    [_type] => post
                                    [_id] => 50276312-p-204903
                                    [_score] => 
                                    [fields] => Array
                                        (
                                            [post_id] => 204903
                                        )

                                    [sort] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => 1482143752000
                                        )

                                )

                        )

                )

            [took] => 68
        )

    [query] => Array
        (
            [post_type] => Array
                (
                    [0] => perspective
                    [1] => page
                )

            [orderby] => date
            [order] => DESC
            [posts_per_page] => 6
            [paged] => 1
            [meta_query] => Array
                (
                    [relation] => OR
                    [0] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => kff_author
                            [value] => 49507
                        )

                    [1] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => included_on_page
                            [value] => 105174
                        )

                )

        )

    [query_vars] => Array
        (
            [post_type] => Array
                (
                    [0] => perspective
                    [1] => page
                )

            [orderby] => date
            [order] => desc
            [posts_per_page] => 6
            [paged] => 1
            [meta_query] => Array
                (
                    [relation] => OR
                    [0] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => kff_author
                            [value] => 49507
                        )

                    [1] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => included_on_page
                            [value] => 105174
                        )

                )

            [error] => 
            [m] => 
            [p] => 0
            [post_parent] => 
            [subpost] => 
            [subpost_id] => 
            [attachment] => 
            [attachment_id] => 0
            [name] => 
            [static] => 
            [pagename] => 
            [page_id] => 0
            [second] => 
            [minute] => 
            [hour] => 
            [day] => 0
            [monthnum] => 0
            [year] => 0
            [w] => 0
            [category_name] => 
            [tag] => 
            [cat] => 
            [tag_id] => 
            [author] => 
            [author_name] => 
            [feed] => 
            [tb] => 
            [meta_key] => 
            [meta_value] => 
            [preview] => 
            [s] => 
            [sentence] => 
            [title] => 
            [fields] => 
            [menu_order] => 
            [embed] => 
            [category__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [category__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [category__and] => Array
                (
                )

            [post__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [post__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [post_name__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag__and] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag_slug__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [tag_slug__and] => Array
                (
                )

            [post_parent__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [post_parent__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [author__in] => Array
                (
                )

            [author__not_in] => Array
                (
                )

            [ignore_sticky_posts] => 
            [suppress_filters] => 
            [cache_results] => 
            [update_post_term_cache] => 1
            [update_post_meta_cache] => 1
            [nopaging] => 
            [comments_per_page] => 50
        )

    [tax_query] => ES_WP_Tax_Query Object
        (
            [es_query:protected] => ES_WP_Query Object
 *RECURSION*
            [queries] => Array
                (
                )

            [relation] => AND
            [table_aliases:protected] => Array
                (
                )

            [queried_terms] => Array
                (
                )

            [primary_table] => 
            [primary_id_column] => 
        )

    [meta_query] => ES_WP_Meta_Query Object
        (
            [es_query:protected] => ES_WP_Query Object
 *RECURSION*
            [queries] => Array
                (
                    [0] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => kff_author
                            [value] => 49507
                        )

                    [1] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => included_on_page
                            [value] => 105174
                        )

                    [relation] => OR
                )

            [relation] => OR
            [meta_table] => 
            [meta_id_column] => 
            [primary_table] => 
            [primary_id_column] => 
            [table_aliases:protected] => Array
                (
                )

            [clauses:protected] => Array
                (
                    [meta-clause] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => kff_author
                            [value] => 49507
                            [compare] => =
                            [type] => 
                        )

                    [meta-clause-1] => Array
                        (
                            [key] => included_on_page
                            [value] => 105174
                            [compare] => =
                            [type] => 
                        )

                )

            [has_or_relation:protected] => 1
        )

    [date_query] => 
    [posts] => Array
        (
            [0] => WP_Post Object
                (
                    [ID] => 212370
                    [post_author] => 36621681
                    [post_date] => 2017-03-22 06:55:08
                    [post_date_gmt] => 2017-03-22 10:55:08
                    [post_content] => 
This was originally published as an Axios column on March 22, 2017. Health care is complicated, as the president has discovered. But here is one thing that is not so complicated: if people have modest means and limited tax credits, and coverage is expensive, they will mostly buy health plans with lower premiums — and high deductibles. This is what is likely to happen under the GOP health care bill, the American Health Care Act. Only people who need more health care will stretch for more generous coverage. If that happens, those health plans will draw too many sick people, causing insurance companies to stop offering them for fear of losing money. That would leave mostly the low-premium, high-deductible plans.
[protected-iframe id="afee00e39402b5f41160a2ed5cc4050d-50276312-36621681" info="https://graphics.axios.com/2017-03-21-kaiser/2017-03-21-kaiser.html?initialWidth=816&childId=2017-03-21-kaiser&parentTitle=Why%20deductibles%20would%20rise%20under%20the%20GOP%20health%20care%20plan%20-%20Axios&parentUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.axios.com%2Fwhy-deductibles-would-rise-under-gop-plan-2322246232.html%3Futm_medium%3Dlinkshare%26utm_campaign%3Dorganic" width="100%" height="225px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"]
Data: Kaiser Family Foundation analysis; Chart: Andrew Witherspoon / Axios
As the chart shows, the average deductible for a typical plan in the non-group market under the GOP plan would be about $1,550 higher in 2017 than it would have been under the Affordable Care Act, based on our analysis for this column. Most of the debate has been about what would happen to premiums — but for consumers, it's total out-of-pocket costs that matter. Under the Affordable Care Act, the low-premium, high-deductible health plans are called "bronze" plans — so think of this as the "bronzification" of the non-group market. The result: premiums may be lower in some cases, but deductibles will go up. That is based on the Congressional Budget Office's conclusion that the AHCA will result in health plans covering a lower share of patients' medical expenses. They'd have an average actuarial value across plans of 65% — meaning insurers would cover 65% of medical expenses on average for its enrollees — compared with the current market under the ACA, which has an average actuarial value of 72%. The drop would be due to consumers gravitating to lower premium plans, insurers increasingly offering only those plans, and the elimination of the cost sharing subsidies the ACA provided to insurers. That could change now that the House is adding a reserve fund of as much as $85 billion to beef up the tax credits for older customers, but it depends on what the Senate does with the money. President Trump said his plan to replace Obamacare would have "lower numbers, [and] much lower deductibles." When advocates of the AHCA talk about expanding choice of lower cost plans, keep in mind that they are focusing on the premiums, not the overall costs to consumers. But insurance market dynamics, the CBO, and now this new analysis suggest that those out-of-pocket costs will go up for many consumers buying their own insurance, particularly people who need more health care services.
[post_title] => Why Deductibles Would Rise Under the GOP Health Care Plan [post_excerpt] => This inaugural Drew Altman column for Axios examines how the GOP House bill would impact deductibles for people who buy insurance in the non-group market. A KFF analysis for the column shows deductibles in a typical non-group plan would be about $1550 higher under the American Health Care Act compared to the Affordable Care Act. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => why-deductibles-would-rise-under-the-gop-health-care-plan [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-03-27 11:16:42 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-03-27 15:16:42 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://kff.org/?post_type=perspective&p=212370 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => perspective [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [1] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 208742 [post_author] => 36621681 [post_date] => 2017-02-09 21:37:13 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-02-10 02:37:13 [post_content] =>
In an op-ed for The Washington Post, Drew Altman discusses how Republicans' ideas to change Medicaid and Medicare and repeal the Affordable Care Act would fundamentally change the federal role in health, calling it: the biggest change in health we are NOT debating.
[post_title] => The Republican Health-care Plan the Country Isn’t Debating [post_excerpt] => In this Washington Post op-ed, Drew Altman discusses how Republicans' ideas to change Medicaid and Medicare and repeal the Affordable Care Act would fundamentally change the federal role in health, calling it: the biggest change in health we are NOT debating. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => the-republican-health-care-plan-the-country-isnt-debating [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-02-10 11:10:30 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-02-10 16:10:30 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://kff.org/?post_type=perspective&p=208742 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => perspective [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [2] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 206797 [post_author] => 36621681 [post_date] => 2017-01-23 13:13:41 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-01-23 18:13:41 [post_content] =>
This was published as a Wall Street Journal Think Tank column on January 23, 2017.
Republicans see high-risk pools run by states playing a central role in their Affordable Care Act replacement plans as a fallback option for sick people who do not have insurance or lose coverage. Based on experience in the states, it’s clear that these pools will need to operate differently and be funded much more fully than they have been in the past if the sickest people who fall through the cracks are to be protected. Under the ACA, there is a single risk pool in each state for the non-group insurance market in which healthier people–who may themselves be sick someday–pay more to offset the costs of sicker people who are guaranteed coverage and comprehensive benefits. Embodied in Republican replacement plans is a very different idea of how the market should work. They would split the risk pools, giving healthier people the option of choosing less costly insurance plans–generally with high deductibles and savings accounts–with more limited benefits packages that they feel fit their needs. Separate arrangements would then be made for sick people who may not be able to keep their current coverage, with the state high-risk pools as their primary fallback option. The health law signed by former President Barack Obama has set a high bar for protecting the sick and people with pre-existing conditions but uses its individual mandate to help accomplish that, a provision Republicans intend to eliminate. While details of the Republican replacement plans aren’t known, the number of people who could be uninsured or have a gap in coverage and need “last resort” insurance could be substantial. We do know that every two years, about 32 million people with coverage lose it and have a gap in coverage. Almost 30% of the nonelderly population has conditions that would have left them uninsurable before the ACA, and about half of Americans report that they, or a family member, have a pre-existing condition. Before the passage of the ACA, 35 states operated high-risk pools for people in the non-group market who could not get standard coverage. The performance of these pools was so anemic that their total enrollment across these states peaked at 226,615 in 2011. Perhaps surprisingly, nearly all of them excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions for a period of time–usually six months to 12 months–while providing other coverage for the enrollee. If this seems counterintuitive to you, join the club; wasn’t coverage for pre-existing conditions the main point? The vast majority of the high-risk pools in the states also imposed lifetime dollar limits on covered services ranging from $1 million to $2 million, totals easily exceeded by someone with a serious illness.
Most plans chosen by enrollees had high deductibles and most pools offered plans with premiums one and a half to two times higher than the rates generally offered in the non-group market. A few states discounted premiums for people with more modest incomes. Premiums did not cover costs in the state risk pools, with a combined shortfall of over $1.2 billion in 2011, and some states capped enrollment. Due in part to the spotty performance of the state risk pools, the ACA established a separate national high-risk pool program called the Federal Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Program (PCIP) to cover uninsurable people until the ACA’s insurance reforms kicked in in 2014. The federal high-risk pool did not exclude coverage of pre-existing conditions and charged more typical premiums despite serving sicker people. But only 100,000 enrolled in it, and it also experienced a shortfall of about $2 billion in its last year of operation, 2013. Among the GOP’s ACA replacement plans, Rep. Tom Price, now President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, has proposed $3 billion over three years for state high-risk pools and incentives for states that hold premiums under two times standard rates. The Ryan Better Way plan in the House proposes $25 billion but does not specify a time period for the funding. Past experience shows that any strategy to split the risk pool into the healthier and the sick and set up state high-risk pools as the fallback for high-cost patients who lose coverage will require new rules that protect people with pre-existing conditions immediately when their coverage starts, eliminate lifetime caps, and have adequate funding if policies are to be affordable and the large losses are to be avoided.
[post_title] => High-Risk Pools as Fallback for High-Cost Patients Require New Rules [post_excerpt] => In this Wall Street Journal Think Tank column, Drew Altman examines how Republicans would “split the risk pools” between the healthier and the sick in their Affordable Care Act replacement plans, using state high risk pools as a fallback for higher cost patients, and examines the steps that would be necessary to make them effective based on prior experience in the states. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => high-risk-pools-as-fallback-for-high-cost-patients-require-new-rules [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-02-14 16:29:36 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-02-14 21:29:36 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://kff.org/?post_type=perspective&p=206797 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => perspective [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [3] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 205864 [post_author] => 36621681 [post_date] => 2017-01-10 10:18:54 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-01-10 15:18:54 [post_content] => This was published as a Wall Street Journal Think Tank column on January 10, 2017. As the Republican Party’s debate over repealing and replacing Obamacare focuses on the Senate, the views of Republican governors have received little attention and will be important to watch. This group doesn’t like the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama’s signature health law, and will want to support the Republican effort to repeal and replace it. But for many of the governors the interests of their states could run counter to two central elements of the repeal and replace plans. One of those elements is the repeal of federal funding for the ACA’s Medicaid expansion, which is expected to be part of the budget reconciliation package. Sixteen states with a Republican governor have chosen to expand Medicaid under the ACA, taking advantage of generous federal matching funds they receive when they do so; a 90/10 match when Obamacare is fully phased in. Nevada’s Republican governor Brian Sandoval warned congressional Republicans in a Jan. 5 letter against cutting off funds for Medicaid expansion without a replacement plan, Politico Pro reported. As the chart shows, these states have a large stake in their Medicaid expansions. For example, 600,000 people have gained coverage through Michigan’s expansion and the state received $4 billion in federal funding for the expansion group in 2015. In Arizona, 413,000 people gained coverage in 2015 and the state received $3 billion in federal funds. Many of these states have augmented their expansions with waivers enabling them to implement conservative reforms they like and giving them political cover to participate in Obamacare. Indiana’s waiver, which requires newly eligible adults to pay premiums and penalizes some beneficiaries if they do not, has received the most attention. If this funding were to be repealed, many of the newly covered would return to the ranks of the uninsured. The burden of providing health services for this population would then fall on state and county budgets and safety net health providers. On the other hand, these states do have to put up some of their own money to draw down the generous federal match, and some red state governors may prefer foregoing the federal funding and operating a smaller Medicaid program covering fewer people in order to shrink state spending. dawsjrepublican-expansion-states-slide_spending-and-enrollment-rounded
The second element of repeal and replace Republican governors will think hard about is the proposal to transform Medicaid into a block grant program giving states greater flexibility and control of Medicaid in return for reduced federal funding for their states in the future. Greater flexibility through a block grant will appeal to Republican governors, but they know they can get the same flexibility from the Trump administration through federal Medicaid waivers without sacrificing federal funding for their state now or in the future.
They can also advocate for broader and more flexible waiver rules for the states than the current ones–for example, eliminating the time limit on waiver programs, or the requirement that they be conducted for research and demonstration purposes. Some governors may feel that a waiver runs the risk of being reversed if Democrats take the White House in four years. As a former Human Services commissioner overseeing Medicaid for a Republican governor, I would have preferred my own waiver to a block grant with less federal funding. But some Republican governors may prefer to run their own Medicaid programs and reap one hundred percent of the savings from any decisions they make about how they operate their Medicaid programs. It remains to be seen what role the Republican governors play in the repeal and replace debate. Some may support repeal of the Medicaid expansion and a Medicaid block grant, but many will no doubt see their interests running counter to those of Republicans on Capitol Hill. [post_title] => Obamacare Debate: Where GOP Governors Stand on Repeal and Replace [post_excerpt] => As congress prepares to vote on repeal of the Affordable Care Act, Drew Altman discusses whether Republican governors and congressional Republicans will be at odds over key issues when it comes to repealing and replacing the law in this Wall Street Journal Think Tank column. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => obamacare-debate-where-gop-governors-stand-on-repeal-and-replace [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-02-07 14:42:47 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-02-07 19:42:47 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://kff.org/?post_type=perspective&p=205864 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => perspective [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [4] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 205438 [post_author] => 36621681 [post_date] => 2017-01-05 08:04:56 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-01-05 13:04:56 [post_content] => This was originally published as a New York Times op-ed on January 5, 2017. This week Republicans in Congress began their effort to repeal and potentially replace the Affordable Care Act. But after listening to working-­class supporters of Donald J. Trump — people who are enrolled in the very health care marketplaces created by the law — one comes away feeling that the Washington debate is sadly disconnected from the concerns of working people.
Those voters have been disappointed by Obamacare, but they could be even more disappointed by Republican alternatives to replace it. They have no strong ideological views about repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act, or future directions for health policy. What they want are pragmatic solutions to their insurance problems. The very last thing they want is higher out-­of-­pocket costs.
The Kaiser Foundation organized six focus groups in the Rust Belt areas — three with Trump voters who are enrolled in the Affordable Care Act marketplaces, and three with Trump voters receiving Medicaid. The sessions, with eight to 10 men and women each, were held in late December in Columbus, Ohio, Grand Rapids, Mich., and New Cumberland, Pa. Though the participants did not agree on everything, they expressed remarkably similar opinions on many health care questions. They were not, by and large, angry about their health care; they were simply afraid they will be unable to afford coverage for themselves and their families. They trusted Mr. Trump to do the right thing but were quick to say that they didn’t really know what he would do, and were worried about what would come next.
They spoke anxiously about rising premiums, deductibles, co-pays and drug costs. They were especially upset by surprise bills for services they believed were covered. They said their coverage was hopelessly complex. Those with marketplace insurance — for which they were eligible for subsidies — saw Medicaid as a much better deal than their insurance and were resentful that people with incomes lower than theirs could get it. They expressed animosity for drug and insurance companies, and sounded as much like Bernie Sanders supporters as Trump voters. One man in Pennsylvania with Type 1 diabetes reported making frequent trips to Eastern Europe to purchase insulin at one-­tenth the cost he paid here.
Surveys show that most enrollees in the Affordable Care Act marketplaces are happy with their plans. The Trump voters in our focus groups were representative of people who had not fared as well. Several described their frustration with being forced to change plans annually to keep premiums down, losing their doctors in the process. But asked about policies found in several Republican plans to replace the Affordable Care Act — including a tax credit to help defray the cost of premiums, a tax-­preferred savings account and a large deductible typical of catastrophic coverage — several of these Trump voters recoiled, calling such proposals “not insurance at all.” One of those plans has been proposed by Representative Tom Price, Mr. Trump’s nominee to be secretary of Health and Human Services. These voters said they did not understand health savings accounts and displayed skepticism about the concept.
When told Mr. Trump might embrace a plan that included these elements, and particularly very high deductibles, they expressed disbelief. They were also worried about what they called “chaos” if there was a gap between repealing and replacing Obamacare. But most did not think that, as one participant put it, “a smart businessman like Trump would let that happen.” Some were uninsured before the Affordable Care Act and said they did not want to be uninsured again. Generally, the Trump voters on Medicaid were much more satisfied with their coverage.
There was one thing many said they liked about the pre­-Affordable Care Act insurance market: their ability to buy lower-­cost plans that fit their needs, even if it meant that less healthy people had to pay more. They were unmoved by the principle of risk­-sharing, and trusted that Mr. Trump would find a way to protect people with pre-­existing medical conditions without a mandate, which most viewed as “un-American.”
If these Trump voters could write a health plan, it would, many said, focus on keeping their out-­of-­pocket costs low, control drug prices and improve access to cheaper drugs. It would also address consumer issues many had complained about loudly, including eliminating surprise medical bills for out­-of-­network care, assuring the adequacy of provider networks and making their insurance much more understandable.
Several states are addressing the problem of surprise medical bills. But other steps urged by these Trump voters will be harder to achieve, including controlling drug costs. Republican health reform plans would probably increase deductibles, not lower them. And providing the more generous subsidies for premiums and deductibles that these voters want would require higher taxes, something the Republican Congress seems disinclined to accept.
In general, the focus among congressional Republicans has been on repealing the Affordable Care Act. There has been little discussion of the priorities favored by the Trump voters who spoke to us. But once a Republican replacement plan becomes real, these working-­class voters, frustrated with their current coverage, will want to know one thing: how that plan fixes their health insurance problems. And they will not be happy if they are asked to pay even more for their health care. [post_title] => The Health Care Plan Trump Voters Really Want [post_excerpt] => In a New York Times op-ed, Drew Altman draws on observations from focus groups in rust belt states of people in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplaces who voted for President-elect Trump and say they may not like their coverage under the ACA but could like Republican replacement plans even less. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => the-health-care-plan-trump-voters-really-want [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-02-06 18:26:59 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-02-06 23:26:59 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://kff.org/?post_type=perspective&p=205438 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => perspective [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [5] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 204903 [post_author] => 36621681 [post_date] => 2016-12-19 10:35:52 [post_date_gmt] => 2016-12-19 15:35:52 [post_content] => This was published as a Wall Street Journal Think Tank column on December 19, 2016. As deaths from opioid overdoses continue to rise, the 21st Century Cures Act has provided a billion dollars over the next two years to states for opioid prevention and treatment programs. The new funding is sorely needed. To really be effective, the solutions to this epidemic, as with any drug epidemic, need to deal both with the suppliers and the users: in this case physicians who irresponsibly overprescribe painkillers and the people who get hooked on painkillers. A new survey of long-term opioid users by the Kaiser Foundation and the Washington Post underscores how challenging the problem is. The users may not be who you think they are. You may know a 16-year-old skateboarder who ripped up his knee, has surgery, got some Vicodin from a physician or his parent’s medicine cabinet, and got hooked. But the typical long-term opioid user is not a kid getting high. The Kaiser-Washington Post survey found that six in 10 long-term opioid users were between 40 years old and 64 years old. Less than a quarter worked full time and 33% were on disability or retired (20%). Seventy percent of long-term users said they have a debilitating disability or chronic disease. Long-term users are slightly more likely to live in rural areas; the problem of opioid overdoses is especially acute in rural America, where treatment is scarce and Emergency Rooms and jails can’t handle the problem. Almost all long-term users of painkillers – 97% – received them from physicians, and both states and the federal government are taking steps to address overprescribing. Virtually every long-term user  –  98% –  said they use opioids to relieve pain. More than four in 10 long-term users say they started taking painkillers for chronic pain, another 25% started because of pain after a surgery, and 25% because of pain after an accident or injury. But a third (34%) of them said they also use them to get high, and another third (34%) said they also use them to deal with stress or relieve tension. Significant percentages say the painkillers they take have had a positive effect on their health (42%) and on the quality of their lives (57%). Opioids won’t simply disappear. If they did, you’d have to wonder how many long-term opioid users would turn to something else—either more or less harmful—just as some opioid users turn to heroin.
It is hoped that the new funding from the 21st Century Cares Act will enable states to do more both to clamp down on physicians who overprescribe opioids and to save the lives of people who overdose on painkillers.
The larger challenge is to address the causes of dependency among opioid users who, the survey shows, are turning to painkillers to cope with complex and very real challenges in their lives. [post_title] => Understanding Who Opioid Users Are Underscores Challenges [post_excerpt] => The 21st Century Cures Act provided a billion dollars in new funding for opioid prevention and treatment. In this Wall Street Journal Think Tank column, Drew Altman looks at the challenges based on a new Kaiser-Washington Post survey of long term opioid users. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => understanding-who-opioid-users-are-underscores-challenges [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-01-19 18:16:58 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-01-19 23:16:58 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://kff.org/?post_type=perspective&p=204903 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => perspective [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) ) [post_count] => 6 [current_post] => -1 [in_the_loop] => [post] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 212370 [post_author] => 36621681 [post_date] => 2017-03-22 06:55:08 [post_date_gmt] => 2017-03-22 10:55:08 [post_content] =>
This was originally published as an Axios column on March 22, 2017. Health care is complicated, as the president has discovered. But here is one thing that is not so complicated: if people have modest means and limited tax credits, and coverage is expensive, they will mostly buy health plans with lower premiums — and high deductibles. This is what is likely to happen under the GOP health care bill, the American Health Care Act. Only people who need more health care will stretch for more generous coverage. If that happens, those health plans will draw too many sick people, causing insurance companies to stop offering them for fear of losing money. That would leave mostly the low-premium, high-deductible plans.
[protected-iframe id="afee00e39402b5f41160a2ed5cc4050d-50276312-36621681" info="https://graphics.axios.com/2017-03-21-kaiser/2017-03-21-kaiser.html?initialWidth=816&childId=2017-03-21-kaiser&parentTitle=Why%20deductibles%20would%20rise%20under%20the%20GOP%20health%20care%20plan%20-%20Axios&parentUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.axios.com%2Fwhy-deductibles-would-rise-under-gop-plan-2322246232.html%3Futm_medium%3Dlinkshare%26utm_campaign%3Dorganic" width="100%" height="225px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"]
Data: Kaiser Family Foundation analysis; Chart: Andrew Witherspoon / Axios
As the chart shows, the average deductible for a typical plan in the non-group market under the GOP plan would be about $1,550 higher in 2017 than it would have been under the Affordable Care Act, based on our analysis for this column. Most of the debate has been about what would happen to premiums — but for consumers, it's total out-of-pocket costs that matter. Under the Affordable Care Act, the low-premium, high-deductible health plans are called "bronze" plans — so think of this as the "bronzification" of the non-group market. The result: premiums may be lower in some cases, but deductibles will go up. That is based on the Congressional Budget Office's conclusion that the AHCA will result in health plans covering a lower share of patients' medical expenses. They'd have an average actuarial value across plans of 65% — meaning insurers would cover 65% of medical expenses on average for its enrollees — compared with the current market under the ACA, which has an average actuarial value of 72%. The drop would be due to consumers gravitating to lower premium plans, insurers increasingly offering only those plans, and the elimination of the cost sharing subsidies the ACA provided to insurers. That could change now that the House is adding a reserve fund of as much as $85 billion to beef up the tax credits for older customers, but it depends on what the Senate does with the money. President Trump said his plan to replace Obamacare would have "lower numbers, [and] much lower deductibles." When advocates of the AHCA talk about expanding choice of lower cost plans, keep in mind that they are focusing on the premiums, not the overall costs to consumers. But insurance market dynamics, the CBO, and now this new analysis suggest that those out-of-pocket costs will go up for many consumers buying their own insurance, particularly people who need more health care services.
[post_title] => Why Deductibles Would Rise Under the GOP Health Care Plan [post_excerpt] => This inaugural Drew Altman column for Axios examines how the GOP House bill would impact deductibles for people who buy insurance in the non-group market. A KFF analysis for the column shows deductibles in a typical non-group plan would be about $1550 higher under the American Health Care Act compared to the Affordable Care Act. [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => closed [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => why-deductibles-would-rise-under-the-gop-health-care-plan [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2017-03-27 11:16:42 [post_modified_gmt] => 2017-03-27 15:16:42 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://kff.org/?post_type=perspective&p=212370 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => perspective [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ) [comment_count] => 0 [current_comment] => -1 [found_posts] => 160 [max_num_pages] => 27 [max_num_comment_pages] => 0 [is_single] => [is_preview] => [is_page] => [is_archive] => [is_date] => [is_year] => [is_month] => [is_day] => [is_time] => [is_author] => [is_category] => [is_tag] => [is_tax] => [is_search] => [is_feed] => [is_comment_feed] => [is_trackback] => [is_home] => 1 [is_404] => [is_embed] => [is_paged] => [is_admin] => [is_attachment] => [is_singular] => [is_robots] => [is_posts_page] => [is_post_type_archive] => [query_vars_hash:WP_Query:private] => 527f98ad71f537bc9897743f2fc1d168 [query_vars_changed:WP_Query:private] => [thumbnails_cached] => [stopwords:WP_Query:private] => [compat_fields:WP_Query:private] => Array ( [0] => query_vars_hash [1] => query_vars_changed ) [compat_methods:WP_Query:private] => Array ( [0] => init_query_flags [1] => parse_tax_query ) )

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation Headquarters: 2400 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025 | Phone 650-854-9400
Washington Offices and Barbara Jordan Conference Center: 1330 G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 | Phone 202-347-5270

www.kff.org | Email Alerts: kff.org/email | facebook.com/KaiserFamilyFoundation | twitter.com/KaiserFamFound

Filling the need for trusted information on national health issues, the Kaiser Family Foundation is a nonprofit organization based in Menlo Park, California.