Chemists Have Solutions .
PricewaterhouseCoopers analysis of premiums in the exchanges vs. in the employer-based group markets, and 2) Gallup's uninsurance poll.
Which one is it you're not liking?
Plans on the exchanges aren't costing more than comparable coverage. If you compare the average employer-based plan to equivalent (i.e., gold and platinum level plans) in the exchanges, which is what PwC did, you find that exchange plans are cheaper.Originally Posted by j-mac
What you're referring to is people who were in the individual market buying skimpier plans and are now buying more generous plans. In the pre-ACA world, those markets were most heavily populated by what would be considered "tin" (or sub-bronze) plans. The PwC study touches on this:
You can compare tin to bronze and find that tin was cheaper, that doesn't tell us anything interesting. But if you compare gold/platinum in the new competitive marketplaces to gold/platinum in the employer-based plans that most privately insured people have, you do find something interesting--the gold/platinum plans are cheaper in the new marketplaces. Apples-to-apples comparisons of comparable plans are showing that exchange plans are cheaper.Prior to the ACA, individual insurance coverage was more limited than employer insurance, and, on average, comparable to bronze plans purchased on the ACA's exchanges. Some of the sticker shock noted among enrollees in the new exchanges is due to more comprehensive insurance coverage in the exchange plans. More than half the people in the individual market had coverage below the bronze level of 60%, the lowest level in the exchanges.
As for the enrollment numbers, those millions losing insurance numbers are inflated by 1) ignoring those who were able to extend their existing plans through this year, and 2) forgetting that many people with canceled policies were either auto-enrolled in off-exchange plans or otherwise bought individual plans off-exchange (and thus don't show up in the exchange counts). You also ignore here that not only are there more than 3 million people who've signed up for private insurance through an exchange, there are over 7 million who've enrolled in Medicaid plans. That means even if your 5 million number wasn't inflated, the number of newly insured people likely outpaced that marker already anyway.
Which is why Gallup didn't see a surge in uninsured people this month but instead actually saw the uninsured rate dropping.
What people believe at the time of the next couple of elections will have an impact on those elections. What that will be, who knows?
Can't we just turn Congress off and then turn it back on again?