According to the White House, 28 states are “on their way” to establishing new marketplaces, called health insurance exchanges, where consumers can begin to shop for health insurance starting January 1st, 2014.
Nancy-Ann DeParle, White House Deputy Chief of Staff, remarked, “States are taking strong steps to implement health reform. The Obama Administration is working in partnership with State leaders across the country... we will ensure Americans in every State have access to an Exchange and the same kinds of insurance choices as Members of Congress.”
But does that mean 22 states will not be ready in time? Administration officials said ““it would be premature at this point” to draw that conclusion.
While the government is reviewing another round of grant proposals to assist states, some states, including Wisconsin and Kansas, have said they plan to give the grant back. Last week, South Dakota’s governor said there is
too much uncertainty for the state to move ahead with an exchange until after it learns the results of the Supreme Court case challenging the law, and the outcome of the November Presidential election.
Will that be too late?
“If states decide after the Supreme Court decision, we will work with them to get them as far down the path as possible,” said the official, noting that a state initially could do a partnership with the federal government, if necessary, then get certified to run its exchange solo after that. Residents in states that can’t — or won’t — run their own exchanges will be directed to a federally facilitated fallback exchange.
Still, some policy experts have questioned whether the federal government will have its backup system up and running by the time enrollment is set to open in the fall of 2013. “We are making substantial progress of development of federal exchanges,” the official said, “including signing contracts with private sector vendors to create the systems.”
Do you think the state exchanges will be ready?
Note: this should not be taken as tax or legal advice.
Instead, starting in January 2014, each state will have the power to determine what health benefits must be covered by health insurance policies offered within its borders. Essential health benefits may vary within 10 broad categories which include preventive care, emergency services, maternity care, hospital and doctors’ services, and prescription drugs.
Opponents of health reform have said that
the reform removes the authority of states to regulate health insurance. This move may be the administration's response to those criticisms.
Chris Jacobs, a health policy analyst for Senate Republicans, feels that the move has only added more uncertainty to health care reform. According to Jacobs, the new policy “gives states the flexibility to impose more benefit mandates, not fewer,’’ and the result will be higher insurance premiums.
What do you think of of move?
Note: this should not be taken as tax or legal advice.
Today, the
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service (CMS) issued
a memo addressing many of the questions and concerns that were raised by states during the comment process regarding the implementation of health insurance exchanges.
For example, the memo clarifies that:
- States will not be required to give up control of Medicaid eligibility determination to the federal government; and
- States can defer to the federal government to implement functions of the Exchange that are required under law, but do not fit within the traditional or proper role of the state government, such as enforcing federal tax code provisions.
Click here to read the full memo.
Note: this should not be taken as tax or legal advice.
The Obama Administration re-branded "PPACA" as "ACA" in September of 2010.
Note: None of this should be taken as legal or tax advice.
According to the study:
- 42% of small employers offer group health insurance today.
- 57% of those small employers are likely to drop health coverage by 2014.
- 100% of the small employers that are likely to drop health coverage, also said they would continue to provide coverage to employees if a "tax-excluded contribution" solution existed (the tax-excluded contribution solution exists via defined contribution health plans).
