One of my commenters insists we're in for a train wreck when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act fully kicks in with its health insurance exchanges in 2014. That seems not to be the case in California:
Last week, California released early information on the rates insurers intend to charge on the new insurance marketplaces — known as “exchanges” — that the state is setting up under Obamacare. They were far lower than anyone expected. Where analysts had anticipated average premiums of $400 to $500, insurers were actually charging $200 to $300. “This is a home run for consumers in every region of California,” crowed Peter Lee, director of the state’s exchanges [Ezra Klein, "The Shocking Truth about Obamacare's Rate Shock," Washington Post: Wonkblog, 2013.06.01].
Folks buying health insurance on the sadistic individual market get similar positive news in Washington state:
Washington’s consumers got their first, preliminary look at the cost of “Obamacare” on Tuesday. And the news, for many consumers, was good: Health insurance next year will cover more and cost less.
...Individuals who purchase coverage on the site will not, in most cases, pay the rates unveiled Tuesday. Federal subsidies, available only for policies purchased on the website, will reduce the cost to consumers. The size of the federal subsidy will be tied to household income: Subsidies will be available for those with incomes up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, which equates to an annual income of $94,200 for a family of four.
...[Washington state Insurance Commissioner Mike] Kreidler has pointed out that individual health insurance policies these days often cover less than 40 percent of medical costs and often do not cover prescription drugs or maternity care.
But that’s not true of the policies on the new website. Beginning next year, the federal reform law prohibits annual or lifetime coverage caps, bans higher rates for women or the chronically ill and requires health insurance to cover 10 “essential benefits”: ambulatory services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health, prescription drugs, rehabilitation, laboratory services, prevention and wellness, and pediatric services including dental and vision care [John Webster, "Washington Insurance Exchange to Cut Health Care Costs," Spokane Spokesman-Review, 2013.05.13].
The listed premiums, before subsidy, in the Washington plans are a little higher than current rates on the individual market. But those plans will cover more, and they will be available to everyone, unlike today's plans under which insurers can refuse to do business with people who really need their product. Sounds like a plus to me!
"Where analysts had anticipated average premiums of $400 to $500, insurers were actually charging $200 to $300."
My God? Where in this country can an individual get medical insurance for two or three hundred dollars a month?!
My DakotaCare One policy goes for four hundred a month right now.
Premium increases annually have averaged around 12 to 15 percent since I got the policy, which has a 5,000 dollar deductible, about five years ago.
That little fit over with, I should hasten to add a little caveat that people often forget when they choose insurance. Will the insurance company actually honor their contract?
Low premiums mean nothing if you're getting nothing for your money -- and they mean a whole lot less than nothing if you find out the bitter truth when you're flat on your back sick or injured.
DakotaCare has a pretty good reputation insofar as paying legitimate claims goes. Many companies, however, do not fare so well in that department. Have you heard the story about the well-known insurance company whose employees kept pink pig dolls with little wings on their desks? Ahh ... and they danced and laughed as they denied people's claims ...
A couple of years ago I switched my home, auto, and umbrella policies to Amica because of their good reputation at the site
http://www.badfaithinsurance.org/
I will not identify the company that I switched away from. But I will offer this much: The company that I abandoned for home, auto, and umbrella is the same company that I abandoned for fear that they'd stiff me for a medical claim.
They're pretty high up on the FBIC "Hall of Shame."
So let the buyer beware. I don't know how well these "exchanges" will fare when it comes to actually putting up the goods. But time will tell, eh?
Two to three hundred dollars a month for medical insurance?
Pleeeeeeease.
Oh I see. A 26-year-old in perfect health can get these rates.
For a 60-year-old like me in good but not perfect health, the premiums would come out to around seven hundred dollars a month.
That's in Washington state.
Read the fine print, folks.
Oh, to be young again!
All that said, it does look like the "rate shock" problem with Obamacare might in fact not materialize.
Again, time will tell.
Without ObamaCare, that 60-year-old will pay similar high premiums on the individual market, with no PPACA subsidy, and with a higher deductible and less coverage... and that's assuming the private insurer will do business with that 60-year-old in the first place.
As a 60 year old who's never used our insurance and with a 5K deduct, my Wellmark has doubled from 6K annually when Obama was elected. It just took a $3300 jump, they're not waiting for 2014. They pay what they want to pay whether you are over or under your deduct Corey. .
.
Yes insurance carriers are crooks. Has the ACA done anything to change that? Heck no.
.
Has the ACA accelerated the carrier's criminal activity? Damn betcha.
.
Last but not least..."on the rates insurers intend to charge".?
Keep digging Corey.
The best and ultimate final solution would be single payer, maybe someday we will come to our collective senses.
Nick, this Rational Republican agrees with you a hundred and ten percent.
Good thing there's a shortage of tar and feathers.
Of rails, or should I say shafts, an overabundance prevails.