Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
WASHINGTON New data collected by the Department of Health and Human Services show that about 90% of Americans buying individual insurance from state health insurance exchanges will have at least five companies to choose from when the exchanges start operations Oct. 1, according to a memorandum released by the White House Thursday.
In many states, the memorandum said, only one or two insurers have controlled the market for individual insurance policies, the type that people without employer-supplied health insurance have to buy.
The data are not surprising, said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, because insurers are doing all they can to provide a variety of plans at lower costs. In the states that have released plans and prices, such as Oregon and California, he said there are plenty of choices.
"I think that's what we're going to see across the country," he said. "Competition is a good thing."
The monthly cost of health insurance under President Obama's healthcare law is consistently coming in lower than expected.
Premiums for a middle-of-the-road policy have come in below earlier estimates in all nine states that have released their initial rate information.
A new analysis from Avalere Health says the lower-than-expected prices show that the central piece of the healthcare law new insurance exchanges in each state is working as intended.
The initial data suggest that competition in exchanges is working to lower premiums, which will benefit nonsubsidized enrollees and the federal government, said Caroline Pearson, vice president at Avalere Health.
Avalere compared early filings for the specific plans the government will use to determine the level of tax credits available to help people cover the cost of their premiums.
In the nine states that have publicized their 2014 rates, every benchmark plan came in cheaper than estimated by the Congressional Budget Office.
New data show health exchanges expand competition - USA TODAY
WASHINGTON New data collected by the Department of Health and Human Services show that about 90% of Americans buying individual insurance from state health insurance exchanges will have at least five companies to choose from when the exchanges start operations Oct. 1, according to a memorandum released by the White House Thursday.
In many states, the memorandum said, only one or two insurers have controlled the market for individual insurance policies, the type that people without employer-supplied health insurance have to buy.
The data are not surprising, said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, because insurers are doing all they can to provide a variety of plans at lower costs. In the states that have released plans and prices, such as Oregon and California, he said there are plenty of choices.
"I think that's what we're going to see across the country," he said. "Competition is a good thing."
ObamaCare premiums lower than expected - The Hill's Healthwatch
The monthly cost of health insurance under President Obama's healthcare law is consistently coming in lower than expected.
Premiums for a middle-of-the-road policy have come in below earlier estimates in all nine states that have released their initial rate information.
A new analysis from Avalere Health says the lower-than-expected prices show that the central piece of the healthcare law new insurance exchanges in each state is working as intended.
The initial data suggest that competition in exchanges is working to lower premiums, which will benefit nonsubsidized enrollees and the federal government, said Caroline Pearson, vice president at Avalere Health.
Avalere compared early filings for the specific plans the government will use to determine the level of tax credits available to help people cover the cost of their premiums.
In the nine states that have publicized their 2014 rates, every benchmark plan came in cheaper than estimated by the Congressional Budget Office.
What a fiasco!
The Obama Administration is getting desperate. Organizing for Action is now engaged in trying to round up young, healthy men to pay for insurance they neither need nor want. Without these young men, the financial model (tenuous as it is), falls apart.
DHS reports lol
Even if true that means 10% of the states are just sol...
The Obama Administration is getting desperate. Organizing for Action is now engaged in trying to round up young, healthy men to pay for insurance they neither need nor want. Without these young men, the financial model (tenuous as it is), falls apart.
If you own a home, do you need homeowners insurance, assuming you are not so wealthy that you can be considered to be self-insured?
The idea that healthy people don't need insurance is preposterous to say the least. While healthy and especially health young people do not get sick as often as others, some still get sick, and they need insurance just in case they do. Obviously if they are too dumb to understand the need for insurance, or they think they can just pass the cost on to everyone else if they get sick, then we need to properly educate them.
Even among younger adults a group that many have speculated may be resistant to getting coverage under the ACA more than seven in ten rate having health insurance as very important, and similar shares feel it is something they need and that it is worth the money. Overall, just a quarter of those ages 18-30 feel they are healthy enough to go without insurance.
While young adults are sometime described as viewing themselves as young invincibles, the poll findings indicate that many young adults worry about affording medical bills, particularly catastrophic ones. Among those ages 30 and younger, roughly two-thirds say they are worried about not being able to pay medical bills in the event of a serious illness or accident, while over four in ten say they worry about affording medical bills for routine health care services.
Kaiser Health Tracking Poll: June 2013 | The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation
DHS reports lol
Even if true that means 10% of the states are just sol...
HHS is operating the marketplaces in most states, which is why they have the data.
But you can also look to the states that are operating their own marketplaces and have made public the number of insurers that want to participate: Maryland has 13, California has 13, Oregon has 12, Washington has 9, Colorado has 11.
Some small states may still have trouble attracting new insurers but that's why the law 1) allows insurers to sell plans across state lines, in multiple states simultaneously, and 2) provided start-up funds for new insurers (non-profit co-ops).
That said, your thread has now become a lament that only 90%+ of individual markets are getting more competitive next year. Damn that Obama!
California currently has 45 companies licensed to sell individual policies, so 71% are not part of the exchange. ObamaCare is Anti-Competition...and favors Big Insurance. The smaller companies that provide cost effective plans and CHOICE are not participating.
Oh, it is. Unless people who don't need insurance are forced to pay $ thousands for something they won't use, ObamaCare is a huge money loser.
I'm also enjoying the clusterfuckapalooza of an IT project the exchanges have turned into. Online insurance companies have successfully implemented their business with a few tens of millions of capital - and function quite well (ehealthinsurance, for example). But umpty upteen $billions, and ObamaCare is nonfunctional.
California currently has 45 companies licensed to sell individual policies, so 71% are not part of the exchange. ObamaCare is Anti-Competition...and favors Big Insurance. The smaller companies that provide cost effective plans and CHOICE are not participating.
California's exchange is an active purchaser, meaning it deliberately selects which insurers will be allowed to participate. The number of applicants in that state was 3-4 times larger than the 13 that were selected to sell in the exchange. Less cost effective plans simply weren't allowed in.
The Obama Administration is getting desperate. Organizing for Action is now engaged in trying to round up young, healthy men to pay for insurance they neither need nor want. Without these young men, the financial model (tenuous as it is), falls apart.
If you own a home, do you need homeowners insurance, assuming you are not so wealthy that you can be considered to be self-insured?
The idea that healthy people don't need insurance is preposterous to say the least. While healthy and especially health young people do not get sick as often as others, some still get sick, and they need insurance just in case they do. Obviously if they are too dumb to understand the need for insurance, or they think they can just pass the cost on to everyone else if they get sick, then we need to properly educate them.
Healthy young people need catastrophic coverage, nothing more. Gwtting sick does NOT require you to need health insurance.
The Obama Administration is getting desperate. Organizing for Action is now engaged in trying to round up young, healthy men to pay for insurance they neither need nor want. Without these young men, the financial model (tenuous as it is), falls apart.
If you own a home, do you need homeowners insurance, assuming you are not so wealthy that you can be considered to be self-insured?
The idea that healthy people don't need insurance is preposterous to say the least. While healthy and especially health young people do not get sick as often as others, some still get sick, and they need insurance just in case they do. Obviously if they are too dumb to understand the need for insurance, or they think they can just pass the cost on to everyone else if they get sick, then we need to properly educate them.
Healthy young people need catastrophic coverage, nothing more. Gwtting sick does NOT require you to need health insurance.
For instance im 45 years old and have not needed to visit a dr in so long I cant remember the last year I actually went to one. Paying a few hundred vucks for a dr visit while only having a catastrophic policy is smart. Not tossing away thousands on unneeded and unused premiums
California currently has 45 companies licensed to sell individual policies, so 71% are not part of the exchange. ObamaCare is Anti-Competition...and favors Big Insurance. The smaller companies that provide cost effective plans and CHOICE are not participating.
California's exchange is an active purchaser, meaning it deliberately selects which insurers will be allowed to participate. The number of applicants in that state was 3-4 times larger than the 13 that were selected to sell in the exchange. Less cost effective plans simply weren't allowed in.
Big Government Cronyism on Parade.
And the individual loses freedom of choice.
It's not surprising that a Sheeple such as yourself favors this.
