Christopher Holt August 23, 2019
A few weeks back, presidential contender and former
Vice President Joe Biden released a
health care plan. Opponents—and to some degree Biden himself—have mostly
dismissed the plan as a moderate approach that tinkers around the edges of the
Affordable Care Act (ACA). Truthfully, however, Biden’s proposals are hardly
milquetoast half measures.
Biden’s plan would deviate notably from several key
elements of the ACA. For starters, claims
that employees would lose their health insurance were a political concern for
the Obama Administration and its congressional allies, so they needed to avoid
the erosion of popular employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) in their
health care package. Second, the politics of the moment further dictated
that they had to limit spending to
some degree; the ACA needed to be paid for—at least as far as
congressional budgeting was concerned—and there was an intentional effort to
keep the total spending under $1 trillion. Finally (and relatedly), there was an imperative to “bend the cost
curve,” which put some limitations on just how much federal money could be
poured into the health care sector.
Biden’s plan reverses course on all three by
removing limitations on federal health subsidies and introducing a public
option, which together could increase spending and erode ESI.
Biden is proposing a public option that
sounds similar in design to Medicare buy-in proposals others have offered. His
public option would be “like Medicare” and would also cover “the full scope of
Medicaid benefits.” The Biden public option would “negotiate” like Medicare,
although it’s unclear if Biden’s public option would piggyback on Medicare
rates or just emulate Medicare’s fee schedule to limit provider payments and
thereby lower premiums. Biden’s public option would be available to everyone,
explicitly targeting the option to those with ESI. Anyone who does not have
access to Medicaid because of a state decision not to expand but who would
qualify if it had been expanded would be automatically enrolled in the public
option premium-free. States that did expand can transition their citizens as
well but will still be required to maintain their contributions to those
individuals’ health care costs, effectively penalizing them for expanding
Medicaid.
Biden would also change the ACA’s subsidies in three
important ways. First, while the ACA set the maximum percentage of income that a
family could spend on insurance at 9.86 percent (with subsidies kicking in to
cover the rest of the premium), Biden would reduce that percentage to 8.5
percent. Second, the Biden plan would peg the subsidy to more expensive Gold plans
rather than Silver, increasing the subsidy amount. Finally, Biden would lift
the cap on subsidy eligibility, allowing anyone who pays more than 8.5 percent
of their income to receive subsidies no matter how much money they make.
These richer subsidies would flood the health care
market with cash to be spent on heftier benefit packages, almost certainly
driving up health care spending. Further, Biden would remove the ACA’s
constraint on the federal government’s health care liabilities by guaranteeing
no American has to spend more than 8.5 percent of their income on health
insurance regardless of the cost of that insurance. The “cost curve” would bend, most likely—just
the wrong way. And, this
unlimited subsidy, paired with a robust public option, could prove attractive
to many with ESI, potentially leading to the erosion of ESI that the
ACA’s drafters sought to avoid.
Whatever one thinks of Biden’s proposal on the
merits, it is hardly a narrow, moderate approach. The Biden plan is a
dramatic expansion of the ACA’s health insurance subsidies, and such a shift
could have a significant impact on ESI while moving away from the ACA’s few
attempts to bend the health care cost curve.
https://www.americanactionforum.org/weekly-checkup/moderate-joe/#ixzz5xqCkgrOF
Follow @AAF on Twitter
Follow @AAF on Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment