Health Insurance Exchanges and the Affordable Care Act: Eight Difficult Issues
Authors: Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, J.D.
Contact: Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, J.D., Robert L. Willett
Family Professor of Law, Washington and Lee University School of Law, JostT@wlu.edu
Editor: Joris
Stuyck
Downloads
Overview
The state-level health insurance exchanges to be created under the Affordable
Care Act (ACA) are expected to play a major role in the purchase and sale of
health insurance when they become fully operational in 2014. This report focuses
on eight of the most difficult issues that the states and the federal government
face in implementing the exchanges: governance of the exchanges; avoidance of
adverse selection; making self-funded plans compatible with exchanges; making
exchanges attractive to employers; exchanges' use of their regulatory authority;
determining the information that exchanges must make available to consumers and
employers; the exchanges' role in making eligibility determinations for premium
tax credits and cost-sharing reduction payments and their relationship with
public insurance programs; and reducing administrative costs. The report also
examines how the ACA handles those issues, and makes concrete recommendations as
to how those issues should be addressed.
Executive Summary
This is the second report in a series examining the implementation of the
health insurance exchange provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act of 2010. The author analyzes eight of the most difficult issues that
the states and federal government face in implementing the exchanges—which are
expected to play a major role in the purchase and sale of health insurance once
they become fully operational in 2014—and offers recommendations for addressing
them.
1. How should exchanges be governed? Should they be run by a state agency
or by a nonprofit entity?
In each state, the exchange should be placed
within an independent agency, which should be explicitly exempted, as necessary,
from specific state administrative law or government operations requirements.
The governing board of the exchange could include representatives of state
agencies with which the exchanges must work, interested parties, and persons
with relevant expertise. Management, on the other hand, should be apolitical and
professional. Exchanges should outsource those services for which competitive
markets exist and for which performance can be readily monitored.
2. The most significant problem that exchanges have grappled with
historically has been adverse selection. What should be done to avoid adverse
selection against and within exchanges?
To the extent possible, state
regulation of the individual and small-group market should be identical outside
and inside the exchange. Some states may be able to eliminate the market outside
the exchange. To discourage adverse selection both against and within the
exchange, HHS should design a sophisticated but practical risk-adjustment system
allowing states to adjust risk among participating and nonparticipating
insurers.
3. Opening the exchanges to large employer plans, and in particular to
formerly self-insured employee benefit plans, poses a significant threat to the
exchanges. What must be done to make self-insured plans compatible with
exchanges?
In defining "self-insured" status, the U.S. Department of
Labor and Department of the Treasury should clarify that only employers who are
capable of bearing—and do, in fact, bear—the substantial risk of the cost of
health care for their group can be self-insured. States should consider
extending the requirements of the Affordable Care Act to large plans and to
grandfathered plans that qualify for exchange coverage.
4. Exchanges must attract employers as well as individual enrollees if
they are to succeed. What can be done to make exchanges attractive to employers?
Exchanges should offer employers the possibility of an aggregated bill
covering the premiums of all employees. The exchange should assume the task of
allocating premiums among the various insurers and plans chosen by individual
employees. Employers should be able either to pay a fixed percentage of the
premium for a specified level of coverage, with the employee covering the
remainder of the premium, or to charge employees a premium share based on
category and richness of coverage and, if desired, on tobacco use and
involvement in wellness incentive programs. Employers could also offer greater
support to lower-income employees.
5. The Affordable Care Act requires the exchanges to certify health plans
that meet certain requirements for participation in the exchange. How should
exchanges exercise this regulatory authority?
Exchanges must use their
certification power to ensure that health plans meet the statutory requirements
for qualification and that plans do not impose unreasonable premium increases on
their members. Legislation authorizing state exchanges should under no
circumstances require exchanges to admit all insurers in the market, but should
at least give exchanges the option of being an active purchaser. Exchanges
should decide whether to take a more inclusive or exclusive approach to insurer
participation based on the conditions in their own state and local markets.
Exchanges should use their regulatory authority to lower prices and increase
value to the extent that the competitive conditions in their markets allow.
Exchanges should also standardize and limit the range of plan choices available
within each tier to stimulate competition based on price and value.
6. The Affordable Care Act requires the exchanges to make both
descriptive and evaluative information available to consumers. How should the
exchanges fulfill this responsibility?
Exchanges should make
information describing the benefits and limitations of available health
insurance plans readily and easily accessible. To permit informed selection of
an appropriate health plan through the exchange Internet portal, health plans
should be contractually bound by information they disclose on their Web sites.
Exchanges should develop rating systems that permit accurate comparison of the
value of competing health plans, and satisfaction-survey programs that pay
particular attention to the opinions of plan members who have serious health
problems or financial problems related to their health needs. When conducting
their evaluations, exchanges should be attentive to the opinions of both
employers and individuals.
7. Exchanges play a central role in making eligibility determinations for
premium tax credits and cost-sharing reduction payments and for the Medicaid and
Children's Health Insurance Programs. How should eligibility determinations work
under the Affordable Care Act?
Although the Affordable Care Act
includes extensive provisions for determining eligibility for premium tax
credits, cost-sharing reductions, Medicaid, and CHIP, the allocation of
responsibility for making such determinations remains unclear and contradictory.
The statute should be implemented in such a way as to permit an individual to
apply initially either to the exchange or to the state Medicaid agency. Either
entity must then ascertain that the individual is signed up for the appropriate
program. The exchange and the Medicaid and CHIP programs should facilitate
electronic applications that minimize the need for paper documentation. Interim
assistance should be readily available in cases where eligibility cannot
immediately be determined. The reconciliation requirements of the statute should
be interpreted so as not to defeat the purpose of providing assistance to those
who need it. Exchanges should see it as their responsibility to ensure the
continued enrollment of eligible individuals and families for tax credits or
public programs, rather than holding individuals responsible for continually
having to work at maintaining their own eligibility.
8. Exchanges must find ways to hold down administrative costs and must
identify funding sources if they are to succeed. What can exchanges do to reduce
administrative costs and attract funding?
Exchanges should develop a
variety of revenue sources to fund their work, including an assessment on all
insurers in the market. Exchanges should seek opportunities to lower
administrative costs both for insurers and for employers. State enabling
legislation should neither require nor bar the use of agents and brokers for the
purchase of insurance from the exchange. Agent and broker commissions should be
rationalized, however, and should be consistent regardless of which health plan
is being sold and whether it is inside or outside the exchange.
Citation
T. S. Jost, Health Insurance Exchanges and the Affordable Care Act: Eight
Difficult Issues, The Commonwealth Fund, September 2010.
Copyright 2004 – 2010 © The Commonwealth Fund
The Commonwealth Fund | New York City Headquarters: 1 East 75th Street,
New York, NY 10021 | Phone: 212.606.3800 | Fax: 212.606.3500 |
Washington,
D.C., Office: 1150 17th Street, NW, Suite 600, Washington, D.C., 20036
| E-mail: info@cmwf.org