BITTER CHILL IN THE FALL AIR FOR OBAMACARE

Posted on September 12, 2017 by thehealthinsuranceanswerman

by D. Kenton Henry, Editor, Agent, Broker

The Open Enrollment Period (OEP) when individuals and families can select and enroll in health insurance plans for the calendar year 2018 is, just around the corner, beginning, as usual, November 1. What is different this year is, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHS), which oversees Obamacare (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ― ACA), has proposed ending it December 15th ― a period half as long as in all previous years. OEP historically ends January 31st. If this proposed change is effected, consumers, and agents and brokers on their behalf, will be under considerably more pressure to bind coverage during a period which has always been fraught with confusion and frustration. Expected to heighten the latter, are increasing premiums and less participation by insurance companies and providers. Increasing premiums (which have only accelerated during Obamacare) speak for themselves. Less participation by insurance companies means less competition and fewer plans from which consumers may choose. Less participation by providers means it will be even harder to find your doctor or hospital in the Health Maintenance Network (HMO) plans we Texans are forced to choose from since January 2016. Do not expect Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plans to return for 2018. The reason behind this deliberate trend is the unstated agenda of the industry to accustom each of us to have our providers―and thereby our treatment―rationed. The stated agenda is an attempt to mitigate financial losses by the insurance companies. Those in office who would replace Obamacare, and our current insurance system, with a “Single-Payer” system have no problem, whatsoever, with this trend. This, because restrictions on providers and treatment will be inherent in any single-payer program.There are many in Washington who believe the solution to healthcare insurance is to add all of us to Medicare.Those who share in the belief the single-payer system is the solution should consider the reality that Medicare is 50 trillion is debt and predicted to be insolvent 12 years from now. (That is according to the Trump administration. Obama’s predicted it to be insolvent one year earlier, the Congressional Budget Office three years earlier) http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20170713/NEWS/170719951

And this is the reality with current members having paid into it their entire working careers. How do you think that is going to work when you add every other American, a great many of which are not contributing to Medicare and never have? In my mind, that will expedite the path to insolvency exponentially. Consider a true single-payer program which serves as an example: Veteran’s Administration Health Care. A beacon of mismanagement resulting in waiting lines, provider rationing, and, in many parts of the country, long travel distances for care.

To exacerbate the difficulty in predicting premiums, and budgeting accordingly, President Trump has stated he is considering withholding federal subsidies to insurance companies. Historically, these have bought down the retail premiums the consumer must pay. Here we are halfway through September, and we still do not know if Trump will do so. Now―here is the real wrench in the grist mill ― the insurance companies must submit their 2018 premiums to the State Insurance Regulators by September 30th!

“If there’s no deal on the subsidies within the next five weeks, states will have no choice but to approve rate increases that include surcharges and go with those rates for the start of open enrollment on Nov. 1. On average that would mean consumers would see an extra 20 percent price hike next year.” ― 20 August 2017, CNBC.COM

“In many ways, the die has already been cast… if nothing changes before the end of September, we’re pretty much looking at those rates being locked in for 2018,” said Wisconsin insurance commissioner Ted Nickel, who is also president of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. ― 20 August 2017, CNBC.COM

That is 20 percent on top of general premium increases predicted to be in the 12 to 15% range.

Once again, whether you feel you need assistance in coping with these issues in electing your 2018 coverage and protecting yourself and family from the sky-rocketing cost of health care, please call me at 281.367.6565. I have been specializing in health insurance for 26 of my 31 years in insurance. I have assisted my clients in coping with Obamacare since its passage in March of 2010.

For those of you enrolled in Medicare ― Open Enrollment for election of your 2018 Part D Drug Plan begins, as usual, October 15th. Current clients should email me a list of your current drug regimen at allplanhealthinsurance.com@gmail.com. Upon receipt, I will provide you my recommendation your lowest out of pocket cost Part D plan in 2018. Those of you not currently my clients are encouraged to do the same.

http://thewoodlandstxhealthinsurance.com

https://healthandmedicareinsurance.com

*******************************

Featured articles:

Governors Tell Congress to Stabilize Individual Health Insurance Market

Michael Collins, USA TODAYPublished 1:25 p.m. ET Sept. 7, 2017 | Updated 5:45 p.m. ET Sept. 7, 2017

WASHINGTON — Governors from five states called Thursday on Congress to move quickly to stabilize the individual health insurance market and then embark on a serious effort to deal with skyrocketing health care costs.

“All of us — Republicans, Democrats and independents — should agree that our current path is not a sustainable one,” Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam told a Senate panel.

The governors — three Republicans and two Democrats — testified during the second of four bipartisan hearings before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

The panel is looking for a short-term fix to stabilize the individual market after the collapse of GOP efforts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare.

The committee’s chairman, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said he hopes senators can forge a bipartisan agreement by the end of next week and pass limited legislation by the end of the month to keep prices down and make it possible for everyone in the individual market to be able to afford insurance.

Congress must act quickly. New insurance rates for 2018 must be posted on the government’s website, healthcare.gov., by Sept. 27.

At Thursday’s hearing, the committee heard from Republican Govs. Haslam, Charlie Baker of Massachusetts and Gary Herbert of Utah and Democratic Govs. Steve Bullock of Montana and John Hickenlooper of Colorado.

A key issue is the future of federal cost-sharing payments to insurers that help them provide affordable coverage for low- and moderate-income families.

President Trump has threatened to end the payments, worth about $7 billion this year.

With Obamacare in limbo, senators look for fix to stabilize health insurance market

Trump says GOP senators ‘look like fools’ on health care, warns of ‘imploding ObamaCare’

Congress has a crucial to-do list in September: Here’s what lawmakers must accomplish

All five governors testifying Thursday urged Congress to continue the payments, echoing the pleas of state insurance commissioners who appeared before the panel a day earlier.

The governors also called for creation of a reinsurance program that would limit losses to carriers that provide coverage in the marketplace and for the federal government to give states more flexibility to design and regulate insurance plans more suited to their own needs.

“It’s time for the federal government to work with us, not against us,” said Hickenlooper, arguing that state efforts to bring down premiums have been frequently undermined.

Without the federal government’s help, trying to keep insurance affordable is “like climbing one of Colorado’s famous 14,000-foot mountains in winter without crampons,” Hickenloopper said. “It can’t be done.”

Alexander said one option for giving states flexibility would be to allow the governor or state insurance commissioner to apply for a waiver from Obamacare’s rules, instead of waiting for the state legislature to act. He also suggested a “copycat” provision so that when one state wins federal approval for a program or initiative, other states could quickly follow suit.

Senators most likely will fashion a short-term stabilization plan that includes continuing cost-sharing for a limited period of time and gives states significantly more flexibility through Obamacare’s waiver process, Alexander said.

Once a short-term fix is enacted to stabilize the individual market, lawmakers can then move quickly to focus on how to make the market vibrant in the long run, Alexander said.

“I hope we can begin to spend most of our time on the larger issue of health care costs,” he said.

Two more hearings are planned next week. The committee will hear Tuesday from various health policy experts. Health care providers and other stakeholders will appear before the panel next Thursday.

Health Insurance

If Congress doesn’t fund Obamacare subsidies next month it could get pretty complicated

Insurers can’t wait past a Sept. 30 deadline to set key insurance rates for next year.
However, the fate of key subsidy payments under the Affordable Care Act is still unknown.
State health insurance regulators expect that subsidies could remain in limbo past key deadlines, and are making plans for that possibility.

Bertha Coombs | @BerthaCoombs

Published 8:01 AM ET Sun, 20 Aug 2017 | Updated 4 Hours Ago CNBC.com

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/19/if-congress-doesnt-fund-obamacare-subsidies-it-could-get-complicated.html

State health insurance regulators have been hoping for the best when it comes to 2018 exchange enrollment, but are now bracing for the worst-case scenario — that the fate of key health insurance subsidies will remain in limbo past key deadlines next month.

“We have a way to protect consumers, but it is complicated and will cause unnecessary confusion and anxiety,” said Diana Dooley, chair of Covered California, the state’s Obamacare exchange, in a statement Friday.

California officials say they will wait until the end of September to decide whether to let insurers impose a 12.8 percent surcharge on 2018 exchange premiums to account for the potential loss of cost-reduction subsidies that reduce out-of-pocket costs for low-income enrollees.

“We are extending our deadline to give Congress time to act when they return in September,” Dooley explained. “We are heartened by the bipartisan discussion that put consumers first, but we can’t wait past Sept. 30.”

Some Republican lawmakers have proposed passing a short-term funding bill next month to authorize 2018 reimbursements for cost-reduction subsidies insurers are required to make under the Affordable Care Act.

However, if there’s no deal on the subsidies within the next five weeks, states will have no choice but to approve rate increases that include surcharges and go with those rates for the start of open enrollment on Nov. 1. On average that would mean consumers would see an extra 20 percent price hike next year.

“In many ways the die has already been cast… if nothing changes before the end of September, we’re pretty much looking at those rates being locked in for 2018,” said Wisconsin insurance commissioner Ted Nickel, who is also president of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.

Pressure to act fast

State insurance commissioners, insurers and most of the major health industry groups have been urging Congressional leaders to fund the so-called cost-reduction subsidies for months, but politically it puts Republicans in a difficult spot after their failure to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

A federal judge ruled in favor of House Republicans last year, after they sued the Obama administration arguing that funding for the subsidies was never authorized by Congress. That lawsuit has been put on hold three times since last fall, and is due back in court this week.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to pull the plug on the insurer reimbursements citing the ruling, though the administration has continued to make the payments on a month-to-month basis, and will make them for August.

“What’s likely to happen is that Congress will pass some kind of interim funding, which negates the lawsuit,” said Julius Hobson, senior policy advisor at the Polsinelli law firm, adding that barring congressional authorization “it’s difficult to get a remedy that forces the government to spend the money.”

One thing that could help tip the balance for reaching a deal is the Congressional Budget Office’s report, which estimated that cutting the subsidies would increase the deficit by $194 billion over 10 years, in part because higher premium rates would result in more people qualifying for tax credits.

But Congress also has a number of key deals it has to reach next month, including raising the deficit and reaching an agreement to fund the government in order to avoid a shutdown.

What if the payments get funded after the rate hikes?

If funding for cost-reduction subsidies were approved after rates are locked in for open enrollment, consumers would not likely get relief from the price hikes right away.

“The Medical Loss Ratio that was instituted by the ACA will still be in place, meaning that consumers will be reimbursed [if] insures are not spending an 80% minimum on [health] care costs,” said Christina Cousart, senior policy associate at National Academy for State Health Policy, but she added those rebates would happen retroactively.

Some consumers might not be made whole for the premium surcharges. The higher rates would likely result in even fewer healthy unsubsidized consumers signing up for coverage. While the rate increases should be high enough to shield insurers from losses on sicker enrollees, they would not necessarily result in big rebates for consumers.

“There’s no way we can back out these higher rates that the companies put in… We’re going to have more expensive health insurance plans, we’re going to have fewer people enrolled,” said insurance industry consultant Robert Laszewski, president of Health Policy and Strategy associates.

What’s also unclear is whether consumers who receive larger tax credits would have to pay them back at tax time, if insurers do provide premium surcharge rebates.

“This is really hard to say at this point, without knowing how it will all play out — which is why we believe that the best solution is for Congress and the administration to resolve this issue now,” said Covered California spokesman James Scullary. “A resolution now eliminates the need for all of these workarounds to protect consumers.”

If Congress manages to come up with a funding deal to keep the subsidies in place, Wisconsin’s insurance commissioner says they should not stop there. He says the current problems underscore the need to give states more flexibility to stabilize their exchange markets than they have under current Obamacare rules.

“We have so little control now, so much of it is coming from the federal government through more of a central planning function rather than letting states engage in ways that best needs of their consumers,” said Nickel. “We do find ourselves in very difficult straights.”

*********************************

Changes Coming for Next Year’s Obamacare Open Enrollment Period

The Trump administration is working to make changes to the Affordable Care Act (ACA)

With the confirmation of Tom Price as Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Trump administration is already working to make changes to President Obama’s health reform law, the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

No, the promised “repeal and replace” of the ACA (also known as Obamacare) hasn’t happened yet, but Mr Price’s Department of Health and Human Services (DHS) has issued proposed guidelines that would affect consumers during 2018’s Obamacare open enrollment period.

The 2018 open enrollment period is not scheduled to begin until the fall of 2017. If the ACA is repealed, this next open enrollment period may be Obamacare’s last.

Let’s take a look at some of the proposed changes:

Shorter open enrollment period for 2018 – The 2018 Obamacare open enrollment period is currently scheduled to run from November 1, 2017 through January 31, 2018. DHS’s proposed change cut the duration of the the open enrollment period by half so that it runs from November 1 through December 15, 2017.
Some loosening of benefit requirements – The Obamacare law sets strict guidelines for “minimum essential coverage” that all major medical health insurance plans must provide. Though details are not yet available, DHS is proposing to loosen these rules somewhat, allowing insurers to offer plans with a broader range of coverage options.
More supporting documentation required for special enrollment periods – Outside of the nationwide open enrollment period, consumers can only purchase coverage on their own when they experience a major life change, such as marriage or divorce, or the birth or adoption of a baby, etc. A proposed revision of rules would tighten the requirements for applicants to provide documentation proving their eligibility for a special enrollment period.
Changes to doctor network rules – Under Obamacare, the federal government sets standards for what constitutes an adequate network of participating doctors and medical facilities for major medical plans. A proposed change from DHS would allow states to set these limits for themselves instead.
Collection of overdue premiums – In a move designed to discourage applicants from neglecting to pay their monthly premiums near year’s end and simply re-enrolling with the same plan for January, a proposed DHS rule would allow insurers to collect overdue premiums before extending coverage to such applicants in the next year.

**************************************

Trustees’ report says Medicare will be insolvent by 2029

Modern Healthcare

By Virgil Dickson | July 13, 2017

The Medicare trust fund will be insolvent by 2029, the program’s trustees reported today.

The prediction is a year later than the 2028 date the Obama administration outlined in last year’s report. The Congressional Budget Office in January 2016 estimated the program would be solvent only until 2026.

Based on the new findings, the feared Independent Payment Advisory Board, which was designated by the Affordable Care Act to rein in Medicare costs if they grew faster than a set rate, will not be activated.

That’s likely good news as the board, called a death panel by ACA opponents, has never had to be formed. There hasn’t been the need, and some say, the willingness to expend the political capital. With midterm elections coming and possible fallout likely if Republicans repeal the ACA, this is one less possible political headache to worry about. Also of note, 2029 is 12 years longer than projected estimates before the Affordable Care Act become law.

However, trustees are worried doctors will exit the program anyway. The report contained new concerns about access to physicians in the coming years due to the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act.

MACRA replaced the physician payment updates under the sustainable growth rate formula, which clinicians were paid under for years.

Under MACRA the annual physician payment update for 2017 through 2019 will be 0.5%. For 2020 through 2025, there will be no payment update, which alarmed the trustees.

“These amounts do not vary based on underlying economic conditions, nor are they expected to keep pace with the average rate of physician cost increases,” the report said. “Absent a change in the delivery system or level of update by subsequent legislation, access to Medicare-participating physicians may become a significant issue in the long term under current law.”

The new insolvency date does incorporate modest savings from the agency’s move to value-based care, including accountable care organizations. However, exact figures were not broken out.

“The innovations being tested under the ACA, such as bundled payments or accountable care organizations, could reduce incentives to adopt new cost-increasing technologies and could contribute to greater efforts to avoid services of limited or no value within the service bundle,” the report says.

Medicare Part D expenditures per enrollee are estimated to increase by an average of 6.4% annually over the next five years; that’s higher than the projected average annual rate of growth for the U.S. economy, which is 5.2 % during that period.

The report found that these costs are trending higher than previously predicted, particularly for specialty drugs.

In 2016, Medicare covered 56.8 million people and expenditures were $678.7 billion up from $647.6 billion and 55.3 million beneficiaries in 2015.

http://thewoodlandstxhealthinsurance.com

https://healthandmedicareinsurance.com

MEDICARE RECIPIENTS DODGE A BULLET WHILE OBAMACARE INSUREDS PREPARE TO TAKE ONE!

Posted on October 30, 2015 by thehealthinsuranceanswerman

By D. Kenton Henry

Perhaps a storm would be a better analogy but 2016 will deliver something more than a mild tropical depression to the coast of the “Individual and Family” health insurance market. At the same―the Cat 3 (minimum) hurricane projected to slam the Senior market of Medicare recipients appears to have been diverted. For now.

As we enter the third year of enrollment in health insurance plans compliant with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) the “Affordable” aspect of care or―more accurately―the cost of protecting oneself from the cost of health care―seems elusive and more and more a case of misrepresentation. As I have said many times in the past, if you qualify for a subsidy of your health insurance premiums you may find your options affordable. However, depending on where you live, you will surely be upset with the increasing cost of health insurance. 70% of all Obamacare members are enrolled in a Silver Plan. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHS), which oversees enforces the Act and oversees the health insurance industry, has designated the second lowest cost Silver Plan of any insurance company to be the default plan one must select in order to maximize the benefit of any subsidy. This could include a reduction in not only one’s premium but their deductibles and co-pays. As Fox News and the Washington Post report (see featured article below) the cost of these plans will rise by a national average of 7.5%. States such as Oklahoma will see an increase of 37.5%!

In some states it is much worse.

To add insult to injury many insurance companies, such as BlueCross BlueShield of Texas, have taken such losses―in spite of skyrocketing premiums―they have announced they are eliminating the Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) network option for their plans and member benefit. The only option will be to select a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) network option wherein the company can ration your providers and treatment. While the young or otherwise very healthy may find this option acceptable, those of us who are older or dealing with existing illnesses or injuries are certain to be upset by this development. The insurance companies seem to be in agreement on the viability of PPOs and explain any premium increase necessary to assure they even break even on a PPO policy would be beyond the increase limit set by Obamacare. As such, it would therefore not be approved by their state insurance commissioner. So the question remains: what will your personal network and benefit options be for 2016 and what will they cost?

Virtually all insurance companies are keeping the answers close to their vest until this Sunday, November 1, the first day of OPEN ENROLLMENT wherein one may choose a health insurance plan for 2016. Enrollment will remain open until January 31st. Those without a plan at that time will be locked out for the remainder of the year and will pay a penalty equal to the higher of two amounts:

2.5% of your yearly household income (Only the amount of income above the tax filing threshold, about $10,150 for an individual in 2014, is used to calculate the penalty.) The maximum penalty is the national average premium for a Bronze plan

$695 per person ($347.50 per child under 18) The maximum penalty per family using this method is $2,085.

A banner follows which, as of Sunday, November 1st, you may click on and by simply entering your birth date, zip code and tobacco usage, obtain ALL your health insurance options from each and every insurance company issuing 2016 coverage in your state. It will also allow you to calculate what subsidy, if any, and enable you (if you choose) to log directly into the federal marketplace to acquire it and your insurance plan. If you have questions, as you most surely will, do not hesitate to contact me via my contact information via the link or below.

CLICK ON THIS BANNER TO OBTAIN 2016 HEALTH INSURANCE QUOTES:

Relative to Medicare recipients, it would appear a planned increase in the 2016 Medicare Part B premium and deductible has been taken off the table for the time being. The increase would have resulted in a huge spike in what higher income recipients and new enrollees in Part B Out-Patient coverage would pay in premium. The proposed premium increase would have been as presented here:

Income Limits, Medicare Part B Premiums for 2016

Single	Married	2015	2016 Held Harmless	2016 Not Held Harmless
$85,000 or less	$170,000 or less	$104.90	$104.90	$159.30
$85,001 to $107,000	$170,001 to $214,000	$146.90		$223.00
$107,001 to $160,000	$214,001 to $320,000	$209.80		$318.60
$160,001 to $214,000	$320,001 to $428,000	$272.70		$414.20
Above $214,000	Above $428,000	$335.70		$509.80

The threat and legislation which averted this is described in detail in The Fiscal Times article below. As of today, it is still unclear to this editor whether the increase in the calendar year deductible has also been averted.

Editor, Broker, Agent ― D. Kenton Henry

Office: 281.367.6565

Cell (call or text): 713.907.7984

http://allplanhealthinsurance.com

http://thewoodlandstxhealthinsurance.com

Blog: http://healthandmedicareinsurance.com

*******************************************************************

FEATURED ARTICLES:

Health & Science

THE WASHINGTON POST

26 October 2015

2016 Affordable Care Act insurance rates are climbing

By Amy Goldstein October 26

The prices for a popular and important group of health plans sold through the federal insurance exchange will climb by an average of 7.5 percent for the coming year, a jump nearly four times bigger than a year ago, according to new government figures.

The rate increase for 2016 compares with average growth of 2 percent, from 2014 to this year, in the monthly premiums for a level of coverage that serves as the benchmark for federal subsidies that help most consumers buying coverage under the Affordable Care Act.

A “snapshot” of insurance rates, released Monday by the Department of Health and Human Services, also shows that the rate increases for next year vary substantially around the country. Although there are exceptions, more populous states and metropolitan areas tend to have more modest premium increases for the coming year than smaller areas.

The changes for next year have a wide range — from premium increases averaging 35 percent in Oklahoma and Montana to a decrease of nearly 13 percent in Indiana.

The analysis is based on hundreds of health plans sold in local markets within 37 states that use HealthCare.gov, the federal online insurance marketplace. It excludes plans in other states that have created separate ACA insurance marketplaces. The rates reflect the prices of the second-least expensive health plan in each market for 2016 in a tier of coverage known as silver. ACA health plans are divided into four tiers, all named for metals, depending on the amount of customers’ care that they cover. Silver plans have proven by far the most popular. Officials at HHS issued the analysis as less than a week remains before the start on Nov. 1 of a third open-enrollment season for Americans eligible to sign up for health plans under the insurance marketplaces created by the 2010 health-care law. The exchanges are intended for people who cannot get affordable health benefits through a job.

In their analysis, federal officials contend that the health plans sold through the exchanges will be affordable to people willing to shop for the best rates. The cost to consumers, HHS officials emphasize, is cushioned by the fact that nearly nine in 10 are eligible for tax credits.

Taking the subsidies into account, nearly four in five people who already have gotten insurance through these marketplaces will have access for 2016 to a health plan for which they could pay no more than $100 in monthly premiums, the analysis found. The analysis does not address other costs to consumers, such as co-payments and deductibles, which tend to be more expensive in ACA health plans than in employer-based health benefits.

The figures in the analysis reinforce a theme that Obama administration officials introduced last year and have revived as the third sign-up period approaches: the usefulness of researching the best and most affordable coverage, even if it means switching insurance from year to year. “If consumers come back to the Marketplace and shop, they may be able to find a plan that saves them money and meets their health needs,” Kevin Counihan, the HHS official who oversees the health exchanges, said in a statement.

The new figures show that existing customers who went back last fall to HealthCare.gov and picked a different plan at the same level of coverage saved an average of nearly $400 in premiums over the course of this year. Slightly fewer than one-third of those who bought such coverage for a second time switched health plans, according to the analysis. During this open enrollment, Obama administration officials are striving both to attract existing customers again and to ferret out Americans eligible for the exchanges who remain uninsured even though the law requires them to have coverage. Although many consumers can be largely shielded from rate jumps through subsidies and shopping around, the increases ratchet up the government’s expenditures on the tax credits that the law provides, health policy analysts point out.

Analysts have expected that premiums for the coming year would grow more rapidly than they did for 2015. “This is the first year that insurers actually have a full year of experience with how much care people use,” said Larry Levitt, senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a health policy organization. “In the first two years of the program, insurers were essentially guessing.” In addition, Caroline Pearson, senior vice president at Avalere, a health-care consulting firm, said that, as some health plans have attracted a significant share of customers, “the need to price really low diminishes a little bit.” Clare Krusing, a spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry’s main trade group, said that “averages don’t tell the whole story” and that insurance rates hinge on “location and the cost of providing care to individuals in particular markets.” In particular, Krusing said, last year was “a record-breaking year for prescription drug prices. That trend is likely to continue.”

***********************************

Seniors Exhale as Congress Blocks Huge Medicare Increase

By Eric Pianin October 27, 2015 3:17 PM

Responding to pressure from seniors’ and labor groups as the 2016 campaign season heats up, congressional leaders and the White House have blocked a huge, 50 percent increase in the Medicare Part B premium for nearly one third of the 50 million elderly Americans who depend on the program for health services.

The bipartisan solution will block all but a tiny fraction of the premium increase. It is contained in the two-year budget and debt ceiling bill negotiated by House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the White House and that awaits ratification by the two chambers – likely by the end of this week.

The threatened sharp premium increase – reported back in August by The Fiscal Times – was triggered by a quirk in federal law that penalizes wealthier Medicare beneficiaries, newcomers to the program and lower income Americans with complicated chronic health problems. It kick in any time the Social Security Administration fails to approve an annual cost-of-living adjustment – as will be the case next year.

Medicare Part B and the Social Security trust fund are interconnected, and most seniors on Medicare have their monthly premiums deducted from their Social Security checks. Because the federal law “holds harmless” about 70 percent of Medicare recipients from premium increases to cover unexpected increases in healthcare costs, the remaining 30 percent of Medicare Part B beneficiaries suffer the consequences by being made to pay higher premiums.

Without intervention by Congress, roughly 15 million seniors and chronically ill people currently claiming both Medicare and Medicaid coverage would have seen their premiums increase from $104.90 per month to $159.30 for individuals, according to Medicare actuaries. The actuaries also predicted an increase in the annual deductible for Part B of Medicare, from $147 in 2015 to $223 next year.

Estimates of the cost of legislation to blunt or block a premium increase have ranged from $7.5 billion to $10 billion. Under the budget agreement unveiled late last night, that cost will be covered by a loan of general revenue from the U.S. Treasury to the Supplemental Medical Insurance Trust Fund.

In order to repay that loan, the 15 million people who are not subject to the “hold harmless” protection will be required to pay an additional $3 a month in premiums – a token amount — until the loan is repaid years from now, according to a House budget document describing the deal. Medicare beneficiaries who currently pay higher income-related premiums would pay more than $3, based on their income levels.

If there is no Social Security cost of living adjustment increase for 2017, this provision will apply again.

http://Allplanhealthinsurance.com

http://TheWoodlandsTXHealthInsurance.com

BULLETIN: Second Round of Obamacare Breaks From The Gate Starting Now!

Posted on November 15, 2014 by thehealthinsuranceanswerman

(Announcement by D. Kenton Henry and HealthandMedicareInsurance.com)

Who will end up the winner ― you ― the insured, the insurance companies or Uncle Sam?

As a health insurance broker of 27 years, I and my peers have waiting with baited breath all year to see two things:

First ― will enrollments in 2015 health insurance plans, which begin at midnight tonight, the 15th of November, go more smoothly than last year’s embarrassing debacle that was the glitch plagued Healthcare.gov website which floundered in the death throes of end-stage technology through the entire first year “open-enrollment” period?

Secondly ― what are 2015 premiums and benefits going to look like? By the time you read this, you are about to know. I hope you will be happy with the options available to you, however, I hate to say, I cannot guarantee that. Rumor has it that premiums will be going up at varying rates relative to each of the fifty states. In Texas they are projected to rise an average of 14% above 2014 rates depending on your age. If this is the case and you have coverage you feel is adequate―along with the option of keeping it―that is exactly what you should do. But if you are like a great number of my clients, who have been told your current plan will terminate 12.31.2014, your only options are to forego coverage and pay the penalty (excuse me “shared responsibility tax”) when you file your 2015 tax return. Or purchase one of the new compliant plans.

I cannot control the options you will have but I can present, simplify and guide you to your best value in 2015 health insurance coverage. My quoting link will not only determine if you qualify for and calculate the amount of your subsidy (utilizing the same algorithm employed by Healthcare.gov) but, in the event you do qualify, will allow you to seamlessly take advantage of the subsidy and apply for your health plan selection for the reduced (net) premium. It will illustrate all your options from every carrier both on and off the federal exchange.

I am certain that after reviewing your options you will have numerous questions. I encourage you to email or call me with them. I will answer them and once you have decided upon your best value, I can make the enrollment process go as smoothly and comfortably as possible. I intend to work all through the weekend and make myself available to be best of my ability.

It is currently 10 p.m. CST on the 14th. After midnight click on this link to begin exploring your options and know I greatly anticipate working with you and making this transition period in the health insurance consumer market go as smoothly as possible for you.

Sincerely,

Kenton Henry

Broker, Agent, Editor

Email: Quote@allplaninsurance.com

Phone: 281.367.6565

Toll Free: 800.856.6556

CLICK HERE FOR 2015 HEALTH INSURANCE OPTIONS: https://allplanhealthinsurance.insxcloud.com/my-quote/individual-info

*Please return to this page and give us your opinion of your options.

***************************************************************************************************

FEATURE ARTICLES:

NEW YORK TIMES

14 November 2014

Cost of Coverage Under Affordable Care Act to Increase in 2015

By ROBERT PEAR, REED ABELSON and AGUSTIN ARMENDARIZNOV. 14, 2014

“Consumers should shop around,” said Marilyn B. Tavenner, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs the federal insurance exchange serving three dozen states. “With new options available this year, they’re likely to find a better deal.” She asserted that the data showed that “the Affordable Care Act is working.”

But Republicans quickly pounced on the data as evidence of the opposite.

“Last year, many who liked their plan were surprised to learn they couldn’t keep it,” said Senator Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, who is in line to become chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. “This year, many who like their plan will likely have to pay more to keep it.”

The new data means that many of the seven million people who have bought insurance through federal and state exchanges will have to change to different health plans if they want to avoid paying more — an inconvenience for consumers just becoming accustomed to their coverage.

A new Gallup Poll suggests that seven in 10 Americans with insurance bought through the exchanges rate the coverage and the care as excellent or good, and most were planning to keep it.

In employer-sponsored health plans, employees tend to stay with the same insurer from year to year. But for consumers in the public insurance exchanges, that will often be a mistake, experts said.

Nashville illustrates the need for people with marketplace coverage to look closely at the alternatives available in 2015.

Marilyn B. Tavenner, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs the federal health exchange. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times

A 40-year-old in Nashville, with the cheapest midlevel, or silver plan, will pay $220 a month next year, compared to $181 a month this year, for the same plan.

The least expensive plan is offered by another insurer, Community Health Alliance, one of the so-called co-op plans created under the federal law. It offers coverage for a monthly premium of $194.

But the lower premium means that consumers will have to pay a much larger annual deductible, $4,000, rather than $2,000. A policyholder who becomes seriously ill or has a costly chronic condition could pay hundreds of dollars in out-of-pocket expenses.

In addition, different health plans often have different networks of doctors and hospitals and cover different drugs, meaning that consumers who change plans may have to pay more for the same medicines.

Another problem for consumers is that if the price for a low-cost benchmark plan in the area has dropped, the amount of federal subsidies provided by the law could be less, meaning that consumers may have to pay more unless they switch.

The data, released by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, indicates that price increases will be modest for many people willing to change plans. In a typical county, the price will rise 5 percent for the cheapest silver plan and 4 percent for the second cheapest.

************************************

NEW YORK TIMES

Estimate of Healthcare Enrollment Leaves Room to Grow

10 November 2014

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Monday offered a surprisingly modest estimate of the number of people who would sign up for health insurance in the second round of open enrollment, which begins on Saturday.

Sylvia Mathews Burwell, the secretary of health and human services, said she was working on the assumption that a total of 9.1 million people would have such coverage at the end of next year.

By contrast, the Congressional Budget Office had estimated that 13 million people would be enrolled next year, with the total rising to 24 million in 2016. In the past, the White House has used the budget office numbers as a benchmark for success under the Affordable Care Act.

This estimate appeared to be part of an effort by federal officials to lower public expectations, so the goal would be easier to meet and to surpass. In addition, the new number could indicate that administration officials believe it will be difficult to find and enroll many of the uninsured while retaining those who signed up in the last year.

“The number we are going to aim for this year is 9.1 million,” Ms. Burwell said on Monday during remarks at the Center for American Progress, a liberal research and advocacy group.

Ms. Burwell’s estimate was at the lower end of the range suggested by health policy experts in her department. In a report issued earlier Monday, the experts estimated that, at the end of next year, 9 million to 9.9 million people would have coverage purchased through insurance exchanges, or marketplaces.

Representative Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, said the administration was “trying to manage expectations and rewrite its definition of success ahead of the second open-enrollment period.” Administration officials said they were just being realistic, in the light of experience with other health programs.

President Obama announced in April that eight million people had signed up for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Officials said Monday that enrollment had declined to 7.1 million after some people failed to pay their share of premiums and others were found to be ineligible because of unresolved questions about their citizenship or immigration status.

The Department of Health and Human Services estimated that enrollment, including renewals and new customers, would reach 10 million to 11 million by the end of the three-month sign-up period, which closes on Feb. 15.

However, if Ms. Burwell is right, the number would shrink to 9.1 million people at the end of next year. That would still be a 28 percent increase over the number believed to have marketplace coverage today.

Ms. Burwell’s estimate came as a surprise to insurance counselors, agents and brokers working with the Obama administration.

Anne Filipic, the president of Enroll America, a nonprofit group trying to expand coverage, said the goal of 9.1 million “seems reasonable.” She praised the administration for taking what she described as “a pragmatic, analytic approach” to setting a numeric goal.

Federal health officials said they had ended coverage for 112,000 people who could not demonstrate that they were United States citizens or legal immigrants entitled to insurance under the health care law.

In addition, they said, 120,000 households will lose some or all of the insurance subsidies they have been receiving because they could not adequately document their income. These households will face higher premiums.

In making their estimates, federal health officials said, they assumed that 83 percent of the people with marketplace coverage — 5.9 million of the 7.1 million people in “qualified health plans” — would renew their coverage.

The intense political debate swirling around the Affordable Care Act does not make the job of enrolling people any easier, officials said.

Republicans like Tom Cotton in Arkansas and Joni Ernst in Iowa won Senate races in which they emphasized opposition to the health care law, as did successful Republican House candidates like Mia Love in Utah and Ryan Zinke in Montana.

Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, the chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, said that people were skeptical of the law and “aren’t signing up because they realize it’s not a good deal for them.”

The Supreme Court said on Friday that it would consider a case challenging subsidies paid to more than four million people who obtained insurance through the federal marketplace.

Ms. Burwell said Monday that she did not see the legal challenge as a serious threat to the Affordable Care Act. “As we go into open enrollment,” she said, “nothing has changed.”

Federal health officials said they believed that marketplace enrollment would grow more slowly than projected by the Congressional Budget Office, which sees the total holding steady at 25 million from 2017 to 2024.

Administration officials noted that uninsured people could also get coverage by enrolling in Medicaid or by finding jobs with health benefits.

In a brief analysis of coverage trends, the Department of Health and Human Services said Monday that “most of the new marketplace enrollment for 2015 is likely to come from the ranks of the uninsured,” rather than from people who previously bought insurance on their own outside the exchanges.

Cost of Obamacare Borne On The Back Of Seniors

Posted on March 7, 2014 by thehealthinsuranceanswerman

To say that President Obama is not an enthusiastic backer of the two Medicare programs that offer seniors private insurance options would be something of an understatement.

Over the years, Obama has repeatedly derided Medicare Advantage — the program that lets seniors enroll in subsidized, private insurance. He once called it “wasteful,” and said it amounted to “giveaways that boost insurance company profits but don’t make (seniors) any healthier.”

Obama has been equally harsh when it comes to Medicare Part D — the prescription drug benefit President Bush signed into law that relies on privately run plans.

In his 2006 book, “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama blasted the program, saying it “somehow managed to combine the worst aspects of the public and private sectors.” As president, he said it gave overly generous “taxpayer subsidies to prescription drug companies.”

Both programs, it turns out, have been wildly popular with seniors and, by most measures, big successes. But Obama nevertheless appears determined to undermine them with sharp cuts in payments and sweeping new regulations.

Started back in 1997 — and initially called Medicare+Choice — the Medicare Advantage program pays private insurers a set amount per enrollee to provide comprehensive benefits and anything else they can afford to offer.

The idea was that private insurers could better co-ordinate care and manage health costs than the old fee-for-service Medicare, and so provide more comprehensive benefits.

While enrollment in these private plans was flat for the first several years, it has skyrocketed since 2005, to the point where almost one in three seniors are covered by a private health plan. As long as it is affordable, this editor considers Medicare Supplement the ideal way for a Medicare recipient to be covered for medical expenses. Not because selection of Supplement Plan F or G will cover all or virtually all of your expenses but because ALL Medicare Supplement options allow you to visit any doctor, hospital or medical provider that sees Medicare Patient. This as opposed to Medicare Advantage Plans most of which have evolved to significantly limiting your choice of providers. This being said, Medicare Advantage has been a savior to those who simply cannot afford Medicare Supplement. And contrary to Obama’s claim, seniors selecting Medicare Advantage tend to get better quality health care than those in traditional Medicare.

Critics, however, point to studies showing that the government pays Medicare Advantage more per enrollee than it would cost if these seniors had enrolled in the old Medicare program.

Obama tried to remedy this by cutting Medicare funding by $716 billion over the next ten years with payments to Medicare Advantage totaling $200 billion. The purpose of which is to help pay for ObamaCare (while providing “bonus” payments to plans that score high on a quality rating). An official analysis from Medicare’s actuary concluded, however, that such cuts would drive millions seniors out of their Advantage plans and back into the government-run program.

Recognizing political risks of these payment cuts, the administration put them off until AFTER the presidential elections, shoveling $8 billion into a bogus “demonstration project” that offset almost all the scheduled Medicare Advantage cuts implemented in 2012.

Question: What are your thoughts about President Obama’s cuts to the Medicare Advantage and Part D Prescription Drug Programs?

Admin. – Kenton Henry

http://TheWoodlandsTXHealthInsurance.com

*******************************************************************

FEATURE ARTICLE:

THE HILL

February 25, 2014, 10:58 am

GOP leaders to HHS: Call off Medicare changes

By Elise Viebeck

Republican Senate leaders criticized the Obama administration Tuesday for proposed changes to Medicare Advantage (MA) and Part D they say would weaken the two programs.

Led by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the lawmakers called on Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to suspend proposed cuts to Medicare Advantage and reforms in Part D that would allow regulators to participate in negotiations between insurance companies and pharmacies for the first time.

“Unlike ObamaCare, the Medicare prescription drug benefit is wildly popular and it has cost less than initial projections,” the letter stated.

“At a time when HHS is struggling on basic implementation tasks on many fronts, we cannot understand the logic behind the department’s interest in further undermining one of the few success stories under its purview.”

The administration argues that cuts in Medicare Advantage would reduce waste within the program and bring its per-patient funding in line with traditional Medicare, which currently receives less money on average.

In Part D, federal health officials say regulators need new authority to ensure the market for prescription drugs works well for seniors.

The proposed rules would also open drug plans’ preferred networks to a wider range of pharmacies, limit plan bids within a region and remove “protected class” designations for certain types of drugs.

But Republicans say the changes will harm Medicare Advantage beneficiaries and potentially raise premiums on Part D plans or force seniors out of their current coverage.

Both issues are rearing their heads in the midterm elections, as the GOP seeks to broaden its healthcare attacks to include more than ObamaCare.

Tuesday’s letter to Sebelius was signed by McConnell, GOP Whip John Cornyn (Texas), GOP Conference Chairman John Thune (S.D.), GOP Policy Committee Chairman John Barrasso (Wyo.), Conference Vice Chair Roy Blunt (Mo.) and National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Jerry Moran (Kan.).

http://TheWoodlandsTXHealthInsurance.com

http://allplanhealthinsurance.com

Facebook Posting Does Double Duty On This Healthcare Blog

Posted on February 21, 2014 by thehealthinsuranceanswerman

Healthandmedicareinsurance.com followers – I spent enough time responding to the left on my facebook posting – I thought the effort could serve double duty on this blog.
***************************************************************************************************
Before preparing for my trip, I would first like to respond to Kathy: No, I won’t be lobbying for an expansion of Medicaid in Indiana (or any other state for that matter) that has not already expanded it beyond 100% of the Federal Poverty Level. If Medicaid were expanded, it would be to include individuals up to and including those with an income of 133% of the FPL or a maximum income of $15,521 for 2014. Deserving or not aside – while these individuals currently do not qualify for Medicaid in Indiana or Texas – THEY DO qualify for a subsidy of approximately 88% of their health insurance premium. If they elect the plan recommended by the Department of Health and Human Services (“benchmark” plan) it will be the second lowest cost Silver Plan in their area. They are required to pay no more than $40.41 per month. No, I don’t feel sorry for them. They are certainly already receiving food stamps and government subsidized housing and Medicaid is already in financial trouble in most states without further expansion. (Of course I am aware financial feasibility and a balanced state or federal budget is not your concern.)

The person I feel sorry for is the poor working stiff who is making in the $50 – $60,000 dollar range and actually earning his or her income. They don’t qualify a health insurance premium subsidy. (Food stamps I’m not certain of because our government has made those available to virtually everyone including illegal aliens.) Because this responsible working person doesn’t qualify for a subsidy, they will be forced to pay 100% of the Silver plan premium–with an average annual cost of $4,113–entirely on their own. That amounts to 8% of their annual income (at $50k) before taxes which the entitlement person isn’t paying! That’s the person I feel sorry for! Then try providing them with a plan that has their doctor in the network and the benefits they would really like and their cost and that percentage soars! In summation – you keep lobbying for the entitlement class; I’ll keep lobbying for the working American.

Now to address Scott: Glad to see you are finally making a prediction which I feel is pretty much on target. As I’m the one on the front line signing people up for Obamacare, no one knows better the “adverse selection” (bad risk disproportionately selected for participation) than I. But I remember a few of my predictions you tried to dismiss. First – I said Barrack Obama would be elected in 2008. You said, “no”. In 2010 – I said the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA or ACA for short) would pass. You said, “no way!”. Then, in June of 2012 – I said the Supreme Court is going to find a way to uphold the ACA as “constitutional”. You said, “not to worry!” God! I hate being right. (Almost as much as you hate being wrong!)
Anyway, I’m glad you are finally smelling the coffee which probably got to a stench with your latest health insurance premium increase. And, as such, this begs many questions – two of which I will address at this point:

(1) If the federal government cannot build a functional website, to insure the estimated 30 million uninsured, with 3 years lead time – How long is it going to take them to transition us to a “Medicare like” social welfare health insurance program that insures all 300 million plus Americans. And . . .

(2) If Social Security is on track to insolvency and Medicare is predicted to be insolvent by 2023 (nine years from now, people) – how the hell are they going to finance and subsidize healthcare for everyone? Redistribution. Because it wasn’t fair you’ve been so successful, Scott.

In my next blog post, I will address what I see as the specifics of why these things regarding the ACA are destined to transpire. In the meantime, I’m still going to Washington because the one thing we do know is – the person that never gets in the ring has already lost. The real issues I would like to confront our elected officials with are my suggestions for workable healthcare reform which guarantees coverage for pre-existing conditions while being financially responsible and feasible; term limits (I know, I know – when hell freezes over); amnesty and targeting of conservative groups by the IRS. I know they’ll try to get me back on point (theirs) – but not until I’ve made them say, “next question!”

Who Needs the Healthcare.gov Website?

Posted on November 11, 2013 by thehealthinsuranceanswerman

Op-ed by Kenton Henry

If the administration and main stream media will not tell you–I will:

You can go through me–or any licensed health insurance agent or broker to acquire health insurance. NOW. And this is whether you qualify for a subsidy or not. And, importantly, there will be no, I repeat – $0 difference in your cost (premium) for doing so vs. the government website Healthcare.gov or a private insurance company’s. Period. Now where have you heard “Period” before and it turned out to be true? Well . . . in this case it is.

There is only ONE reason to go to the still basically inoperable, security in doubt, aforementioned federal government health insurance website known as The Marketplace:

1) You qualify for a subsidy of your 2014 health insurance premium and you would like to take advantage of that subsidy as you pay your premiums. I.e., you qualify and would like the premium you pay to your insurance company to be reduced by the amount of your subsidy as you pay the premium. (This as opposed to paying the gross premium (cost before your subsidy is applied) then declaring your subsidy on your 2014 tax return and having your tax liability reduced accordingly.)

If you this does not describe you – there is absolutely no reason to go to healthcare.gov!

Neither do you need to go through a state appointed, federally funded Navigator, hired by the State and required to complete only 20 hours of online education and be subjected to no background check. Why replicate and risk the possible insecurity of your personal information which includes your address; birth date; social security number and reported income by going through someone not even vetted by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or the Center for Medicare Services (CMS)? As the Secretary for HHS, Kathleen Sebelius, admitted under oath and questioning from Texas Senator John Cornyn during Congressional, hearings just last week – “It is possible (for a convicted felon to be hired as a Navigator and take your personal and vital information).”

This begs the question: Why is the administration and main stream media not advertising, and barely mentioning, that a health insurance shopper can go through a licensed and vetted insurance agent who has passed a background check with every company with whom they are appointed and do so at no additional cost? Or that the shopper can then have all the expertise that that agent’s time in the industry (27 years in my case) brings to bear on their needs and situation? Or how about a “go to” advocate in their behalf they can call whenever there is an issue relating to claims; rates or general service related issues such as changes in address or dependents. This as opposed to a different unknown service rep at the end of a toll free number each time they call an insurance company directly?

I will let you speculate on the answers to these questions but (while the purpose of this blog is to educate the follower on issues relating to health and Medicare insurance) indulge me while I for once engage in a little shameless self-promotion on behalf of myself and all licensed agents and brokers:

If you reside in Texas; Indiana; or Ohio – please visit my website at http://allplaninsurance.com and click on the bold red “Get A Quote!” button on the home page or–better yet–call me toll free @ 800.856.6556 and let’s have an intelligent dialogue about your true wants and needs relative to coverage and then get some meaningful quotes and information for you. All without submitting the equivalent of a home mortgage application!

If you reside in any other state – do yourself a favor and call a well recommended licensed health insurance agent or broker in your community.

Again, call me even if you do qualify for a subsidy. I can help you just the same and–as without a subsidy–your cost for insurance will be the same. If you do not want to take the subsidy now but would rather take it on your 2014 tax return (when you actually know what your income will have been) we can apply for you now and have your coverage issued immediately.

If you want the subsidy applied upfront, to reduce the premium you pay each month, we will still have to enter the healthcare.gov website. But we will do so only after we have obtained your gross quotes via my website. I know the formula and can do a pretty fair job of estimating your net premium (after your subsidy is applied). If this scenario describes you, as the federal website is still inoperable, we should wait and see if HHS and CMS have the site fixed and secure by November 30th as promised. Let’s keep our fingers crossed and–if so–we should sail (wink, wink) through the application and have your coverage issued by January 1. But remember, if all government deadlines remain as now, we will need to complete your application no later than December 15th!

Admin. – Kenton Henry

http://allplanhealthinsurance.com

That Giant “Sucking Sound” Is Your Providers Exiting Your Preferred Provider Network!

Posted on September 23, 2013 by thehealthinsuranceanswerman

Op-Ed by Kenton Henry, Administrator

I have just completed my Affordable Care Act (ACA) training and certification in order to offer ACA compliant plans to my clients, and the public in general, beginning October 1. However, even in this final hour with only eight days until the new plans are to be available – the insurance companies have still not released the premiums the insure will pay for these options. “Any day now” is what I am being told. However, I will share with you a thing or two I do know based on what I have studied.

Most of it came as no surprise to me. One major company (whose name I cannot divulge as the information they provided was yet to be approved by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) who will be in charge of the Federal-Run Exchange–Marketplace–in Texas, Indiana and Ohio–where I have clients) previewed plans. The lowest plan deductible available was $1,500. All plans will be limited to a maximum out-of-pocket of $6,350 per individual and $12,700 per family. While older people will probably find a $1,500 deductible acceptable in terms of affordability, I am not certain how twenty year olds are going to feel about that. I certainly don’t think that and higher deductible options will be an incentive for them to enroll even with the convenience of doctor’s office co-pays and prescription drug cards. I can almost guarantee you that unless they receive a subsidy – they won’t be signing up.

Beyond that, the benefits sounded perfectly acceptable until I came to the part about “special care centers”. It turns out, at least with this company (which happens to be a very large, conspicuous player in the Texas health insurance market we’ll just refer to as company XYZ)when you are in need of a special surgical procedure such as a hip or knee replacement: “You may only receive one by going to an ‘XYZ Approved Hip and Knee Replacement Center'”. I have had a hip replacement and had it at the relatively young age of 49 and I don’t know about you but I didn’t want just anyone performing mine. I still had dreams of remaining very active and athletic to the point of partaking in very aggressive martial arts training among other activities such as mountain biking. Fortunately, I have been able to do so but would I had I gone to some “Preferred” (discount) provider who agreed to accept lesser fees for greater patient volume?

To underscore my concern relative to an obvious attempt to ration our selection of providers, if not the procedures themselves, I received an email today informing me the primary Medicare Advantage Plan I enrolled my clients in last year is having an inordinate number of Primary Care Physicians drop out of its network and that I should be prepared to re-shop their Advantage Plan. The problem is, if this very large nationally recognized plan is experiencing this kind of “provider drop-out” – what can I expect from smaller companies with less capital? Again, I have had to delete their name as the information was proprietary and for “agent use only” but the letter they sent their clients is attached below. If you are one of my current Medicare clients I placed with this plan – you may have already read this. Otherwise, I apologize for breaking the news to you like this.

Our feature article appeared in today’s New York Times (September 23rd) and describes how patient options will be restricted as a result of the ACA. Think about it. If the insurance companies have no choice in who they insure and must cover any and all pre-existing conditions . . . and if they are informed by the Department of Health and Human Services their profit and, more specifically, the ratio of claims they must pay relative to the premium they take in, i.e., 80% to 20% – how else can they manage losses except to restrict access to procedures, providers and what your providers are paid? Something had to give.

****************************************************************

Letter to Medicare Advantage Clients

Update to Physician Network Changes

At ————- , we manage the physician networks for our plans to help meet the evolving needs of health care consumers. This includes adjusting the size and composition of our physician network as we strive to meet the specific needs of Medicare Advantage and/or Medicaid plan members.

As a result, in the coming months, select physicians for one or more of your Medicare Advantage and/or Medicaid members will no longer participate in our Medicare and Medicaid plan networks. Please note: these changes do not affect members enrolled in Medicare Supplement or commercial plans.

Member transitions
We know that members are impacted when we make changes to our network, and are taking steps to support members with smooth transitions to new care providers as appropriate to help ensure continuity of care.

We will be sending letters to affected members to notify them of care providers that will no longer participate in the —————– Medicare and Medicaid plan network as early as January 1, 2014 (network changes for New Jersey Medicaid plans have an October, 2013 effective date.) When appropriate, letters will suggest new care providers for members to consider for their ongoing care. Members are encouraged to call the number on their member ID card if they need help with identifying a new care provider.

In some plans, members may choose to continue seeing their current care providers on an out-of-network basis, in accordance with their out-of-network benefits. These changes have no impact on plan benefits, and members undergoing a treatment plan will be able to continue seeing out-of-network care providers consistent with federal requirements.

Provider directories
These network changes will be reflected in our online provider directory as of October 1, 2013. It is highly encouraged to refer to the online provider directory in all cases to confirm care provider network and panel status for all potential enrollees, as changes may not be reflected in previously printed and/or downloaded directories.

It is important to note that when searching for an in-network provider on the online directory, a provider’s “Accepting New Patients” status must indicate “OPEN“, even if the potential enrollee is an existing patient.

Talking points for member inquiries
Please refer to the Physician Network Changes – Frequently Asked Questions for Member Discussions that provide additional information and may be used in the event you receive any member inquiries.

****************************************************************

Lower Health Insurance Premiums to Come at Cost of Fewer Choices

By ROBERT PEAR

Published: September 22, 2013

WASHINGTON — Federal officials often say that health insurance will cost consumers less than expected under President Obama’s health care law. But they rarely mention one big reason: many insurers are significantly limiting the choices of doctors and hospitals available to consumers.

From California to Illinois to New Hampshire, and in many states in between, insurers are driving down premiums by restricting the number of providers who will treat patients in their new health plans.

When insurance marketplaces open on Oct. 1, most of those shopping for coverage will be low- and moderate-income people for whom price is paramount. To hold down costs, insurers say, they have created smaller networks of doctors and hospitals than are typically found in commercial insurance. And those health care providers will, in many cases, be paid less than what they have been receiving from commercial insurers.

Some consumer advocates and health care providers are increasingly concerned. Decades of experience with Medicaid, the program for low-income people, show that having an insurance card does not guarantee access to specialists or other providers.

Consumers should be prepared for “much tighter, narrower networks” of doctors and hospitals, said Adam M. Linker, a health policy analyst at the North Carolina Justice Center, a statewide advocacy group.

“That can be positive for consumers if it holds down premiums and drives people to higher-quality providers,” Mr. Linker said. “But there is also a risk because, under some health plans, consumers can end up with astronomical costs if they go to providers outside the network.”

Insurers say that with a smaller array of doctors and hospitals, they can offer lower-cost policies and have more control over the quality of health care providers. They also say that having insurance with a limited network of providers is better than having no coverage at all.

Cigna illustrates the strategy of many insurers. It intends to participate next year in the insurance marketplaces, or exchanges, in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Tennessee and Texas.

“The networks will be narrower than the networks typically offered to large groups of employees in the commercial market,” said Joseph Mondy, a spokesman for Cigna.

The current concerns echo some of the criticism that sank the Clinton administration’s plan for universal coverage in 1993-94. Republicans said the Clinton proposals threatened to limit patients’ options, their access to care and their choice of doctors.

At the same time, House
Republicans are continuing to attack the new health law and are threatening to hold up a spending bill unless money is taken away from the health care program.

Dr. Bruce Siegel, the president of America’s Essential Hospitals, formerly known as the National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems, said insurers were telling his members: “We don’t want you in our network. We are worried about having your patients, who are sick and have complicated conditions.”

In some cases, Dr. Siegel said, “health plans will cover only selected services at our hospitals, like trauma care, or they offer rock-bottom payment rates.”

In New Hampshire, Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, a unit of WellPoint, one of the nation’s largest insurers, has touched off a furor by excluding 10 of the state’s 26 hospitals from the health plans that it will sell through the insurance exchange.

Christopher R. Dugan, a spokesman for Anthem, said that premiums for this “select provider network” were about 25 percent lower than they would have been for a product using a broad network of doctors and hospitals.

Anthem is the only commercial carrier offering health plans in the New Hampshire exchange.

Peter L. Gosline, the chief executive of Monadnock Community Hospital in Peterborough, N.H., said his hospital had been excluded from the network without any discussions or negotiations.

“Many consumers will have to drive 30 minutes to an hour to reach other doctors and hospitals,” Mr. Gosline said. “It’s very inconvenient for patients, and at times it’s a hardship.”

State Senator Andy Sanborn, a Republican who is chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, said, “The people of New Hampshire are really upset about this.”

Many physician groups in New Hampshire are owned by hospitals, so when an insurer excludes a hospital from its network, it often excludes the doctors as well.

David Sandor, a vice president of the Health Care Service Corporation, which offers Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in Illinois, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas, said: “In the health insurance exchange, most individuals will be making choices based on costs. Our exchange products will have smaller provider networks that cost less than bigger plans with a larger selection of doctors and hospitals.”

Premiums will vary across the country, but federal officials said that consumers in many states would be able to buy insurance on the exchange for less than $300 a month — and less than $100 a month per person after taking account of federal subsidies.

“Competition and consumer choice are actually making insurance affordable,” Mr. Obama said recently.

Many insurers are cutting costs by slicing doctors’ fees.

Dr. Barbara L. McAneny, a cancer specialist in Albuquerque, said that insurers in the New Mexico exchange were generally paying doctors at Medicare levels, which she said were “often below our cost of doing business, and definitely below commercial rates.”

Outsiders might expect insurance companies to expand their networks to treat additional patients next year. But many insurers see advantages in narrow networks, saying they can steer patients to less expensive doctors and hospitals that provide high-quality care.

Even though insurers will be forbidden to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions, they could subtly discourage the enrollment of sicker patients by limiting the size of their provider networks.

“If a health plan has a narrow network that excludes many doctors, that may shoo away patients with expensive pre-existing conditions who have established relationships with doctors,” said Mark E. Rust, the chairman of the national health care practice at Barnes & Thornburg, a law firm. “Some insurers do not want those patients who, for medical reasons, require a broad network of providers.”

In a new study, the Health Research Institute of PricewaterhouseCoopers, the consulting company, says that “insurers passed over major medical centers” when selecting providers in California, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky and Tennessee, among other states.

“Doing so enables health plans to offer lower premiums,” the study said. “But the use of narrow networks may also lead to higher out-of-pocket expenses, especially if a patient has a complex medical problem that’s being treated at a hospital that has been excluded from their health plan.”

In California, the statewide Blue Shield plan has developed a network specifically for consumers shopping in the insurance exchange.

Juan Carlos Davila, an executive vice president of Blue Shield of California, said the network for its exchange plans had 30,000 doctors, or 53 percent of the 57,000 doctors in its broadest commercial network, and 235 hospitals, or 78 percent of the 302 hospitals in its broadest network.

Mr. Davila said the new network did not include the five medical centers of the University of California or the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center near Beverly Hills.

“We expect to have the broadest and deepest network of any plan in California,” Mr. Davila said. “But not many folks who are uninsured or near the poverty line live in wealthy communities like Beverly Hills.”

Daniel R. Hawkins Jr., a senior vice president of the National Association of Community Health Centers, which represents 9,000 clinics around the country, said: “We serve the very population that will gain coverage — low-income, working class uninsured people. But insurers have shown little interest in including us in their provider networks.”

***************************************************************************************************

http://allplanhealthinsurance.com

It Was My Impression The Current Administration Has Always Supported Greater Regulation!

Posted on September 18, 2013 by thehealthinsuranceanswerman

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I recall that ever since President Obama took office in 2009–in the midst of the housing crisis; failed savings and loans and with the legacy of Enron still looming fresh in the memories of stockholders everywhere– he has said more government regulation through stricter laws and scrutiny (among a host of other burdensome and expensive supposed remedies) was necessary to protect the consumer and public in general. Now–in a narrative of unabashed hypocrisy his administration speaks out and intervenes to prevent Texas’s Governor Rick Perry from doing that very thing.

Perry directed the Texas Department of Insurance to establish strict rules to regulate Navigators trained to help Texans purchase health insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). (These rules are outlined in our feature article below.) Remember – when you go through one these Navigators to enroll in an ACA compliant health plan for an effect date of January 1 – you will be required to divulge your income; your birth date; social security number; address; credit card and checking account information. Do you really want just anyone taking this information? Do you really want the person taking it to not be subject to criminal and financial background checks? Insurance agents licensed in the State of Texas are subject to all these requirements. Why would the administration which always argues for more protection of the individual from the misfeasance, malfeasance and just plain greed of the big corporations, e.g., health insurance companies – now be opposed to such? Why is this regulation so suddenly a liability? Please weigh in and help me understand this. The arguments presented by the fed below do not.

Admin. – Kenton Henry
****************************************************
Feature Article
The Texas Tribune
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Perry Directs TDI to Regulate Federal Navigator Program
Gov. Rick Perry has directed the Texas Department of Insurance to establish strict rules to regulate so-called navigators trained to help Texans purchase health coverage under Obamacare.
While the governor says the extra regulations will ensure that people handling Texans’ private financial and health information are properly trained and qualified, the rules could present a significant roadblock to organizations helping to implement the federal Affordable Care Act.
“This is blatant attempt to add cumbersome requirements to the navigator program and deter groups from working to inform Americans about their new health insurance options and help them enroll in coverage,” Fabien Levy, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said in an email.
Along with many other provisions in President Obama’s signature health reform law, the individual mandate to purchase health insurance is set to take effect on Jan. 1. Texas’ Republican majority, which vehemently opposes the federal health law, declined to establish a state-based insurance marketplace. The federal government is doing it instead, launching an Orbitz-like online insurance exchange starting Oct. 1. That exchange will require individuals to input sensitive tax information, including their Social Security numbers and estimated annual income, to determine whether they qualify for tax credits to purchase coverage.
To help uninsured Texans use the complicated new system, the federal government awarded nearly $11 million in August to local organizations charged with hiring and training navigators, who will help consumers input their financial information and pick a health plan through in the exchange, must undergo 20 to 30 hours of training, pass a certification test and renew their certification annually, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
For Perry, those ground rules are not enough.
“The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has repeatedly delayed explaining how its navigators were going to be created, how they were going to operate and how they were going to be regulated,” Perry wrote in a letter to Insurance Commissioner Julia Rathgeber. “Because of the nature of navigators’ work and because they will be collecting confidential information, including birth dates, social security numbers and financial information, it is imperative that Texas train navigators on the collection and security of such data.”
In the letter, Perry specifically directed TDI to establish rules that require navigators to complete at minimum of 40 hours of state training in addition to the federal training requirements. He also demanded that navigators pass a rigorous exam based on that training, refrain from influencing a consumer’s insurance choice by recommending a specific plan or comparing benefits offered by different plans, and submit to periodic background and regulatory checks and show state identification while on the job.
He also directed TDI to maintain a database of registered navigators, including background checks and fingerprints; set limits on when and where navigators can enroll people in the exchange; charge fees to provide navigator training and registration; and establish the department’s authority to suspend or revoke navigators’ registration for failing to comply with state requirements.
“TDI agrees that the navigators in Texas have to be well trained and competent in what they’re doing,” said Ben Gonzalez, an agency spokesman. “Our goal is for them to be accountable and be conscientious about the confidential information that they’re going to be collecting.”
Federal officials said some of the rules Perry ordered the state insurance department to implement are forbidden under U.S. law. For example, navigators are not allowed to retain or report information on consumers who sign up for coverage through the exchange; therefore, they could not submit that information to TDI, as Perry has requested. The federal agency also emphasized that navigators are not allowed to access consumers’ information after it has been submitted to the exchange.
Levy said the U.S. government has similar programs already set up to help counsel people applying for Medicare, and that those have “never faced this kind of bullying from Texas.”
“This is clearly an ideologically-driven attempt to prevent the uninsured from gaining health coverage,” Levy said. “But despite the state’s attempts, we are confident that navigators will still be able to help Texans enroll in quality, affordable health coverage when open enrollment begins on Oct. 1.”
Given the governor’s directive, the department will begin putting together the rules with some urgency, Gonzalez added. The rule-making process can take several weeks, as the state is required to hold public meetings and solicit stakeholder input before the rules are drafted. After a draft is approved, the rules must be posted on the Texas Register to receive official comment before they can be codified.
“It’s our expectation the rules and training be in place by Jan. 1, when insurance can be purchased through the exchange,” Rich Parsons, a spokesman for the governor’s office, said via email.
The federal health exchange has a six-month open enrollment period — from Oct. 1 to March 31 — in which navigators can help the uninsured find health coverage to comply with the insurance mandate. Individuals who do not purchase insurance during the open enrollment period could be subject to federal tax penalties. If the state’s regulations take effect on Jan. 1, the navigators will be required to undergo additional training during the open enrollment period, which could present significant challenges.
To address the privacy concerns raised about the navigator program, some grant recipients are already requiring navigators to undergo additional training on privacy protection. United Way of Tarrant County, in collaboration with 17 other organizations, received $5.8 million, the largest federal navigator grant in Texas. Tim McKinney, the organization’s chief executive officer, said the organization is requiring navigators to undergo an additional hour-and-a-half of training on how to comply with the federal privacy law HIPAA.
Lawmakers signed off on Perry’s call for greater regulation of the navigator program in the last legislative session when they passed Senate Bill 1795, which authorizes TDI “to regulate navigators if it determined that federal standards did not ensure they were qualified to perform their duties or avoid conflicts of interest,” according to a legislative report. The new state law allows the department to enact rules that protect patient privacy and prohibit navigators from accepting payments from health insurance companies or posing as an insurance agent. At least 16 other states have also enacted or are considering laws to regulate navigators, according to a USA Today report.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and 12 other state attorneys general have also raised concerns that the federal navigator program could pose risks to patients’ privacy. In a letter sent to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in August, the attorneys general asserted that the federal government’s screening process does not require uniform background or fingerprint checks, meaning convicted criminals or identity thieves could become navigators. They also expressed concerns that navigators would not undergo sufficient training.
Some medical professionals and advocates have objected to the privacy concerns raised by conservatives, suggesting they are politically motivated. For example, navigators must already comply with state and federal laws governing the privacy of sensitive medical information. If they do not adhere to strict security and privacy standards, including how to handle and safeguard consumers’ Social Security numbers and identifiable information, they are subject to criminal and civil penalties at both the federal and state level. The federal government imposes up to a $25,000 civil penalty for violating its privacy and security standards.
This story was produced in partnership with Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit, nonpartisan health policy research and communication organization not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

http://allplaninsurance.com

healthandmedicareinsurance.com

Up to the Minute Health and Medicare Related Insurance News and Discussion

Tag Archives: department of health and human services

BITTER CHILL IN THE FALL AIR FOR OBAMACARE

MEDICARE RECIPIENTS DODGE A BULLET WHILE OBAMACARE INSUREDS PREPARE TO TAKE ONE!

2016 Affordable Care Act insurance rates are climbing

BULLETIN: Second Round of Obamacare Breaks From The Gate Starting Now!

Cost of Coverage Under Affordable Care Act to Increase in 2015

In addition, different health plans often have different networks of doctors and hospitals and cover different drugs, meaning that consumers who change plans may have to pay more for the same medicines.

Cost of Obamacare Borne On The Back Of Seniors

Facebook Posting Does Double Duty On This Healthcare Blog

Who Needs the Healthcare.gov Website?

That Giant “Sucking Sound” Is Your Providers Exiting Your Preferred Provider Network!