• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Seems like a complicated subject, have you tried yelling at it?

After dobbs, women are no longer free.

The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand.

Those who are easily outraged are easily manipulated.

New McCarthy, same old McCarthyism.

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

Trump’s cabinet: like a magic 8 ball that only gives wrong answers.

We are aware of all internet traditions.

Let’s bury these fuckers at the polls 2 years from now.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

the 10% who apparently lack object permanence

They love authoritarianism, but only when they get to be the authoritarians.

You are so fucked. Still, I wish you the best of luck.

Text STOP to opt out of updates on war plans.

The real work of an opposition party is to oppose.

This fight is for everything.

Donald Trump found guilty as fuck – May 30, 2024!

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

The real work of an opposition party is to hold the people in power accountable.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

America is going up in flames. The NYTimes fawns over MAGA celebrities. No longer a real newspaper.

Do we throw up our hands or do we roll up our sleeves? (hint, door #2)

The media handbook says “controversial” is the most negative description that can be used for a Republican.

Polls are now a reliable indicator of what corporate Republicans want us to think.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Anderson On Health Insurance / CSR funding and the next best option

CSR funding and the next best option

by David Anderson|  August 18, 20178:31 am| 3 Comments

This post is in: Anderson On Health Insurance, Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

Andrew Sprung at Xpostfactoid has pushed back on my argument that Democrats have the advantage of inertia on the CSR funding argument. He raises an excellent point.

1. Cost. CBO projects premium increases of 20% right off the bat in 2018 and 25% by 2020. Higher premiums mean more people qualify for subsidies, and those subsidies are bigger. CBO projects a 10-year cost of $194 billion — to increase coverage by 1 million. In 2026, that 1-million coverage boost would cost a cool $37 billion. CBO’s 2016 projection for spending on marketplace subsidies in 2026 is $106 billion. Imagine the effects of increasing that spending by 36% in more rational ways. Compare, for example, the comprehensive set of subsidy sweeteners proposed by Urban’s Blumberg and John Holahan in 2015 — which included raising the AV of benchmark plans to 80%, reducing the percentage of income paid at every level and capping premiums for all buyers at 8.5% of income. The authors estimated the ten-year price tag at $221 billion over ten years.

This is a very good point. The coverage gains bought by loading all CSR costs onto Silver only are an extraordinarily inefficient way to expand coverage and improve the law. I am not disputing that at all. There are better ways to spend the money to increase coverage. The same coverage increase can be bought far more cheaply by tweaking Medicaid matching rates or encouraging some creative 1332 waivers.

In Health Affairs, Steven Chen has a good blog post on how states could use the CSR windfall to improve coverage via a 1332 waiver. He uses California and 2016 numbers for his example:

Using California as an example, Covered California showed that the termination of CSR payments by the Federal government would cause insurance premiums for silver plans in the individual market to increase by 16.6 percent in 2018. The study also showed an inverse relationship between CSR and APTC: The Federal government paid $750 million in CSR payments in 2016, but if it were to defund CSR payments, not only would it not receive any savings, it would incur an additional $976 million in APTC spending. Using these figures as illustration, if the Federal government had terminated CSR payments in 2016 and if California had provided CSR payments through a 1332 Waiver, under this scenario California would have to pay $750 million in CSR payments, but it would receive $976 million from the Federal government in lost APTC payments—payments California would have otherwise received without waiver—ending up with a total net profit of $226 million!

The ACA needs a technical corrections bill. It needs a “it’s been live for four to eight years and some things work and some things didn’t, let’s push the things that work and fix or drop the duds… bill”

Not funding CSR sets a plausible outcome absent of an agreement. It is a boundary condition. Deals get made when all sides of a deal believe that they have an outcome that is better through an agreement than the outcome which would occur without an agreement. I can easily and readily see deals.

There could be a trade where CSR is funded and $75 billion dollars are allocated to reinsurance and $30 billion dollars are allocated to increasing subsidies for people who make between 200% and 500% FPL. There could be a trade where $100 billion dollars are spent to up CSR 73 to CSR 80 and then adding a new tier of CSR for people making between 250% and 325% FPL so their Silver is now has an actuarial value of 75%. There could be a trade where Medicaid 1115 waivers can be integrated with 1331 (Basic Health Plan) and 1332 (State Innovation) ACA waivers as well as additional funding for safety net hospitals and community health centers. There could be dozens of deals that spend less money, cover more people and fix known problems. But all of these deals are premised that the outcome due to no agreement is a significant albeit inefficient Democratic policy victory.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « On the Road and In Your Backyard
Next Post: Moral Clarity and Vanilla ISIS »

Reader Interactions

3Comments

  1. 1.

    patrick II

    August 18, 2017 at 10:40 am

    Kevin Drum had this to say: Killing CSR subsidies may be a good thing.

    If CBO is correct, the remarkable conclusion is this: maybe we should kill the CSR subsidies. For Donald Trump, threatening to eliminate CSR is a cynical attempt to garner scary headlines about premium increases, which help him pretend that Obamacare is doomed. But as CBO makes clear, Obamacare will continue to work fine with or without CSR payments, and the premiums people actually pay after tax credits wouldn’t change much. In fact, net spending on Obamacare subsidies would increase, and it’s quite likely that more people would benefit than would be hurt.

    I’ll let you two math wizards work it out.

  2. 2.

    David Anderson

    August 18, 2017 at 10:53 am

    @patrick II: Yep, Kevin is using a lot of my argument to advance this argument.

  3. 3.

    patrick II

    August 18, 2017 at 11:23 am

    So, if I understand this, by trying to screw up the ACA Trump actually helps it, by trying to get Obama care repeal he actually hurts it and the bill does not pass, and by supporting nazis in their effort to keep confederate statues standing he actually increases the call to cut them those traitorous statues down. Maybe I shouldn’t have voted for Hillary. Except for the whole foreign policy thing.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Image by MomSense (5/10.25)

Recent Comments

  • Betty Cracker on Late Night Open Thread: #TSLA Troubles (May 21, 2025 @ 5:13am)
  • Geminid on Late Night Open Thread: #TSLA Troubles (May 21, 2025 @ 5:03am)
  • Manyakitty on Late Night Open Thread: #TSLA Troubles (May 21, 2025 @ 4:43am)
  • Manyakitty on Tuesday Night Open Thread (May 21, 2025 @ 4:34am)
  • Ohio farmer on Late Night Open Thread: #TSLA Troubles (May 21, 2025 @ 3:55am)

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
War in Ukraine
Donate to Razom for Ukraine

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Meetups

Upcoming Ohio Meetup May 17
5/11 Post about the May 17 Ohio Meetup

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Hands Off! – Denver, San Diego & Austin

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

PA Supreme Court At Risk

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!