I have a question?

[kentuck]

Do the folks that live in all the states pay the same in the exchanges or do some pay more, where some Governors refused to take Medicaid money? Are all the prices uniform across the nation?

It seems to me that people making less than $50,000 per year gets a pretty good deal, with the subsidies and the total cost. Those that make $75K and above do not get that good a break on prices. I have heard that on TV also. Can anyone confirm that??

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Most people making 75 or more have employer health insurance.

It is the people in low wage jobs that constituted the vast majority of the uninsured.

[kentuck]

2. I guess these folks must be looking for a better deal?

Maybe in a year or two, if the ACA is working better, they can sign up and get a better deal than their employer is offering?

[Warren Stupidity]

5. Unfortunately that isn't allowed.

Unless your employer's plan is so shitty it doesn't qualify you are stuck with what they give you. Yet another bad compromise in the ACA, another mechanism to keep people locked in and keep rates high. Still better than what we had before.

[Mojorabbit]

9. Do you have a link that verifies that?

I know a lot of people (of which husband is included) who are not insured at that rate and above. I wonder if it is just an aberration.Thanks!

[Warren Stupidity]

10. Sure.

54.5 percent of the uninsured earn less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level, or $32,499 for a family of four, and will likely qualify for Medicaid next year in the states that expand the program;
38.2 percent of the uninsured earn less than 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or $94,200 for a family of four, and will likely qualify for subsidies to purchase health insurance on the exchanges in 2014.
7.3 percent of the uninsured earn too much to qualify for subsidies and may be on their own to purchase coverage;

http://capsules.kaiserhealthnews.org/index.php/2013/03/who-are-the-uninsured-the-feds-parse-the-numbers/

[Mojorabbit]

11. Thank you! I appreciate it. nt

[okaawhatever]

3. Having just watched DU's own Steve Leser on Fox (He posted the clip on here) I can

tell you those below 400% of poverty level are the real winners. Ditto self-employed, pre-existing conditions, etc. Steven said 60k is 400%. While those who are employed may not get a better deal per se, they are automatically getting better benefits. Things like free mammograms. For those who make more than 60k and are self-employed they are also getting better deals.

[kentuck]

4. Thanks!

I knew I had heard that somewhere!

[frazzled]

6. No, 400% poverty income depends on household size

For an individual, it's $45,960. For a couple, it's $62,040. If you have 2 kids and 2 parents, it's $94,200, etc. For a family with 4 kids, it's as much as $126,360. Keep adding around $16K for each additional family member.

Here's a chart: http://www.familiesusa.org/resources/tools-for-advocates/guides/federal-poverty-guidelines.html

[okaawhatever]

7. Okay, great thanks for the info. nt

[dsc]

8. rates vary from state to state

In some states, like mine, there wasn't a lot of competition so we wound up with higher rates. Also some states already had community rating to some degree or other, so for them, prices went down for more people.

[AmBlue]

12. Rates in Florida will be higher...

....because our Republican governor and legislature decided to wash their hands of ALL things to do with ObamaCare-- including regulation of insurance premiums. It has been reported in the newspapers here that because of their intentional negligence, it is likely that our rates here in Florida will be higher than in other states. This would not have been the case if our state had regulated premiums.

True to form, our Republican governor and legislature also turned down federal dollars for Medicaid expansion. So the very poorest in our state will not have access to healthcare yet.

[Ms. Toad]

13. They don't have the ability to opt out of the price controls.

If the health care provided is less than 80-85% of the premium charged, the excess has to be rebated.

They can opt out of the Medicaid Expansion.

[AmBlue]

15. It was reported that it is the state's responsibility...

...to provide oversight of premiums-- and that the feds don't actually have the legal authority to do it at the state level. Our legislators decided to suspend that responsibility for the next two years. Although I can't find the original article I read, here's one of our Republican state legislators trying to tell us why it's *good* they aren't providing oversight.
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/column-health-act-uncertainties/2137977

[Ms. Toad]

16. That is advance regulation of the premium.

Whatever is charged up front, if the ultimate spend on health care is less than 80-85% of the premiums charged the excess must be rebated. That won't help with the pain up front if insurance companies decided to gouge people - but the prospect of having to return money the next July/August, as well as participation by the same companies in the exchanges in the rest of the country should keep them from deliberately playing games with the premiums.

It is despicable that they are pretending to not have enough information to be able to regulate up front, when they could certainly (at least) go back through their Medicaid experience and determine (on average) what it costs. But the ultimate price control in the ACA comes at the back end through rebates if they set the premiums too high.

[AmBlue]

17. Good to know, thanks.

I signed on through the CoveredCalifornia site and got as far as I could just to see what our premiums would be if we were Californians. The high end, Platinum premiums for our family were in the $300-350 range. Now, through Healthcare.gov, I've been able to apply but it still won't let me click through and see our eligibility results, HOWEVER, I can skip ahead to enrollment. So, when I've been able to look and see what premiums are going to be, they look like $550-650 range for a Platinum plan. So, as best I can see at this point, our premiums in Florida would be about $300 more per month than if we lived in California. : (

Still, quite a savings over the $1175 per month premiums we are saddled with now.

[Blue_In_AK]

14. They're not the same.

I've read that Alaska has the second highest rates in the country AND our governor refused the Medicaid expansion. Plus, we basically have only one provider, Premera. There was something called MODA or something like that that I never heard of, but the vast majority of options were Premera.

It was reported on the local news Wednesday or Thursday that precisely seven Alaskans have been successful in signing up. Not working too well here.