Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Critics say ACA ‘risk’ strategies are having reverse Robin Hood effect
Critics say ACA ‘risk’ strategies are having reverse Robin Hood effect
In early summer, a small, nonprofit HMO in Birmingham, Ala., got a surprise from the federal government: a bill for $1.7 million.
The charge, which amounted to a startling two-fifths of the premium money that Viva Health had collected from 1,100 customers, stemmed from an obscure part of the Affordable Care Act designed to support health plans with lots of sick, expensive customers by giving them money from plans with healthier customers.
The goal is to help keep insurance markets stable by sharing the “risk” of sicker people and removing any incentive for plans to avoid individuals who need more medical care. Such stability is likely to encourage competition and keep overall prices lower for consumers, while its absence can undermine both and limit coverage choices — the basic principles of the law.
...
Indeed, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, which dominates the market in which Viva sells, is getting more than $2.5 million.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/critics-say-aca-risk-strategies-are-having-reverse-robinhood-effect/2016/01/13/e41cf574-b48f-11e5-a842-0feb51d1d124_story.html
In early summer, a small, nonprofit HMO in Birmingham, Ala., got a surprise from the federal government: a bill for $1.7 million.
The charge, which amounted to a startling two-fifths of the premium money that Viva Health had collected from 1,100 customers, stemmed from an obscure part of the Affordable Care Act designed to support health plans with lots of sick, expensive customers by giving them money from plans with healthier customers.
The goal is to help keep insurance markets stable by sharing the “risk” of sicker people and removing any incentive for plans to avoid individuals who need more medical care. Such stability is likely to encourage competition and keep overall prices lower for consumers, while its absence can undermine both and limit coverage choices — the basic principles of the law.
...
Indeed, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, which dominates the market in which Viva sells, is getting more than $2.5 million.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/critics-say-aca-risk-strategies-are-having-reverse-robinhood-effect/2016/01/13/e41cf574-b48f-11e5-a842-0feb51d1d124_story.html
So the Democratic party is cutting off its face to spite its nose (wording intended) over Single Payer to the point where even a once-solid Progressive such as Howard Dean has sold out and now the system they're defending is propping up big corporations at the expense of little, more response companies. This will do nothing but lead to regulatory capture of the insurance marketplace spreading the "too big to fail" disease from banks to insurance carriers.
We would have been better served had the Supreme Court had struck down this monstrosity. Then, at least, we would have had the political cover to work towards SP. As it stands now The Establishment is gutting every argument for SP while clinging to a law that is destined to self-destruct.
Next Up: GOP donors will start investing in the TBTF corporations soaking up those sweet, sweet tax subsidies.
15 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
