• 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.

Our messy unity will be our strength.

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

Is it negotiation when the other party actually wants to shoot the hostage?

At some point, the ability to learn is a factor of character, not IQ.

“In the future, this lab will be a museum. do not touch it.”

One of our two political parties is a cult whose leader admires Vladimir Putin.

We are learning that “working class” means “white” for way too many people.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

“A king is only a king if we bow down.” – Rev. William Barber

It is possible to do the right thing without the promise of a cookie.

These days, even the boring Republicans are nuts.

The poor and middle-class pay taxes, the rich pay accountants, the wealthy pay politicians.

Everything is totally normal and fine!!!

Balloon Juice, where there is always someone who will say you’re doing it wrong.

Wow, I can’t imagine what it was like to comment in morse code.

Hey hey, RFK, how many kids did you kill today?

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

You cannot love your country only when you win.

I would try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Giving in to doom is how we fail to fight for ourselves & one another.

People really shouldn’t expect the government to help after they watched the GOP drown it in a bathtub.

It’s pointless to bring up problems that can only be solved with a time machine.

Too often we hand the biggest microphones to the cynics and the critics who delight in declaring failure.

Let me file that under fuck it.

Mobile Menu

  • 4 Directions VA 2025 Raffle
  • 2025 Activism
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • 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 / Comment on a proposed rule

Comment on a proposed rule

by David Anderson|  July 28, 202110:17 am| 11 Comments

This post is in: Anderson On Health Insurance

FacebookTweetEmail

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has a proposed rule that seeks to alter the playbook for the 2022 ACA plan year.  They are taking comments on the rule through this afternoon.

I’m commenting on the rule on two fairly narrow aspects as I have significant expertise and knowledge on those two aspects.

Commenting on federal (and state) rule-making is important.  It is an act of citizenship and engagement when you have the knowledge and perspective to add something to the conversation.

Comments on rules are important for several reasons beyond active and engaged exercises of citizenship.

First, it is a way to have some democratic accountability of the executive branch.  Interested stakeholders can petition for redress of their grievances and bring about their particular and peculiar expertise to a subject that the government may or may not have as much in-depth knowledge. Sometimes comments can point out “DOH” moments to the agencies and allow for course correction.

Secondly, notice and comment is a core component of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).  The APA governs most of the rule-making regulatory state.  A core APA tenet is rule-making entities can only implement final rules when the rules are neither capricious nor arbitrary.  If comments identify a significant consequence or assumption of the rule that is not addressed in the final rule response to comments, that is good evidence that the rule may be flawed….

If you have specific expertise or interest in anything that the Federal government touches, be ready and willing to comment.

Regulations.Gov is the nation’s one stop shop for commenting on proposed rules.

The best comments have a few common themes.  First, they identify a specific set of issues within a proposed rule.  Then the authors establish their expertise and illustrate why they have some capacity to offer valuable insight into the problem.  And then evidence is brought to bear on the relevant points.

There are thousands of Jackals with unique expertise in some field that is relevant to federal rule making at some point in time, so when you see something that is in your wheelhouse, comment on that rule.

My comment letter is below the fold:

July 28, 2021

To whom it may concern;

I would like to comment on matter CMS-9906-P, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Updating Payment Parameters, Section 1332 Waiver, Implementing Regulations and Improving Health Insurance Markets for 2022 and Beyond Proposed Rule. I am a research associate at the Duke University Robert J. Margolis Center for Health Policy with a research focus on the Affordable Care Act. I would like to comment on several matters.

1. We also propose to repeal the separate billing regulation at § 156.280(e)(2),

I am supportive of reducing administrative burden for enrollment and maintenance of enrollment in the FBM and SBMs. Some of my current, ongoing research has found that the requirement to set up a single payment account for positive, non-zero premium plans can lead to significant enrollment loss due to a significant non-financial transaction and hassle cost.1 Prior research has found, on Healthcare.gov, the presence of a zero premium plan led to a 14% increase in enrollment for individuals earning between 151-200% Federal Poverty Level within a county.2 While these studies do not speak directly on the matter of $1 separate payment for non-Hyde voluntary abortion coverage, they do speak on the importance of minimizing transaction costs for individuals who have expressed a concrete preference to initially enroll and then maintain enrollment in health insurance coverage.

2. We propose extending FFE open enrollment to end on January 15 of the applicable year, rather than December 15 of the previous year beginning with the 2022 coverage year and beyond.

While I have advocated for extending open enrollment periods (OEP) to span the New Year in order to give households an opportunity to correct good faith errors as well as change choices after automatic re-enrollment is effectuated, I believe that the department would be wise to delay implementation of this proposed change until the 2023 coverage year.3 Insurers have already filed initial rates and QHP applications. There is a very short window to update modest errors and make minor strategic changes. An extended open enrollment period that spans the New Year will lead to a significantly different composition of the risk pool, while also changing marketing requirements and customer support needs. An unanticipated policy shock could lead to significant administrative costs for insurers. I recommend the inclusion the extended OEP in the upcoming proposed 2023 NBPP.

I also recommend that a new Special Enrollment Period (SEP) be created for a restricted class of individuals who were automatically re-enrolled into plans that have a net premium increase of at least $10 per member per month in 2022 compared to 2021 as well as a SEP for individuals who had chosen a plan with a positive premium before the end of the current OEP but were unable to effectuate the chosen plan by January 1, 2023. Both SEPs would run to January 15, 2023 with policies becoming active on February 1, 2023. The intent would be to give a second chance for error correction to individuals and households that have expressed a willingness and a preference to purchase insurance but who had been tripped up during the process.1

Sincerely,

David Anderson

References

1. Drake C, Cai S-T, Anderson D, Sacks DW. Financial Transaction Costs Reduce Benefit Take-Up: Evidence from Zero-Premium Health Plans in Colorado. Social Science Research Network; 2021. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3743009
2. Drake C, Anderson DM. Terminating Cost-Sharing Reduction Subsidy Payments: The Impact Of Marketplace Zero-Dollar Premium Plans On Enrollment. Health Aff (Millwood). 2020;39(1):41-49. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00345
3. Drake C, Anderson D. Next Year, Extend Open Enrollment Of The ACA Marketplaces Into January. Published February 18, 2021. Accessed July 28, 2021. https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20210211.159357/full/

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Wednesday Morning Open Thread: The First Jan. 6 Select Committee Meeting
Next Post: Kids on Vents to Own the Libs »

Reader Interactions

11Comments

  1. 1.

    narya

    July 28, 2021 at 10:26 am

    As someone who works at an FQHC that serves LGBTQ folks, I have, indeed, drafted comments for us to submit to the feds. :-)

  2. 2.

    dnfree

    July 28, 2021 at 10:43 am

    Very impressive!  Using your powers for good.

  3. 3.

    Ken

    July 28, 2021 at 11:27 am

    Can you see all the comments?  I’m curious whether they’re mostly of similar quality to yours, or whether there’s a large fraction of, well, “Boaty McBoatFace” responses.

  4. 4.

    rikyrah

    July 28, 2021 at 11:32 am

    You absolutely rock, Mr. Anderson.

  5. 5.

    Butch

    July 28, 2021 at 11:50 am

    @Ken: Most agencies are required to publish at least a summary, and it’s worth pointing out that a simple “I’m for it” or “I’m against it” gets tossed into a category called “nonsubstantive” and is not considered further.

  6. 6.

    Anonymous At Work

    July 28, 2021 at 11:50 am

    Separate from this, I wanted to ask about whether ACA, Medicare/caid, etc. can allow vaccination mandates or treat vaccination as an unhealthy habit akin to smoking for purposes of coverage denial and pricing.  To what extent is that possible under existing law, vs. needing a new law passed?

  7. 7.

    laura

    July 28, 2021 at 12:06 pm

    Thank you for this advice and for the roadmap regarding the APA rule making and comments. My recollection of my APA class is Chevron, deference and the current hostility to the APA by Justices Gorsuch and Gang Bang. If time allows, would you be willing to address the current court’s posture should positive changes result from this instance of rule making?

  8. 8.

    David Anderson

    July 28, 2021 at 12:13 pm

    @Anonymous At Work:  That will be tomorrow’s post.

    TLDR: Not really. And do we really want to go down that route?

  9. 9.

    David Anderson

    July 28, 2021 at 12:14 pm

    @laura: I AM SO NOT AN ADMIN LAW LAWYER

  10. 10.

    David Anderson

    July 28, 2021 at 12:16 pm

    @Ken: Yep, you can see other comments.

    This is a low profile technical rule.  The comments are overwhelmingly likely to be from insurers and insurer groups, patient advocacy groups, a few think tanks, and a few nerds like me.  There might be a couple of low to no substantive responses but the probability that there is a well thought out response to the proposals is fairly high as no one is trying to fundraise or list build off of this rule.

    Now if there was a big abortion fight, mask mandate or an EPA rule, comment quality goes down quickly and massively.

  11. 11.

    Anonymous At Work

    July 28, 2021 at 12:44 pm

    @David Anderson: If it results in “Get COVID and lose your bass boat” to such an extent that it helps improve vaccinations, all for it.

    If it’s more hassle than worth, probably not worth the attention.

    Would want to see why/why not in terms of the admin law (I do regulatory work that’s quasi-legal).

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - ema - Midtown Manhattan Fall Foliage
Image by ema (12/16/25)

2026 Pets of Balloon Juice Calendar

PLEASE REVIEW YOUR INFO ASAP

Recent Comments

  • TS on Late Night Open Thread: Creatures of Darkness (Dec 17, 2025 @ 5:00am)
  • Chris T. on Tuesday Night Open Thread (Dec 17, 2025 @ 4:26am)
  • Gloria DryGarden on Tuesday Night Open Thread (Dec 17, 2025 @ 4:22am)
  • WTFGhost on Tuesday Night Open Thread (Dec 17, 2025 @ 4:09am)
  • Gloria DryGarden on Tuesday Night Open Thread (Dec 17, 2025 @ 4:07am)

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
On Artificial Intelligence (7-part series)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

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

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

Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup

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
Rose Judson (podcast)

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

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

Privacy Manager

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

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

Email sent!