latimes.com
Baltimore riots live updates: State of emergency declared, schools to be closed
Opinion Editorial

Another misguided GOP attack on Obamacare

Ever since the housing market collapse, nothing stokes the flames of public outrage quite like the phrase "government bailout." It's become the condemnation of choice for both parties when faced with a policy they don't like. Lately, conservatives have been arguing that an obscure provision of the 2010 healthcare law would provide a taxpayer bailout to insurance companies that don't charge high enough premiums. Funny, but they didn't have a problem with that concept when it was used to help launch Medicare's prescription drug program under (Republican) President George W. Bush. Maybe that's because it isn't really a bailout.

The specific provision is called "risk corridors," and it's one of three efforts in the Affordable Care Act to help insurers manage the transition from the bad old days — when they could deny coverage to people or charge them higher rates based on their preexisting conditions — to a new system under which every applicant is guaranteed coverage and premiums don't vary according to the policyholder's health. That's a huge leap for insurers, which may have a hard time predicting their future customers' health and medical bills accurately enough to set sufficient rates. That's why the government set up the corridors for three years, covering some of an insurer's cost if its medical bills come in higher than projected. And to offset that expense, the government will collect an equal percentage of the profits made by an insurer whose medical payments turn out to be lower than projected.

When Medicare asked insurers to start offering prescription drug coverage, the same mechanism was included for much the same reason: The government was pushing insurers to take on a new risk that they weren't fully ready to gauge. Over time the government withdrew its backstop, leaving insurers to deal with the challenges increasingly on their own. Based on that experience, the Congressional Budget Office projected that the corridors in the healthcare law would pay for themselves. Whether they do, of course, depends on whether insurers sign up the pool of customers they expected to attract, which remains to be seen.

PHOTOS: How the Democrats can win back the House and keep the Senate -- in 6 steps

Rather than waiting to find out how things go in the coming year, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Rep. Tim Griffin (R-Ark.) have introduced bills in the Senate and House to repeal the risk corridors. That would amount to a bait-and-switch for insurers — some of them new to the individual market — that have already signed up customers for 2014. Knowing that Senate Democrats aren't likely to pass such a bill, some Republicans are eager to attach the provision to a must-pass bill to raise the debt limit in February. We can only hope that GOP leaders learned from last year's disastrous government shutdown that such hostage-taking doesn't end well. Risk corridors have worked in the past to the public's benefit, not the taxpayers' regret, and Congress should give them the chance to work again.

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • Bill on drug pricing would help state in figuring healthcare costs
    Bill on drug pricing would help state in figuring healthcare costs

    A new crop of specialty drugs holds great promise for treating or even curing some devastating diseases, but their high cost challenges health insurers and taxpayer-funded health programs. In California, Gov. Jerry Brown has asked for $300 million in the coming fiscal year's budget just for specialty...

  • Why whole-genome testing hurts more than it helps
    Why whole-genome testing hurts more than it helps

    President Obama proposes to plunk down $215 million on "precision medicine," and the National Institutes of Health and its National Cancer Institute will spend it by sequencing the whole genome of a million or more Americans.

  • Who should and shouldn't get heart transplants -- and why?
    Who should and shouldn't get heart transplants -- and why?

    When a Georgia teenager named Anthony Stokes got himself killed not long ago, smashing up a stolen car in a police chase after supposedly taking a shot at an old lady in her house, the regret that poured out online was not for the death of the 17-year-old, but for the “waste” of the transplanted...

  • Obamacare turns 5: The law's potential has been stymied by politics
    Obamacare turns 5: The law's potential has been stymied by politics

    President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law five years ago Monday, an anniversary that congressional Republicans will soon observe with another symbolic vote to repeal it. The general public isn't as eager to do away with the law, widely known as Obamacare, but...

  • It's past time for Congress to pass Medicare reform
    It's past time for Congress to pass Medicare reform

    House Republicans have no qualms about leaving millions of low-income Americans without health coverage, as evidenced by their repeated votes to repeal Obamacare. But they're so skittish about reducing access to Medicare, the federal insurance program for senior citizens and the disabled, that...

  • A middle way to resolve the Obamacare case
    A middle way to resolve the Obamacare case

    At the Supreme Court argument in King vs. Burwell, the case challenging how the Affordable Care Act works, someone should have asked, “If a state with a federally run health insurance exchange now adopts or ratifies that marketplace as its own, wouldn't it qualify as a state-established exchange?”...

  • Goal should be to keep Daughters of Charity hospitals open
    Goal should be to keep Daughters of Charity hospitals open

    The financial crisis faced by the Daughters of Charity Health System appeared to be solved last year when Prime Healthcare Services of Ontario agreed to buy the chain and keep its six hospitals, including St. Francis Medical Center of Lynwood, open for at least five years. On Tuesday, however,...

  • Overdue for checkups: Denti-Cal program for low-income kids
    Overdue for checkups: Denti-Cal program for low-income kids

    Fewer than half the low-income kids enrolled in California's dental insurance program see a dentist in any given year. That seems like a problem. Whether it is, though, is impossible to tell because of the state's inadequate oversight of the program, known as Denti-Cal. According to a recent audit,...

Comments
Loading