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.


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




Health & Science


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, 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 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.

Related: Millions Facing a Hefty Increase in Medicare Premiums in 2016

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.

Related: Social Security Ruling Drives Up Medicare Costs for Millions

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.

BlueCross BlueShield of Texas Tells Clients “Say Good-Bye To Your PPO Plan”

By D. Kenton Henry

Don’t worry. This doesn’t apply to you if you have coverage through an employer’s group plan. But if you (like myself) are one of 370,000 insured members with an individual or family health insurance plan―be prepared to choose your provider from a different menu. And rest assured it will be portion controlled.

BlueCross will continue to offer Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) Plans where you must elect and utilize a provider within their HMO network or you will have no coverage whatsoever. This is where rationing begins. With your provider. You can expect the number of doctors and hospitals to be significantly limited relative to the selection currently available to you in the Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) network where you may go in or out of the network at your discretion and still be covered. Although details are yet to be unveiled, these HMO plans will most likely require you to select a “Primary Care Physician” with whom all medical care must be initiated. If so, you will have to obtain a referral from that primary care provider in order to see a specialist. And that is where rationing of care continues. With your treatment. HMO providers have contractually agreed to accept a lower payment in return for providing you treatment in the first place. Referring you (away) to a specialist results in a total loss of payment.

BlueCross explains they paid $400,000,000 more in claims then they collected in premium from their PPO members in 2014. And they add (exclamation point mine) “that is unsustainable!” Their rationale is―the insurance company will be better able to “manage” the care we members receive and what we are charged for care, helping to reduce health insurance premiums. Those currently enrolled in a “grandfathered” (written prior to the March 2010 passage of the Affordable Care Act) plan or HMO network policy will be happy to know you will probably be able to maintain your coverage option (deductible, co-pays) into 2016, assuming the premium remains affordable. Those, like myself, who want total discretion as to our providers are certain to be disappointed.

This begs the question: What will our options be with other insurance companies? Unfortunately, like BlueCross, most companies are yet to reveal the details of their policies. I will be introduced to these changes over the remainder of October and―rest assuredwhatever your best options are for 2016―I will have them. And you will be able to elect them with the beginning of OPEN ENROLLMENT (OE) November 1st―through the end January 31st. If you involve me, I will take into consideration your providers and do my best to find an affordable plan which allows you to continue to utilize them. If this entails you qualifying for and needing a premium subsidy from Healthcare.govI will assist you in navigating that process and serve as an advocate in your behalf. As I have done for 29 years this month, my objective is to ensure you obtain and maintain your best possible health care coverage at the lowest cost. Even in this age of increasing insurance premiums and less provider options.

Please refer to the featured article below and, lastly, to the Questions And Answers at the end of today’s post. Additionally, do not hesitate to call me or email me in order to prepare for these coming changes.

D. Kenton Henry (Editor, Agent, Broker)

Office: 281.367.6565 or Toll Free: 800.856.6556

Cell: 713.907.7984


*******************************************************************FEATURED ARTICLE:

Blue Cross to drop PPO plan covering 367,000 Texans


By Peggy O’Hare

July 27, 2015 Updated: July 27, 2015 8:34pm

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas is eliminating in 2016 its…

Health insurance carrier Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas next year will eliminate a PPO health plan that 367,000 consumers statewide now depend on for health benefits.

The company’s decision to drop its Blue Choice PPO plan will affect only customers in the individual market — not those covered by Blue Cross PPO group plans through their employers. About 148,000 consumers whose PPO plans were grandfathered in 2010 also won’t be affected.

The change is being made because the insurance company paid out $400 million more in claims than it collected in premiums for its Blue Choice PPO product in 2014.

“We felt like the PPO was not going to be a sustainable option,” said Dr. Dan McCoy, chief medical officer and divisional senior vice president for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas.

The move will not interrupt customers’ coverage before the end of the year.

The insurance carrier expects to offer another product when open enrollment for 2016 begins Nov. 1 in the individual market. No details on that new product were available Monday since it still is awaiting federal approval. Consumers won’t be able to view and compare their options on the federal exchange until Oct. 10, the company said.

“A new product has been filed that we believe will give you a flexible choice for your clients,” Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas said in a communication to insurance brokers last week. “We will be able to share information about that product if and when it is approved by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services closer to open enrollment.”

The carrier has not yet started sending notices to customers affected by the change, aside from posting a general notice on its website, a spokeswoman said. However, they should receive notices by early October.

Only a small fraction of the carrier’s total 5.5 million customers in Texas are covered by individual Blue Choice PPO plans, but the product has proven popular with consumers who want flexibility on which doctors they can visit.

Loretta Camp, an independent health insurance agent at Davidson Camp Insurance Services and a member of the San Antonio Association of Health Underwriters, said she is bracing for a flood of questions from consumers.

“We pretty much expected there to be just a huge amount of feedback,” Camp said of Blue Cross’ announcement, “and we’ve gotten hardly any. I don’t think people have really grasped what that means.

“It‘s a huge impact to my client base,” Camp said, noting that 88 percent of her customers buying health plans for themselves or their families inside or outside the federal exchange selected PPOs — preferred provider organization plans that allow consumers greater freedom on which doctors to visit.

Customers with PPOs pay lower rates if they use doctors or hospitals considered to be “in network” and incur additional costs if they see providers “out of network.”

Such plans are generally pricier than the more restrictive HMOs — health maintenance organization plans that only cover care from doctors and hospitals “in network” and won’t cover services outside the network at all unless it’s an emergency.

“We have a number of clients that moved … to a PPO plan because they were having difficulty finding providers that would take the HMO plans,” Camp said.

In its communication to brokers last week, Blue Cross acknowledged there will be some physicians and providers no longer considered “in network” as a result of individual Blue Choice PPO plans being discontinued.

“The number of providers not in network due to the discontinuance may be greater in 2016,” said the notice to brokers. “We have ensured that we have an adequate network to provide the physicians and hospitals needed to serve our retail members in each market, and we continue to have discussions with additional providers.”

Keeping the individual PPO plans intact and raising the price would have forced the insurance company to raise everyone’s rates in the individual market.

Under the Affordable Care Act, “individual business is rated using a single risk pool, meaning all individual plans had to be looked at together,” the carrier said in its notice to brokers last week.

Like most carriers, Blue Cross was venturing into uncertain territory when the Affordable Care Act made health insurance available to everyone beginning in 2014, McCoy said.

“This is really a new era in American insurance,” McCoy said Monday. “And clearly we entered this marketplace with not a lot of information.”

That meant serving a large number of new customers and complying with the new federal law. “This was a group of people, many of which had never had health insurance before,” McCoy said of the new beneficiaries, “coupled with the Affordable Care Act that contained a lot of new provisions and additions to care.”

“You combine that with the fact that health care costs in the United States have continued to grow. So clearly the premiums were not enough to make up for the health care expenditures that occurred.”

Blue Cross officials sidestepped questions Monday about whether it will continue selling its Blue Advantage HMO plans in the individual market in Texas next year. The company also declined to say how many consumers now now covered by Blue Advantage HMO plans, calling that proprietary information.

However, the federal website shows the carrier requested a rate increase of almost 20 percent for its Blue Advantage HMO plans in 2016. That proposal is still under review by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Blue Cross officials wouldn’t comment.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas noted it was the only insurance carrier to offer a PPO product in all 254 counties in Texas during the first two years of open enrollment in 2014 and 2015. Company officials said they will continue to offer other options in all 254 counties both inside and outside of the marketplace.



What to Expect for Open Enrollment for 2016 Plans

Jul. 23, 2015

We’re getting ready for Open Enrollment for 2016. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas (BCBSTX) will offer individual coverage options in every market in the state, both on and off the exchange. If you have an individual health plan or are looking to buy one in 2016, here are some of the changes you need to know.

When is Open Enrollment?

Open Enrollment for individuals runs from November 1, 2015 through January 31, 2016. If you are looking to buy your own health insurance plan for 2016, you can do so during this time.

If you already have health insurance, this is also the time you can:

  • Look at other plan choices
  • Compare plans and prices
  • See if you can get financial help

You’ll be able to see what plans will be available starting in October, when the “window shopping” period begins. This will give you time to weigh your options, ask questions and decide what will work best for you – before it’s time to sign up.

What will be different for individual plans in 2016?

There are some changes in the plans we intend to offer in the individual market in 2016. We won’t be offering PPO insurance plans in the individual, retail market. However, we intend to continue to offer HMO plans. This change does not affect our employer group customers or the grandfathered PPO individual plan members.

Why is Blue Choice PPO going away?

BCBSTX was the only insurer to offer an individual PPO insurance plan across the state to individuals in 2014 and 2015. Since the Affordable Care Act began, the market has changed. We found that the individual PPO plan was no longer sustainable at the cost it was being offered. Because we want to make sure that our plans are affordable, we decided to not offer individual PPO plans in 2016.

Why couldn’t you just keep offering the individual PPO plans and raise the rate for them?

The law requires that we set our individual plan rates based on all of our individual members’ claims history. This means that if the costs of one plan are high, it will raise the rates of all other plans, not just the high-cost plan. If we kept the Blue Choice PPO, this would have raised the rates so much for all our other plans that most people wouldn’t be able to afford them. By dropping the PPO, we can still offer our other plans at reasonable rates.

I have a PPO plan. What will this mean for me?

If you have an employer group PPO plan, this will not affect you. If you enrolled in the individual Blue Choice PPO plan last year, you won’t be able to keep your PPO plan in 2016. We’re sharing this information well in advance of the required notification date so that you have plenty of time to research the plan options that best suit your needs. We will work with you and your doctors to lessen the impact of this change to your ongoing care.

My Blue Choice PPO plan is “grandfathered.” Is it being discontinued too?

No. If you have a grandfathered individual PPO plan, it will still be available in 2016. Grandfathered individual plans are plans that existed on March 23, 2010, when the Affordable Care Act became law. If you don’t know if your plan is grandfathered, check your plan details or call the customer service number on the back of your BCBSTX member ID card.

Will I be able to keep my doctor and/or hospital if I switch plans?

Currently, we have two provider networks for our individual plans: Blue Choice PPO and Blue Advantage HMO. Some providers are only in the Blue Choice network, and some of them have decided not to join the Blue Advantage HMO network in 2016. So, with the Blue Choice PPO individual plans going away, these providers will no longer be an in-network option for most of our individual members. If you have a grandfathered plan, you will still have access to the Blue Choice network.

If your doctor is not in the Blue Advantage network, we will work with you and your doctor to lessen the impact of this change to your ongoing care.

When can I see 2016 plan details and rates?

Individual plan details and rates will be available in October 2015. Open Enrollment begins November 1, 2015



Op-Ed by D. Kenton Henry

While most Americans who receive a health insurance subsidy to offset the cost of the coverage they obtained from the federal website,, go quietly about their personal business―the future of that subsidy―and the very future of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) or Affordable Care Act (ACA) for short―which gave birth to said subsidies―hangs in the balance. And, for the most part, these same Americans remain blissfully ignorant that the future of their health insurance protection hangs with it also. Apparently sleeping as its fate is to be decided by the 30th of this very month when the Supreme Court releases its decision on King vs. Burwell.

King vs. Burwell contests the financial help available to some enrollees on  the federal insurance exchange in 34 states on the basis that the PPACA was not written to allow for the existence of subsidies provided by the federal exchange. In fact, the plaintiffs argue just the opposite―that only those exchanges established by the states could provide such. Should the court rule in favor of the administration, it will mean the law has survived one more effort to derail it and its future may well be assured. However, If the plaintiffs prevail, that leaves the estimated 6.4 million recipients of the subsidies in the thirty four states which did not with illegally subsidized health insurance. And, without subsidies . . . health insurance reform starts to fall apart. The majority of the recipients will drop their coverage and only the sickest―who bring the most expensive claims to the insurance companies―will remain on their plans. This phenomena is know within the industry as “adverse selection”. In reality, it means that the youngest and the healthiest, regardless of age, will flee their plans like rats off a sinking ship. And the sinking ship will be Obamacare. The law itself. This is because it is estimated that insurance premiums for these 6.4 million will increase an average 256%. A result which will single-handedly insert the substitution “Unaffordable” into the Affordable Care Act―Obama’s signature landmark legislation― sending it into a classic death spiral.

And what does the Supreme Court’s decision hinge on? Four key words: “established by the state”. As in the subsidies are to be available only to income qualified recipients in those exchanges established by the state. The four words are contained in that portion of the law which details how premium subsidies are calculated for health insurance policies. Plaintiffs argue thirty four states never established an exchange. Ergo, how can subsidies be provided for their residents? They argue the wording was constructed to serve as an incentive for the states to create own exchange; the states called the federal government’s bluff and the feds willy-nilly pulled a rabbit out of their head and provided federal exchange subsidies for which no provision within the law was made. To follow their argument to its logical conclusion, the Internal Revenue Service has violated the law by providing tax credits to individuals in these states.

The administration argues that exchanges were created by the states when they effectively opted to let the federal government do it for them. Therefore, their inaction became their action. This allows subsidies to be provided their residents.

As a health insurance broker with twenty-nine years in the industry, I have survived the inevitable ups and downs of the small business owner. I, and my practice, have survived Hillary’s attempt in the early nineties at health care reform and the deterring effect of ever increasing health care costs; the resulting sky-rocketing insurance premiums and the general turbulence of an industry which attempts to manage the costs of a sector which comprises an estimated twenty percent of our nation’s economy. I have survived the Affordable Care Act’s resulting cut in my compensation and the loss of hundreds of clients who were forced off their policies because they did not comply with the law’s mandates. Policies with which, for the most part, my clients were happy. Had they not been, they would have dropped them on their own. I now survive the effect of premiums which have risen on average fifteen percent each of the last two years and, in many cases, much, much more for those clients who do not qualify for the subsidy. The bottom line is, “if you qualify for a significant subsidy, you are probably happy with this law. If you qualify for a relatively small subsidy―or none at all―you are most likely very unhappy with it.” It seems everyone is judging it from the perspective of their own personal welfare. And that is human nature, is it not? And I reluctantly admit, I am no exception. And it is not without guilt I do so.

Because, if the subsidies are revoked, by my estimates, I stand to lose approximately two thirds of the new business I have written in the last two years since ACA plans were forced on the public under threat of penalty. Just last month I experienced the first and slightest increase in income since the act’s passage in March of 2010. My income had been decreasing precipitously since then, mostly due to the “minimum loss ratios” imposed on insurance companies resulting in maximum losses to the agent and broker. But I accepted these; remained committed to my industry and business and have survived. If King v. Burwell is decided in favor of the administration’s adversaries, my clients will let their coverage lapse and the resulting personal effect will be “two steps forward and three steps back”. Hence, the guilt. The guilt born of knowing the worst aspects of this law (unknown to average person) are yet to be implemented and only a minute portion of the resulting costs are currently apparent. Those forthcoming will have a devastating effect on our nation’s treasury which is already eighteen trillion in debt and rising “with a bullet”. I know that progression of this law and its mandates is already forcing rationing of our health care providers and further progression is going to result in ever increasing rationing of health care treatment available to each of us. And yet, for my own sake, I don’t want to experience more losses.

Please do not think I do believe there was no need for health care reform. When two of every five health insurance applications I submitted on behalf of clients was declined due to pre-existing conditions and another not taken due to “waivers” of such (prior to the law’s enforcement) I experienced the angst of my clients and my own.

And so I sit, in front of my computer desktop, on the edge of my seat monitoring each post from SCOTUSBLOG.COM and each editorial from the most liberal to conservative journalist (who knows much less about this law than I) attempting to predict as to which way this imminently pending decision will go. The patriotic conservative within me says, “for the welfare of my nation’s economy, this law should fail.” While the agent, broker, small business man within me who likes to eat, pay his bills, maybe put something away for retirement and doesn’t want to see any more of his clients lose their very necessary and greatly appreciated health insurance coverage says―”Please, oh, please. Let the Supreme Court of this United States of America, in all their supremacy, rule that the authors of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act didn’t really mean what they wrote. Let the subsidies stand.”


Related stories:



Four Words That Imperil Health Care Law Were All a Mistake, Writers Now Say



MORNING CONSULT Burwell Draws Line On Health Subsidy Fix Jon Reid   |   June 10, 2015

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


(Announcement by D. Kenton Henry and

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 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 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.


Kenton Henry

Broker, Agent, Editor


Phone: 281.367.6565

Toll Free: 800.856.6556


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




14 November 2014

Cost of Coverage Under Affordable Care Act to Increase in 2015


“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.



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.

The Chameleon Which Is The Affordable Care Act


The Affordable Care Act, like a chameleon, is capable of changing its color or otherwise morphing to fit the pragmatic motives of its creator.

As I have said before, the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA) (or ACA for short) is law. Therefore, of late, I have attempted to focus on the reality of it and its ramifications for all of us whether we are currently uninsured, covered by our employer’s plan or have our own individual or family health insurance plan. The primary purpose of this blog is to educate and inform– not to editorialize. If the latter were my objective, I would establish a separate blog where I would rant and rave ad infinitum about all I see wrong with the Act and big government in general. But it is not, so writing for The MedPlus Messenger, I try to remain objective and minimize expression of my feelings. But it is difficult. Increasingly so. Each day I try to put more lipstick on this pig but each day I awaken to more news the White House has selectively chosen another segment of the ACA not to implement in 2014 pursuant to the law.
Yesterday’s headlines broke news that the caps on insured’s out-of-pocket (OOP) maximums–set to go in effect in 2014–have been delayed until 2015. This potentially doubles (or worse) the liability of an insured and benefits the insurance company by allowing it to avoid covering expenses above the current OOP’s. Do you believe that is the objective of the White House? To benefit the insurance companies? And I thought the whole reason for the ACA was to better protect the patient, consumer, insured member. After all, it is the Patient Protection … … … Act is it not?
So what was the motive behind the White House’s reprieve for insurance companies? “General Math” provides the answer. I.e.:
Lower patient out-of-pockets = higher insurance premiums
Higher insurance premiums = less participation in coverage and greater backlash against the ACA


Greater backlash = trouble for the Democrats in the 2014 mid-term elections
Conclusion = this reprieve was politically motivated


Reader and followers – if you can argue this to a different conclusion – please feel free to do so here for my erudition and that of the rest of us.

Admin – Kenton Henry
Feature Articles:
Washington Times
By Tom Howell Jr.
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
President Obama has granted yet another part of his health care law a delay, quietly announcing a one-year grace period before imposing a strict limit on consumers’ out-of-pocket medical expenses.
The delay means some health care plans in the group market will have until 2015 to begin paying for all expenses exceeding $6,350 for an individual’s out-of-pocket spending, or $12,700 for a family.
SPECIAL COVERAGE: Health Care Reform
Language on the delay has been posted on the Labor Department’s website since February, but it did not surface in the political arena until The New York Times reported on it Tuesday.
Mr. Obama used the limits as a key selling point when he pushed the Affordable Care Act through Congress in 2010. Now, Republicans are using the delay as part of last-ditch bids to dismantle the law before key implementation dates this fall.
“Burying this announcement online in a ‘maze of legal and bureaucratic language’ shows little concern for the promises with which this law was sold,” said House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican, borrowing language from the Times article. “What else in the law isn’t working that we don’t yet know about?”
The Obama administration also announced in a pre-July Fourth blog posting that it was delaying the mandate that requires employers with at least 50 full-time employees to provide them with health care coverage.
For the Obama administration, the setbacks are ill-timed and leave officials trying to convince consumers that the delays don’t signal an inability to carry out other parts of the law.
Erin Shields Britt, spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services, said the health care law is still implementing historic consumer protections from “the worst insurance company abuses, by banning discrimination based on pre-existing health conditions, ending lifetime and annual limits on what an insurance company will cover, and capping out-of pocket spending to protect Americans and their families.”
“The February guidance builds on these landmark consumer protections by requiring that health plans limit out-of-pocket spending for major medical coverage for the first time, in 2014, on time,” she said. “This single limit will apply to additional benefits in 2015.”
The newly reported delay arose because some employers and insurers use separate companies to administer major-medical coverage and drug benefits, resulting in separate out-of-pocket limits.
Because of this fractured landscape, parties needed time to streamline their data systems . The rule says that, for the first plan year after Jan. 1, 2014, the annual limit on out-of-pocket expenses will be satisfied if a group health plan that uses more than one service provider complies with the cap on major medical coverage and maintains a similar cap on the non-major medical coverage.
Even as it delays some parts, the administration has said the individual mandate requiring most Americans to have coverage remains in effect. Officials also are working feverishly to implement by Oct. 1 state-by-state health care exchanges where those without employer-based coverage can buy insurance with the help of tax credits.
A recent inspector general report suggested that Health and Human Services is months behind in setting up the federal data hub that will allow federal and state agencies to synchronize information about consumers on the exchanges.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, wrote to the Obama administration Monday to suggest that it delay the rollout of the exchanges.
Conservative lawmakers are waging a rhetorical war against Obamacare ahead of a spending showdown on Capitol Hill in September.



Pharma & Healthcare |


Yet Another White House Obamacare Delay: Out-Of-Pocket Caps Waived Until 2015

WASHINGTON, DC – MARCH 18: U.S. President Barack Obama (L) speaks as Assistant Attorney General of Justice Department’s civil rights division Thomas Perez (R) listens during a personnel announcement March 18, 2013 at the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC. Perez has succeeded Hilda Solis as the U.S. Secretary of Labor. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

First, there was the delay of Obamacare’s Medicare cuts until after the election. Then there was the delay of the law’s employer mandate. Then there was the announcement, buried in the Federal Register, that the administration would delay enforcement of a number of key eligibility requirements for the law’s health insurance subsidies, relying on the “honor system” instead. Now comes word that another costly provision of the health law—its caps on out-of-pocket insurance costs—will be delayed for one more year.

According to the Congressional Research Service, as of November 2011, the Obama administration had missed as many as one-third of the deadlines, specified by law, under the Affordable Care Act. Here are the details on the latest one.

Obamacare contains a blizzard of mandates and regulations that will make health insurance more costly. One of the most significant is its caps on out-of-pocket insurance costs, such as co-pays and deductibles. Section 2707(b) of the Public Health Service Act, as added by Obamacare, requires that “a group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage may not establish lifetime limits on the dollar value of benefits for the any participant or beneficiary.” Annual limits on cost-sharing are specified by Section 1302(c) of the Affordable Care Act; in addition, starting in 2014, deductibles are limited to $2,000 per year for individual plans, and $4,000 per year for family plans.

Move up t Move down

Obamacare Increases Costs of College Health Plans by as Much as 1,112% Avik Roy Contributor

There’s no such thing as a free lunch. If you ban lifetime limits, and mandate lower deductibles, and cap out-of-pocket costs, premiums have to go up to reflect these changes. And unlike a lot of the “rate shock” problems we’ve been discussing, these limits apply not only to individually-purchased health insurance, but also to employer-sponsored coverage. (Self-insured employers are exempted.)

These mandates have already had drastic effects on a number of colleges and universities, which offer inexpensive, defined-cap plans to their healthy, youthful students. Premiums at Lenoir-Rhyne University in Hickory, N.C., for example, rose from $245 per student in 2011-2012 to between $2,507 in 2012-2013. The University of Puget Sound paid $165 per student in 2011-2012; their rates rose to between $1,500 and $2,000 for 2012-2013. Other schools have been forced to drop coverage because they could no longer afford it.

According to the law, the limits on out-of-pocket costs for 2014 were $6,350 for individual policies and $12,700 for family ones. But in February, the Department of Labor published a little-noticed rule delaying the cap until 2015. The delay was described yesterday by Robert Pear in the New York Times.

Delay needed to align ‘separate computer systems’

Notes Pear, “Under the [one-year delay], many group health plans will be able to maintain separate out-of-pocket limits for benefits in 2014. As a result, a consumer may be required to pay $6,350 for doctors’ services and hospital care, and an additional $6,350 for prescription drugs under a plan administered by a pharmacy benefit manager.”

The reason for the delay? “Federal officials said that many insurers and employers needed more time to comply because they used separate companies to help administer major medical coverage and drug benefits, with separate limits on out-of-pocket costs. In many cases, the companies have separate computer systems that cannot communicate with one another.”

The best part in Pear’s story is when a “senior administration official” said that “we had to balance the interests of consumers with the concerns of health plan sponsors and carriers…They asked for more time to comply.” Exactly how is it in consumers’ interests to pay far more for health insurance than they do already?

It’s not. Unless you have a serious, chronic condition, in which case you may benefit from the fact that law forces healthy people to subsidize your care. To progressives, this is the holy grail. But for economically rational individuals, it’s yet another reason to drop out of the insurance market altogether. For economically rational businesses, it’s a reason to self-insure, in order to get out from under these costly mandates.                         Patient groups upset

While insurers and premium-payers will be happy with the delay—whose legal justification is dubious once again—there are groups that grumbled. Specifically, groups representing those with chronic diseases, and the pharmaceutical companies whose costly drugs they will use. “The American Cancer Society American Cancer Society shares the concern” about the delay, says Pear, “and noted that some new cancer drugs cost $100,000 a year or more.” But a big part of the reason those drugs cost so much is because manufacturers know that government-run insurers will pay up.

“The promise of out-of-pocket limits was one of the main reasons we supported health reform,” says Theodore M. Thompson of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society National Multiple Sclerosis Society. “We have wonderful new drugs, the biologics, to treat rheumatoid arthritis,” said Patience H. White of the Arthritis Foundation. “But they are extremely expensive.”

The progressive solution to expensive problems? More subsidies. But subsidies don’t reduce the underlying cost of care. They only excuse the high prices that manufacturers and service providers already charge.

It’s one of the many aspects of Obamacare that should be repealed, if we are to combat the rate shock that the health law imposes on tens of millions of Americans. But that will require Republicans to come up with a smarter strategy than shutting down the government.