States Have Tried Versions Of Skinny Repeal. It Didnt Go Well.
We need an outcome, and if a so-called skinny repeal is the first step, thats a good first step, said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.).
Based on published reports, several Republican senators, including Dean Heller of Nevada and Jeff Flake of Arizona, appear to back this approach. It is, at least for now, being viewed as a step along the way to Republican health reform.
I think that most people would understand that what youre really voting on is trying to keep the conversation alive, said Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn. Its not the policy itself
its about trying to create a bigger discussion about repeal between the House and Senate.
But what if, during these strange legislative times, the skinny repeal were passed by the Senate and then became law? States experiences with insurance market reforms and rollbacks highlight the possible trouble spots.
Considering The Parallels
By the late 1990s, states such as Washington, Kentucky and Massachusetts felt a backlash from the coverage requirement rules they previously put on the individual market. When some of the rules were repealed, things went badly, said Mark Hall, director of the health law and policy program at Wake Forest University.
Premiums rose and insurers fled, leaving consumers who buy their own coverage, because they dont get it through their jobs, with fewer choices and higher prices.
Thats because like the Senate plan the states generally kept popular parts of their laws, including protections for people with preexisting conditions. At the same time, they didnt include mandates that consumers carry coverage.
That goes to a basic concept about any kind insurance: People who dont file claims in any given year subsidize those who do. Also, those healthy people are less likely to sign up, insurers said, leaving them with only the more costly policyholders.
Bottomline: Insurers end up less willing to participate in the market, said Hall.
Its not an exact comparison, though, he added, because the current federal health law offers something most states did not: significant subsidies to help some people buy coverage, which could blunt the effect of not having a mandate.
During the debate that led to passage of the federal ACA, insurers flat-out said the plan would fail without an individual mandate. On Wednesday, the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association weighed in again, saying that if there is no longer a coverage requirement, there should be strong incentives for people to obtain health insurance and keep it year-round.
http://khn.org/news/states-have-tried-versions-of-skinny-repeal-it-didnt-go-well/