Massachusetts Pace vs US Enrollment pace

Just a quick note concerning Obamacare enrollment.  Compared to the comparable time point of the 2006 Massachusetts experience, Obamacare Exchange enrollment pace is matching Massachusetts’ enrollment pace  for private insurance during the Bay State’s 2006 open enrollment period.

At 16% into the open enrollment period, 2,089 Massachusetts citizens had signed up.  As a straight population adjustment (sum *48.75), that would translate into the national experience of roughly 102,000 people signing up.  106,000 people signed up via either the federal exchange or through state exchanges covering all but three Exchange jurisdictions according to the Washington Post.    Three state run Exchanges have not reported their numbers so we can assume a slightly higher number.

Being slightly less charitable if we apply an adjustment to the raw population total to account for the fact that Massachusetts had a much smaller uninsured pool, (8.4% in 2006 vs. 15.4% US nationally in 2013), expectations would have seen 186,000 Obamacare enrollments.

However there is another adjustment that would reduce 186,000 expected pace downwards.  The Massachusetts Medicaid expansion was only applicable to people up to 100% Federal Poverty Line.  For the states that are taking Medicaid enrollment, people who make between 133% and 138% are eligible, so the total US national pool eligible for the Exchanges is smaller than the 1.83 factor adjustment implies.

Even with a crappy three weeks of website work, and pointed political opposition, the pace is either concurrent with the nearest relevant example, or slightly behind depending on how you want to model expected pace.  That ain’t bad. (As a side note, I am curious as to why HHS was so optimistic about first month enrollment)

Additionally, Obamacare, even with the Supreme Court and the reactionary assholes neutering Medicaid expansion in half the country is signing people up for Medicaid expansion at a rate that surpasses Massachusetts’ experience in 2006.

 Update 1: via a commenter in the Pittsburgh region, I was directed to this story concerning Pennsylvania enrollment.

Despite the glitches, Highmark’s health plans appeared to be an early favorite among people who were able to complete the shopping process. The company picked up 827 individuals through Nov. 2, or 37 percent of enrollees in the state.

That number doubled to 1,665 by Nov. 12, a trend Ash called “encouraging.”

Pennsylvania is a Federal Exchange state.  Assuming Highmark is representative, the key is the November pace is at least 3x faster than the October pace, and that is without any time pressure to enroll yet for January 1st coverage. 

 

Looking at Landrieu’s plan

As a political matter, I understand the desire for Democrats to get out of the way of pissed off middle class people who actually have to pay a little more to get good health insurance that actually pays out.  As a policy matter, I really don’t care that there are some losers in a political process.  However politics creates the contours of policy and 50 Senate Democrats on Jan. 5, 2015 creates much better policy outcomes than 47 Senate Democrats.

Sen. Landrieu has an elegant work-around to the matter that individual insurance policies are getting cancelled.  Here are the major points:

  1. Date change of grandfather status from day of PPACA being signed into law to 12/31/13 for individual only plans.
  2. No new enrollment allowed into individual plans
  3. Insurance companies must continue to offer grandfathered plans until no subscribes elect to renew
  4. Currently covered individuals on newly grandfathered plans are Exchange and subsidy eligible.
  5. Annual renewal notice stating that the insurance being bought is crap insurance.
  6. Cancellation notices that require actual reasons with relevant citations for cancellation — ie not “Obamacare made us do it”

This is an elegant kludge that nicely gets around the political problem without causing long term damage to Obamacare’s risk pools.

show full post on front page

Whats in a number Part 2

What’s in the enrollment numbers that are starting to circulate:

Politico has good news and bad news:

Bad news:

40,000 to 50,000 people have enrolled in private health care plans using HealthCare.gov — a range far short of White House hopes, according to new numbers reported by the Wall Street Journal Monday.

That figure does not include people who signed up using state exchanges. Avalere Healthcare, a consulting firm, estimated Monday that about 49,000 people had successful enrolled in insurance in 12 of the 15 states running their own insurance exchange. The largest state exchange, California, has not released numbers.

This is bad news.  The exchanges were projected to sign up and collect either checks or credit card information from half a million covered lives in this time span.  The reporting is a bit unclear if there are roughly 90,000 to  100,000 covered lives or 100,000 contracts between the state and federal marketplaces.  If it is 100,000 contracts that would be 200,000 or so covered lives as a rough guesstimate.  The exchanges are behind pace.  However, when compared to Massachusetts at a comparable period and then adjusting for the compressed time frame, the Exchanges are ahead of Massachusetts’s pace even with the techical problems.  The question is will the fixes that have been going into play be good enough to deal with the highly probable surge of people who are looking for January 1st coverage right and want to buy right after Thanksgiving.

Good news:

Those figures don’t include enrollments in Medicaid, which have vastly outpaced the number of sign-ups in the marketplace in states like Kentucky and Washington, which have released early figures. A separate Avalere report on 10 of the states expanding Medicaid found that 444,000 have signed up for Medicaid.

 This means people who need healthcare are getting it in some states in some situations.  Ideally it would be an all-state statement, but fuck you Chief Justice Roberts et al.

Cost sharing subsidies and the near poor

By now, I think most people know that the sticker price on Exchange insurance policies is not the price most people will pay for their policy.  Most people know that subsidies are available to lower the out of pocket monthly premium price for the working middle class.  However, there is another class of subsidies that I don’t think a lot of people know about.  These subsidies apply to out of pocket expenses for Exchange Silver plans that transform the Exchange Silver into better plans.

The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities  has a good one paragraph summary of these out of pocket/cost sharing subsidies:

The premium credits allow people to buy a silver plan, which has a 70 percent actuarial value.  That means that the plan will cover 70 percent of the costs for covered medical services of a typical beneficiary population, with beneficiaries, on average, paying the other 30 percent.[3]   However, people who receive cost-sharing assistance — those with incomes below 250 percent of the poverty line — will not have to pay the full remaining 30 percent of the cost of covered services.  As a result, people with incomes below 250 percent of poverty will effectively be enrolled in a plan that has a higher actuarial value than 70 percent.  For example, people with incomes below 150 percent of the poverty line will have plans that have an actuarial value of 94 percent, while plans for people with incomes between 150 percent and 200 percent of the poverty line will have an actuarial value of 87 percent.  These higher actuarial values mean that as a result of cost-sharing assistance, low-income individuals and families will be able to enroll in health plans with lower deductibles, co-payments, and/or total out-of-pocket costs.

It is a sliding scale.  People who barely breaking even get 80% off their out of pocket responsibilities.  For instance, a family on a Silver Plan with a $3000 listed deductible would only be responsible for $600 of the deductible.  I think the family is still on the hook for the $600 instead of transforming the deductible into a sliding scale co-insurance.  A family making just under 250% of federal poverty line would get a 10% discount on their out of pocket expenses.  These subsidies transform a Silver plan for a family making under 150% of FPL into a Platinum plus plan, and for families making between 150% to 200% FPL, their Silver plans get transformed into very good Gold plans to weak Platinums. 

Oh yeah, as a FYI to the Medicare for All folks, Medicare currently has an actuarially value of 82% to 83%.  That number increases with low income subsidies on Medicare Part D but the combination of premium subsidies and out of pocket subsidies gets quite a few people who making less than 250% of FPL coverage that is far better than  Medicare Part A and B combined.