4 ms·

2 points. First, yes, plans started to go up before ACA, in anticipation of ACA. Second, when a plan went up 20% in 2012, it might have been an $80 hike. Now in

2 points. First, yes, plans started to go up before ACA, in anticipation of ACA. Second, when a plan went up 20% in 2012, it might have been an $80 hike. Now in 2017 when it goes up 20% it is an extra $240 a month. So even if the rate of increase is similar, the pain it causes is not, especially contrasted with stagnant wages.

tptacek 10y ago
No, I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. Plans were going up for years. In almost a third of all years in the ten years prior to ACA, California saw double digit growth in its guaranteed-issue small group market. Also, there's no mechanism by which plans go up by double digits "in anticipation of" the ACA.
- WillPostForFood 10y ago
  "Plans were going up for years" - yes, but not as much they went up after ACA. "[a]cross all states, from before the reform to the first half of 2014, enrollment-weighted premiums in the individual health insurance market increased by 24.4 percent beyond what they would have had they simply followed state-level seasonally adjusted trends.” And the rate increase is 49% if you don't weight enrollment, which is a better indicator of individual impact. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Fall2014BPEA_Kowalski.pdf https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Fall201...
  - tptacek 10y ago
    Again, you're comparing the pre-ACA California individual insurance market, in which insurers could (and actively did) simply refuse coverage to anyone they might have to provide services to, to the post-ACA California individual insurance market in which they couldn't. The correct comparison is to the California small group market, which prior to the ACA also had guaranteed issue. The small group market covered companies with low single digit numbers of employees and approximates the ACA individual market (less the adverse selection of people without benefits-providing employers). In that market, the price trends before and after the ACA are broadly comparable.

tptacek 10y ago

No, I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. Plans were going up for years. In almost a third of all years in the ten years prior to ACA, California saw double digit growth in its guaranteed-issue small group market. Also, there's no mechanism by which plans go up by double digits "in anticipation of" the ACA.

WillPostForFood 10y ago
"Plans were going up for years" - yes, but not as much they went up after ACA. "[a]cross all states, from before the reform to the first half of 2014, enrollment-weighted premiums in the individual health insurance market increased by 24.4 percent beyond what they would have had they simply followed state-level seasonally adjusted trends.” And the rate increase is 49% if you don't weight enrollment, which is a better indicator of individual impact. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Fall2014BPEA_Kowalski.pdf https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Fall201...
- tptacek 10y ago
  Again, you're comparing the pre-ACA California individual insurance market, in which insurers could (and actively did) simply refuse coverage to anyone they might have to provide services to, to the post-ACA California individual insurance market in which they couldn't. The correct comparison is to the California small group market, which prior to the ACA also had guaranteed issue. The small group market covered companies with low single digit numbers of employees and approximates the ACA individual market (less the adverse selection of people without benefits-providing employers). In that market, the price trends before and after the ACA are broadly comparable.