Quantcast
Channel: Health Insurance Headlines on One News Page [United States]
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live

What will you see on Obamacare exchange for 2017? Details start to emerge

$
0
0
Though full details won't be released until later this month, some information is starting to trickle out about what Illinois residents will and won't find when they shop for health insurance on the state's Affordable Care Act exchange.

Neither Northwestern Memorial Hospital nor its physician group,... Reported by ChicagoTribune 7 hours ago.

Robert Reich: Will Hillary Clinton Get America Back On Track? – OpEd

$
0
0
The parallels are striking. In the last decades of the nineteenth century – the so-called “Gilded Age”— America experienced inequality on a scale it had never before seen, combining wild opulence and searing poverty.

American industry consolidated into a few giant monopolies, or trusts, headed by “robber barons” who wielded enough power to drive out competitors. A few Wall Street titans like J.P. Morgan controlled the nation’s finances.

These men used their huge wealth to rig the system. Their lackeys literally deposited stacks of money on the desks of pliant legislators, prompting the great jurist Louis Brandeis to tell America it a choice: “We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both.“

We face a similar choice today.

Then, America chose democracy. President Theodore Roosevelt, railing against the “malefactors of great wealth,” broke up the trusts. And he pushed Congress to end the most blatant forms of corruption.

His fifth cousin, FDR, went further – enacting social insurance for the elderly, the unemployed, and the disabled; a minimum wage and forty-hour workweek; the right to unionize; compensation for workers injured on the job; and strict limits on Wall Street.

In other words, between 1870 and 1900, American capitalism got off track. Between 1901 and 1937 (the effective end of the New Deal), America put capitalism back on track.

We’re now in the Second Gilded Age, and American capitalism is again off track. It takes about three generations for Americans to forget how our system, unattended, goes wrong. And then to right it.

Inequality is now nearly at the same level it was in the late nineteenth century. Half of all families are poorer today than they were a decade-and-a-half ago, the pay of CEOs and Wall Street bankers is in the stratosphere, and child poverty is on the rise.

Meanwhile, American industry is once again consolidating – this time into oligopolies dominated by three or four major players. You can see it in pharmaceuticals, high tech, airlines, food, Internet service, communications, health insurance, and finance.

The biggest Wall Street banks, having brought the nation to the brink of destruction a few years ago, are once again exercising vast economic power. And big money has taken over American politics.

Will we put capitalism back on track, as we did before?

The vile election of 2016 doesn’t seem to offer much hope. But future historians looking back on the tumult might see the start of another era of fundamental reform.

Today’s uprising against the established order echoes the outrage average Americans felt in the late nineteenth century when they pushed Congress to enact the Sherman Antitrust Act, and when Democratic presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan fulminated against big business and finance.

One hundred twenty years later, Bernie Sanders – the unlikeliest of presidential candidates – won 22 states and 46 percent of the pledged delegates in the Democratic primaries, and pushed Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party to adopt many of his proposals.

At the same time, Donald Trump – a faux populist – has laid bare the deep discontents of America’s white working class, which both parties have long neglected. Not incidentally, Trump has also jeopardized the social fabric of America and nearly destroyed the Republican Party.

Hopefully some of America’s current elite will conclude, as it did at the turn of the last century, that they’d do better with smaller share of growing economy fueled by a flourishing middle class and in a society whose members feel the system is basically fair, than in one riven by social and political strife.

History proved the early generation of reformers correct. While other nations opted for communism or fascism, Americans chose to make capitalism work for the many rather than the few.

If Donald Trump is elected next week, all bets are off.

But if Hillary Clinton assumes the presidency, could she become another Teddy or Franklin D. Roosevelt?

You may think her too much of an establishment figure, too close to the moneyed interests, too cautious. But no one expected dramatic reform when each of the Roosevelts took the reins. They were wealthy patricians, in many respects establishment figures. Yet each rose to the occasion.

Perhaps she will, too. The timing is right, and the need is surely as great as it was over a century ago.

As Mark Twain is reputed to have quipped, “history doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” Reported by Eurasia Review 2 hours ago.

Health insurance 'coverage' is not the same as healthcare 'access'

$
0
0
(NaturalNews) Often lost in the debates over reform to the United States' broken healthcare system is a subtle but critical point: Providing people with health insurance coverage is not the same thing as providing them with access to healthcare.This issue has come to the forefront... Reported by NaturalNews.com 1 hour ago.

MDxHealth Announces Unique CPT Code Awarded for ConfirmMDx from the American Medical Association

$
0
0
*NEWS RELEASE                                                              *
*REGULATED INFORMATION*
*INSIDE INFORMATION*

* *MDxHealth An* *n* *ounces Unique* *CPT Code Awarded for ConfirmMDx from the American Medical Association  * *

- * * Current Procedural Terminology code will facilitate reimbursement -

*IRVINE, CA, and HERSTAL, BELGIUM* - October 31, 2016 - MDxHealth SA (Euronext: MDXH.BR), today announced that its ConfirmMDx ^® for Prostate Cancer test has been granted a Category I MAAA Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code by the American Medical Association (AMA).

"Obtaining Category I CPT code for ConfirmMDx is an important reimbursement milestone that can only be achieved once there is sufficient evidence demonstrating the test improves patient outcomes, has the support of the specialty medical associations, inclusion in medical guidelines and widespread physician adoption," *stated Dr. Jan Groen, CEO of MDxHealth.* "We believe that ConfirmMDx has become a 'standard of care" for the management of men with a with a previous negative prostate biopsy and that this Category I designation will facilitate negotiations with payors and most importantly, timely reimbursement."

CPT Category codes are granted and regulated by the AMA CPT Editorial panel and are widely used by government payors and insurance companies to describe health care services and procedures for reimbursement purposes. The unique ConfirmMDx CPT code, effective in January 2018, will streamline reimbursement from US government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and commercial health insurance companies. Criteria for the Category I MAAA designation include literary documentation of clinical efficacy and consistency with current medical practice as well as widespread adoption and use across the US and with a frequency consistent with intended clinical use.

About ConfirmMDx for Prostate Cancer

ConfirmMDx for Prostate Cancer is the first epigenetic, and only tissue-based test in the 2016 NCCN Guidelines for early detection of prostate cancer which addresses false negative biopsy concerns. It is the only molecular diagnostic test that provides a very high negative predictive value (NPV) of 96% for clinically significant prostate cancers, and 90% NPV for all prostate cancers, as well as prostate mapping of the test results to help guide repeat biopsies. Each year, more than 1 million American men undergo an invasive prostate biopsy with a negative result, however approximately 30% of those men actually have prostate cancer. The current standard of care for prostate biopsy procedures samples less than 1% of the prostate, leaving men at risk for undetected cancer and leading to a high rate of repeat biopsies, even on cancer-free men. ConfirmMDx for Prostate Cancer helps urologists identify low-risk men who may forego an unnecessary repeat biopsy and high-risk men who may benefit from intervention. ConfirmMDx has qualified for Medicare reimbursement and covered by numerous private health insurance plans.

About MDxHealth

MDxHealth is a multinational healthcare company that provides actionable molecular diagnostic information to personalize the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. The company's tests are based on proprietary gene methylation (epigenetic) and other molecular technologies and assist physicians with the diagnosis of cancer, prognosis of recurrence risk, and prediction of response to a specific therapy. For more information, visit mdxhealth.com and follow us on Twitter at: twitter.com/mdxhealth .

*For more information:*

* *

Dr. Jan Groen, CEO
MDxHealth
US: +1 949 812 6979
BE: +32 4 364 20 70
info@mdxhealth.com    

 

   

 

Jonathan Birt, Chris Welsh, Hendrik Thys, Cameron Standage (PR & IR)
Consilium Strategic Communications
UK: +44 20 3709 5701
US: +1 917 322 2571 (Rx Communications Group LLC)
mdxhealth@consilium-comms.com

 

 

This press release contains forward-looking statements and estimates with respect to the anticipated future performance of MDxHealth and the market in which it operates. Such statements and estimates are based on assumptions and assessments of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which were deemed reasonable but may not prove to be correct. Actual events are difficult to predict, may depend upon factors that are beyond the company's control, and may turn out to be materially different. MDxHealth expressly disclaims any obligation to update any such forward-looking statements in this release to reflect any change in its expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based unless required by law or regulation.  This press release does not constitute an offer or invitation for the sale or purchase of securities or assets of MDxHealth in any jurisdiction. No securities of MDxHealth may be offered or sold within the United States without registration under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in compliance with an exemption therefrom, and in accordance with any applicable U.S. securities laws.

NOTE: The MDxHealth logo, MDxHealth, ConfirmMDx, SelectMDx, AssureMDx and PredictMDx are trademarks or registered trademarks of MDxHealth SA. All other trademarks and service marks are the property of their respective owners.

ConfirmMDx AMA CPT Code Approval
--------------------This announcement is distributed by NASDAQ OMX Corporate Solutions on behalf of NASDAQ OMX Corporate Solutions clients.

The issuer of this announcement warrants that they are solely responsible for the content, accuracy and originality of the information contained therein.

Source: MDxHealth (R) via GlobeNewswire

HUG#2052730 Reported by GlobeNewswire 22 minutes ago.

Rolek Retirement Strategies Presents Retirement Planning Course at LaSalle University

$
0
0
Certified Financial Planner Kyle Rolek of Rolek Retirement Strategies will begin adult learning courses and workshops for pre-retirees and retirees ages 50-70 looking to create a personal retirement plan based on their financial situation and goals. The first of the two-day course offerings, which will be held at LaSalle University in Newtown, Pennsylvania in November, helps participants navigate the complexities of financial planning for retirement.

PHILADELPHIA, Penn (PRWEB) October 31, 2016

Kyle Rolek CFP® of Rolek Retirement Strategies will be instructing “Retirement Planning Today,” an adult learning program and workshop to be scheduled at a variety of colleges in the Philadelphia area. The first program will be held in November at LaSalle University’s Bucks County Center in Newtown, Pennsylvania.

Retirement planning in today’s economic environment poses challenges that most aging Americans don’t foresee. Through this formal adult learning program, Rolek—a certified financial planner—brings his expertise in retirement planning into the classroom to help re-retirees and newly retired individuals empower themselves to make informed decisions regarding their financial future.

Retirement Planning Today (RPT) teaches pre-retirees (age 50-70) how to plan a successful retirement that focuses on sound financial strategies that help them gain a clear understanding of recent tax changes, building a nest egg, protecting assets from potential long-term health expenses, managing investment risks and more.

The two-day RTP course addresses financial issues pertaining to the self-employed as well as employees of corporations and government agencies. Course attendees learn how to build wealth and assess their financial situation to develop a personalized plan to achieve their individual goals for retirement. Rolek, a certified financial planner and fiduciary, brings his expertise in retirement planning to the classroom to help pre-retirees make informed decisions regarding their future after leaving the workplace.

According to Rolek, the course has something for everyone, whether they’re recently retires, planning to retire next year or in 20 years.

“The information participants learn in this class can serve them throughout their lifetime,” Rolek says.

The RTP course preview includes:

Life Planning for Retirement· Traditional vs. new retirement
· New retirement opportunities
· Values and objectives in nine areas of life
· The retirement planning process 
· Retirement needs and expenses
· Early retirement trends
· How long must your money last?
· Inflation, prices and purchasing power
· Retirement expectations
· How much will you need to retire?
· Can you retire today? 
· Retirement roadblocks and mistakes
· Retirement planning mistakes
· Financial and cash-flow statements
· Credit and debt
· Taxes and marginal tax rates
· Strategies to save money on taxes
· Taxable investments
· Capital gains income tax exclusion
· Investments with tax advantages 
· Retirement Income Sources
· Traditional vs. Roth IRAs
· IRA to Roth IRA conversions
· Other retirement income sources
· Social Security eligibility and benefits
· Recent  changes in Social Security
· Defined benefits vs defined contributions

Retirement Plan Distributions· Lump sum vs. IRA transfer vs. annuities
· Rollovers, direct rollovers and transfers
· Annuity income and choices
· Early retirement considerations
· Minimum required distributions 
· Section 6 – Investments
· Considerations before you invest
· Cash, stocks, bonds
· Mutual funds, exchange traded funds
· Unit investment trusts
· Individually managed accounts
· Tax-deferred annuities
· Investment risk management strategies 

Risk management and asset protection· Disability income insurance
· Health insurance and Medicare
· Long-term care and insurance
· Comparing life insurance 

Estate Planning· Planning for incapacity
· Taxes
· A will may not be enough
· Probate
· Gifting assets
· Joint ownership of property 
· Direct transfer assets
· Types of trusts 

Unlike financial seminars or steak dinners that focus on a specific topic, the comprehensive RPT course helps attendees glean a “big picture” experience by examining many aspects of personal finance and how they can work together to create an integrated retirement plan. The course is educational and non-commercial—no specific financial products will be discussed or sold.

Course attendees with financial questions that are personal in nature or relate to specific financial products may arrange a personal consultation with Rolek after the course is complete at no additional charge.

The two-day course and workshop includes a 223-page illustrated textbook. Couples may attend together for a single registration fee. 

To learn more about the “Retirement Planning Today” course and workshop, including dates and registration information, visit the Rolek Retirement website, email kyle.rolek(at)rolekretirement(dot)com, or call 267.427.5667.

About Rolek Retirement Strategies:
Founded by Certified Financial Planner® Kyle Rolek, Rolek Retirement Strategies is a full service retirement advisory firm focused on enhancing retirement security through education. Rolek Retirement Strategies provides live retirement workshops hosted at universities throughout the U.S. Rolek Retirement Strategies provides award winning educational videos, calculators and articles to the public.

About Retirement Planning Today:
Since 2004, Retirement Planning Today® courses have been conducted at thousands of educational venues across the U.S. Courses are taught exclusively by authorized instructors licensed to offer investment advice (Series 65/66), regulated by state or federal Securities and Exchange Commission. Reported by PRWeb 23 hours ago.

Open Enrollment is Here – Get Financial Help to Pay for Health Insurance

$
0
0
For more information, visit http://www.covered-fresno.com or Contact Covered California Fresno at (559) 222-4140. Our Enrollment Center is located at 4005 N Blackstone Ave, Fresno Ca 93726.

Fresno, Ca (PRWEB) October 31, 2016

Covered California’s open enrollment begins Nov. 1, 2016 and runs through Jan. 31, 2017. This is the time for individuals and families to sign up for affordable health insurance. Covered California offers financial assistance that can help reduce health care costs. Having health insurance brings peace of mind, and by signing up by Dec 15 individuals and families can be covered for all of 2017.

Covered California is the only place where individuals and families can get financial assistance to help pay for their health insurance. Last Year, nine out of 10 enrollees qualified for some level of financial help and more than 120,000 enrollees paid less than $10. per month per individual. Covered California offers a range of plans so that consumers can choose the health plan and level of coverage that best meets their needs and budgets. To see how much financial assistance you may receive go to http://www.covered-fresno.com.

In addition, many Californians could qualify for Medi-Cal, allowing for no out-of-pocket costs or low-cost health coverage for low-income Californians. Medi-Cal is health coverage, just like the coverage from Covered California.

Health insurance can be complicated. Californians that need health coverage can get confidential assistance from one of the more than 28,000 individuals in California who are ready to help them enroll. Enrollees can begin by finding confidential in-person help from a Certified Insurance Agent at http://www.covered-fresno.com.

Covered California Enrollment Centers allow individuals a place to obtain assistance at no charge by phone or in person from a certified health insurance agent. In preparation for what is expected to be a very busy enrollment period, Mark Svetlik, agency director for the Covered California Fresno Enrollment Center has hired additional staff, and upgraded its computers and software to handle the expected surge in enrollment during this open enrollment period. The goal is to help make selecting and purchasing a policy or signing up for Medi-Cal as simple as possible. Reported by PRWeb 1 day ago.

Cooperation needed to keep health costs down

$
0
0
A new era is dawning in health care. Payers and providers must cooperate rather than fight over a limited pool of dollars and “Big Data” will finally begin to drive both cost containment and consumer choice. Those are a few of the ideas that attendees at Health Care 20/20 will be hearing from a diverse panel on Accelerating Innovation. Large employers in particular are increasingly looking beyond simply providing health insurance to their workers and trying to figure out how to keep them healthier… Reported by bizjournals 17 hours ago.

Obamacare's Biggest Problem is Profit, Not Government

$
0
0
It's true: the Affordable Care Act is having problems. But Republicans who say those problems are caused by "big government" have it exactly backward. Obamacare's current difficulties are grounded in our country's political fetishization of the private sector - a fad that began in the Republican Party, but has unfortunately spread to much of the Democratic establishment.

Government isn't the problem here. It's the solution.

When the ACA is attacked, most Democrats point to the good it has done. They should. Some of its work, particularly in extending coverage to children and economically vulnerable populations, is highly laudable

But the flaws are real. One person in five on the exchanges will have no choice of insurers next year. Premiums for "mid range" plans - which offer fairly paltry coverage - will increase by an average of 25 percent, according to the Administration. States like Arizona are faring even worse, with an average projected increase of 116 percent. Many people have found insurance on the exchanges to be unaffordable and are taking a tax penalty instead.

And while lower-income people will see their premium costs offset by subsidies, those subsidies represent a shifting of wealth from the general public to for-profit insurance corporation. That, too, is a legitimate policy concern.

What went wrong, and what can be done to fix it?

The policy heart of the ACA is the individual mandate to purchase health insurance, which was crafted at a right-wing think tank. A number of its other key provisions had GOP roots too, including the "marketplaces."

Sen. John Chafee's Republican alternative to Hillary Clinton's 1993 health proposal resembled the future ACA in a number of key ways. Republican Governor Mitt Romney eventually implemented a similar program in Massachusetts.

The ACA differed from these Republican plans in several key ways, including its expansion of Medicaid and the small additional tax it imposed on high earners. But it has Republican DNA. If President Obama hoped that would bring in some GOP support, he miscalculated. As the president himself said, "Republicans reversed course and rejected their own ideas once they appeared in the text of a bill I supported."

The ACA's deepest problems stem from assumptions built into its design - assumptions that its backers described at the time as "technical" and "wonkish," but which were in fact deeply ideological at their core. These assumptions were rooted in a misplaced faith in private-sector market forces - a faith not shared by some who, like me, had actually worked in private-sector health insurance.

The developed world is filled with healthcare success stories, but they are government success stories.

How did market myths distort the ACA? First, even the most conservative economist would agree that market forces can't function without competition. And yet in 2009, before the Affordable Care Act was signed into law, several studies found that 94 percent of all health insurance markets in the United States were "highly concentrated."

The ACA tried to address this lack of competition by establishing nonprofit coops to compete with private carriers. But 15 of the 23 coops established under the law have already failed (as I predicted they would in 2011).

The ACA also relied on free-market ideology to "bend the cost curve," assuming that insurers would compete to cut costs in order to gain market share. But health insurers have relied on less productive tactics like mergers and market dominance to boost their profits instead.

The ACA used ideologically biased theory to justify penalizing "generous" health plans with extra taxes if their coverage became too costly. It was misguided to assume that such plans would, or could, self-correct when subjected to financial penalties. Benefits in so-called "Cadillac" plans (a loaded term worthy of GOP pollster Frank Luntz) were less generous than those of most developed countries, and costs were largely beyond their control.

Studies debunked the "Cadillac tax" before the ACA's passage, but ideology demanded its inclusion anyway.

The ACA also suffered from the ideologically-driven notion that people who fail to purchase private-sector insurance coverage are guilty of a moral lapse. Sure, it's prudent to insure yourself for potential losses, including the needed for medical care. But many people live paycheck to paycheck, and health insurance is very expensive - even for high-deductible plans that offer little in the way of comprehensive coverage.

When people are struggling to make ends meet, it's not surprising that they often wind up crossing their fingers and hoping they don't get sick. Throw in the complexity of the enrollment process and the difficulty of predicting an enrollee's subsidies, and the result is a highly predictable shortfall in enrollment - especially among the younger, healthier people needed for actuarial balance.

What can be done?

Lately President Obama has been waxing enthusiastic about the "public option," a government-run alternative to the for-profit companies listed on the health exchanges. Jacob Hacker, the original author of the "public option" concept, recently wrote an editorial calling for its revival. As Hacker notes, 33 Democratic Senators now support the public option.

It's a good idea. If the health exchanges offered a publicly-run health plan along with their current options, it would increase competition and hold down costs. But many questions would remain: Would it only be available to health exchange participants? If so, most Americans would be excluded. Would for-profit insurers use it as a "dumping ground" for bad health risks, driving public costs up in order to bolster their profits? (Ironically, that would also provide ammunition for the false argument that the private sector is more efficient.)

The fact is, the American healthcare system is broken for everyone under the Medicare-eligible age of 65. Out-of-pocket costs for Americans with "good coverage," including premiums, copayments, and deductibles, has skyrocketed in recent years. The Milliman actuarial firm found that these costs rose by 5.2 percent last year, to an average of more than $11,000 for an average family of four with employer-based coverage.

Meanwhile, Medicare is outperforming the private sector. The Kaiser Family Foundation reports that Medicare costs rose by an average annual rate of 1.4 percent per year between 2010 and 2015, less than half the cost increase experienced by private insurers. While that difference varies over time, Medicare's efficiencies of scale will always ensure that it can achieve cost savings private insurers cannot. As an added side benefit, Medicare doesn't pay exorbitant salaries to its executives. (That's a good place to start "bending the cost curve.")

The ACA's reliance on "market forces" was a design flaw. In all likelihood, the private sector will never be able to provide universal, affordable health coverage. So how do we convert ourselves to a more efficient government-run system, like those in other developed countries?

It won't be easy. The tendrils of excessive profit-seeking reach into every corner of our health economy, and it will take a long-term project to fix that. In the meantime, Medicare's doors should be opened to as many Americans as possible. The public option should be available to anyone who wants it. Medicare should provide coverage to all of America's children, and to people between the ages of 55 and 65. We should also consider some of the other techniques that have succeeded in other countries, like an "all-payer" system of uniform rates for medical services.

The ACA's authors would argue that a more progressive health solution was politically impossible. But the public option has always been popular. Polls have often showed majority support for government-sponsored health insurance. And Americans know they have a healthcare problem. They frequently defer or delay needed medical treatment, and healthcare costs are a leading source of bankruptcy and financial anxiety.

Democrats' political prospects will suffer if they cling to Obamacare's less popular and less effective provisions. Conversely, they'll gain strenth with a commonsense program of government-based healthcare. They should not be afraid to propose bolder interim policies, or to declare that Medicare for All is their long-term goal.

That approach will be attacked as "ideological." But it's based on real-world experience, both in the US and around the world. That's more than can be said for the free-market myths that have influenced our nation's health care policy for far too long.

 

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 14 hours ago.

This exclusive report reveals the ABCs of the IoT

$
0
0
This exclusive report reveals the ABCs of the IoT The Internet of Things (IoT) Revolution is picking up speed and it will change how we live, work, and entertain ourselves in a million ways big and small.

From agriculture to defense, retail to healthcare, everything is going to be impacted by the growing ability of businesses, governments, and consumers to connect to and control their environments:

· “Smart mirrors” will allow consumers to try on clothes digitally, enhancing their shopping experience and reducing returns for the retailer
· Assembly line sensors will detect tiny drops in efficiency that indicate critical equipment is wearing out and schedule down-time maintenance in response
· Agricultural equipment guided by GPS and IoT technology will soon plant, fertilize and harvest vast croplands like a giant Roomba while the “driver” reads a magazine
· Active people will share lifestyle data from their fitness trackers in order to help their doctor make better health care decisions (and capture discounts on health insurance premiums)

No wonder the Internet of Things has been called “the next Industrial Revolution.” It’s so big that it could mean new revenue streams for your company and new opportunities for you. The only question is: Are you fully up to speed on the IoT?

After months of researching and reporting this exploding trend, John Greenough and Jonathan Camhi of Business Insider Intelligence have put together an essential briefing that explains the exciting present and the fascinating future of the Internet of Things. It covers how IoT is being implemented today, where the new sources of opportunity will be tomorrow and how 17 separate sectors of the economy will be transformed over the next 20 years, including:

· Agriculture
· Connected Home
· Defense
· Financial services
· Food services
· Healthcare
· Hospitality
· Infrastructure
· Insurance

· Logistics
· Manufacturing
· Oil, gas, and mining
· Retail
· Smart buildings
· Transportation
· Connected Car
· Utilities

 

If you work in any of these sectors, it's important for you to understand how the IoT will change your business and possibly even your career. And if you’re employed in any of the industries that will build out the IoT infrastructure—networking, semiconductors, telecommunications, data storage, cybersecurity—this report is a must-have.

Among the big picture insights you’ll get from *The Internet of Things: Examining How the IoT Will Affect The World*:

· IoT devices connected to the Internet will more than triple by 2020, from 10 billion to 34 billion. IoT devices will account for 24 billion, while traditional computing devices (e.g. smartphones, tablets, smartwatches, etc.) will comprise 10 billion.
· Nearly $6 trillion will be spent on IoT solutions over the next five years.
· Businesses will be the top adopter of IoT solutions because they will use IoT to 1) lower operating costs; 2) increase productivity; and 3) expand to new markets or develop new product offerings.
· Governments will be the second-largest adopters, while consumers will be the group least transformed by the IoT.

And when you dig deep into the report, you’ll get the whole story in a clear, no-nonsense presentation:

· The complex infrastructure of the Internet of Things distilled into a single ecosystem
· The most comprehensive breakdown of the benefits and drawbacks of mesh (e.g. ZigBee, Z- Wave, etc.), cellular (e.g. 3G/4G, Sigfox, etc.), and internet (e.g. Wi-Fi, Ethernet, etc.) networks
· The important role analytics systems, including edge analytics, cloud analytics, will play in making the most of IoT investments
· The sizable security challenges presented by the IoT and how they can be overcome
· The four powerful forces driving IoT innovation, plus the four difficult market barriers to IoT adoption
· Complete analysis of the likely future investment in the critical IoT infrastructure: connectivity, security, data storage, system integration, device hardware, and application development
· In-depth analysis of how the IoT ecosystem will change and disrupt 17 different industries

*The Internet of Things: Examining How the IoT Will Affect The World* is how you get the full story on the Internet of Things.

To get your copy of this invaluable guide to the IoT, choose one of these options:

1. Subscribe to an ALL-ACCESS Membership with BI Intelligence and gain immediate access to this report AND over 100 other expertly researched deep-dive reports, subscriptions to all of our daily newsletters, and much more. >> *START A MEMBERSHIP*
2. Purchase the report and download it immediately from our research store. >> *BUY THE REPORT*

The choice is yours. But however you decide to acquire this report, you’ve given yourself a powerful advantage in your understanding of the IoT.

Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 15 hours ago.

Liz Weston: When Social Security turns you into a zombie

$
0
0
People who accidentally wind up on the agency's Death Master File have seen their bank accounts frozen, credit cards closed, health insurance cut off and benefit payments canceled or even pulled back from checking accounts. More than 36,000 living people were erroneously listed as dead between 2007 and 2010, according to a 2011 audit by Social Security's Office of the Inspector General. [...] the federal agency says, the number of people declared dead prematurely has dropped by about half, to below 7,400 instances per year. Social Security spokeswoman Nicole Tiggemann attributes the decline to a rise in the number of states that use electronic death registration systems, which can upload data directly to the federal agency. "Universal implementation of (electronic death registration) has the potential to virtually eliminate death reporting errors and would ensure our death records, whether pertaining to current beneficiaries or other persons, include the most accurate and most current information," Tiggemann says. Banks, credit card issuers and insurers scour the records in efforts to prevent fraud and identity theft. Agencies that pay benefits — including the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Defense, the Railroad Retirement Board and the Office of Personnel Management — match the file against their own records to ensure that they don't make payments after a person's death. If you've been informed that your name is in the Death Master File, or you suspect that it is, the Social Security Administration recommends you visit a local office as soon as possible with at least one piece of identification, such as a driver's license, passport, employee or school identification card or health insurance card. If a financial institution won't recognize that you're alive, you can turn to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which forwards people's complaints directly to banks, credit card issuer Reported by SeattlePI.com 15 hours ago.

Is High-Deductible Health Insurance Worth the Risk?

$
0
0
More people are choosing to pay less in monthly premiums, leaving them responsible for high medical costs later. Reported by NYTimes.com 10 hours ago.

This Congress Should Take the Opportunity to Make Progress for Pregnant Workers

$
0
0
When Congress reconvenes next month, members will have a chance to show America's women and families that progress is possible. Rather than continuing a dismal record of inaction when it comes to supporting women, lawmakers should use this lame duck session to move the country forward. The common sense, bipartisan Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is a proposal that would do just that, and passing it before the end of the year should be a top priority.

A new analysis of charges filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), conducted by the National Partnership for Women & Families and released on the 38th anniversary of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), demonstrates why doing so is critical. Despite the PDA banning pregnancy discrimination nearly four decades ago, we found that women filed nearly 31,000 charges of pregnancy discrimination between October 2010 and September 2015 - the most recent data available. Clearly, more needs to be done to protect pregnant workers and to fully realize the promise of the PDA.

The fact that thousands of women continue to report pregnancy discrimination every year is troubling enough, but a closer look at the charges and recent demographic data on women's labor force participation is even more concerning. Nearly one-third of the charges were filed by women who said they were discharged from employment for becoming pregnant. This was the most common reason a charge of pregnancy discrimination was filed, and it means that women likely lost income, health insurance and other workplace supports at a time when their family budgets may have already been strained.

The data also show that pregnancy discrimination charges are widespread - spanning industries, states and races and ethnicities:
· Women in every industry reported on by the EEOC filed charges of pregnancy discrimination, including those that employ the most workers overall and the highest shares of women, such as health care and social assistance and educational services;
· Women in all 50 states and the District of Columbia filed charges of pregnancy discrimination, and the 10 jurisdictions with the highest share of charges relative to the number of women in the workforce span every region of the country; and
· Although women across races and ethnicities report pregnancy discrimination, more than 28 percent of the charges were filed by black women, even though they comprise only 14 percent of women in the workforce ages 16 to 54.
Also worth noting is that between October 2014 to September 2015 alone, more than 650 charges were filed by women who believed they were denied reasonable workplace accommodations they needed to continue working, such as taking more frequent bathroom breaks or carrying a water bottle. This form of pregnancy discrimination can be subtle, but it can have serious consequences. It can mean that pregnant women have to risk their health and the health of their pregnancies to continue working - and that's exactly what the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act seeks to eradicate.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act would strengthen workplace protections for pregnant workers by making clear that employers must provide the same protections for women with pregnancy-related limitations as they do for workers with similar limitations, including minor job modifications that would allow a pregnant woman to continue working. The bill currently has bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress, and polling shows that more than 90 percent of voters favor a policy like it. Eighteen states, the District of Columbia and four cities have already enacted similar measures.

It is shameful that women are still being fired, forced out of their jobs, and denied employment opportunities because they become pregnant. These new findings confirm what too many women know to be true, and they are especially striking given that discrimination too often goes unidentified and unreported. Congress should recognize the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act as a chance to make a difference for America's women and families and waste no time in passing it this year. The sooner we take steps to stop discrimination against pregnant workers, the better off families, businesses and our country will be.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 10 hours ago.

N.C. gets $1M ACA consumer protection grant

$
0
0
Open enrollment starts Tuesday, and North Carolina has secured a hefty Affordable Care Act consumer protection grant. The grant, valued at more than $1.1 million, was awarded by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), and will be used for health insurance enforcement and consumer protections. It is for a period of 24 months. In its announcement Monday, CMS said, “State Departments of Insurance are vital to the oversight of health insurance issuers and are responsible for ensuring… Reported by bizjournals 9 hours ago.

Obamacare exchanges to open amid fears about rates' effect on enrollment

$
0
0
Most lower income people who get good subsidies can get affordable health insurance.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Reported by USATODAY.com 9 hours ago.

Over Half A Trillion In M&A: October Mergers Smash All Records With $500.1 Billion In Deals

$
0
0
Last week David Rosenberg pointed out that mega Merger Manias like the one we are experiencing "invariably takes place at or near cycle peaks, as companies realize that they can no longer grow their earnings organically. We have just witnessed five multi-billion dollar deals this past week alone — $207 billion globally (AT&T/Time Warner; TD Ameritrade/Scottrade) in what has been the most active announcement list since 1999 … what do you know, near the tail end of that tech bull market too."

And now that October is officially over, we can close the books on what has been an unprecedented month for M&A. According to Bloomberg, in the month when a chill was sent through the spines of corporate CFOs and their investment bankers over fears that rates are about to rise and thus make debt-funded deals more expensive, the scramble to acquire competitors went off the charts, leading to an all time high in global M&A with almost half a trillion dollars of mergers and acquisitions announced globally.

CenturyLink Inc.’s $34 billion acquisition of Level 3 Communications Inc., as well as General Electric Co.’s deal to combine its oil and gas division with Baker Hughes Inc., pushed October’s deal volumes to about $489 billion, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That’s the highest amount for at least 12 years, topping the previous record of $471 billion in April 2007, the data show.

Deallogic had a slightly different higher October deal total, calculating that the value for mergers and acquisitions for October actually surpassed the half a trillion mark, hitting $500.1B, but the idea is the same and adds that global deal volume has only been higher during five other months in records going back to 1995. More than half of the deals have been based in the US, where M&A volume has already hit a monthly record of $321.2 billion. That's about a third higher than the next biggest month on record, according to Dealogic.

Cited by Bloomberg TV, Bob Profusek, partner and chair of the global M&A practice at law firm Jones Day said that “every weekend recently has been busy.”

According to the Jones Day lawyer “the fundamental drivers are still there,” Profusek said. “Low growth -- which is bad for most things, but it’s good for M&A because that’s how you get growth -- and very accommodating capital markets.” More important, however, are concerns that the period of low interest rates is coming to an end, prompting corporations to scramble and issue debt now while it is still cheap.

Profusek worked for Potash Corp. on its merger with Agrium Inc., and is advising Reynolds American Inc. on British American Tobacco Plc’s $47 billion bid for the rest of the company.

The mega deals dominated October, with just eight transactions accounting for more than $300 billion of the October total. The biggest deal of the year, AT&T Inc.’s $85.4 billion bid for Time Warner Inc., was revealed on Oct. 22 in a rare Saturday deal announcement. So far this year, 32 deals valued at more than $10 billion have been struck. *That puts 2016 on track to beat every year since 2007 except for last year, when a bumper 52 transactions of that size or more were announced*.

“Size matters,” said Profusek, “particularly because we’re in a very challenging regulatory environment right now.”

The massive size of M&A also means that the market is skeptical many of them will close, or will ultimately find financing should rates spike higher prior to closing. Almost 30 deals announced since the start of 2015 have not yet closed, including Dow Chemical Co.’s $59 billion merger with DuPont Co., which was pushed back until next year. The two health insurance megadeals - Anthem Inc.’s bid for Cigna Corp. and Aetna Inc.’s offer for Humana Inc. - are also still pending. Both those deals are currently trading with at least $40 gaps between the offer price and the target’s current share price, indicating investors are pessimistic they will close.

As Bloomberh observes, "despite currency and equity markets reacting skittishly to poll results and news sentiment in the final days before the U.S. presidential election, M&A activity is forging ahead."

“I don’t hear boards or management really putting the election high on their list of concerns,” Frank Aquila, partner at law firm Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, said in a telephone interview. “Unless there is some sort of regulatory deadline or tax deadline that people are working to, deals get there when they get there.”

And yet, according to companies, the biggest reason why consumer spending is weak and deteriorating is precisely due to the election. Almost as if someone is lying... Reported by Zero Hedge 5 hours ago.

What You Need To Know About Obamacare This Sign-Up Period

$
0
0
WASHINGTON ― The health care reform law known as Obamacare faces another crucial stretch starting Tuesday, when the three-month sign-up period for next year’s insurance coverage begins.

The fourth such enrollment period since the exchange marketplaces went online starts amid headlines about escalating sticker prices under the Affordable Care Act and during an election year that has shoved the unpopular, widely misunderstood reform law back into the spotlight.

More than six years have passed since President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law, leading to 20 million previously uninsured people gaining coverage and the uninsured rate falling to an all-time low, as well as the end of insurance industry practices like rejecting individuals with pre-existing conditions.

But the law has also made coverage more expensive for certain people whom the exchanges are meant to serve, and insurance companies that lost money on Obamacare have pulled back, reducing choice for consumers in many states.

Politicians are still debating the way forward. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton aims to strengthen Obamacare by providing more financial assistance and creating a government-run public option plan. Her GOP opponent, Donald Trump, and congressional Republican leaders want to scrap the ACA entirely and implement much more modest reforms that, among other results, would eliminate health coverage for millions of people.

While that endless argument continues, the future of the exchange marketplaces themselves could be determined during the open enrollment period that runs from Nov. 1 through Jan. 31. The deadline for obtaining coverage that will be in place on Jan. 1, 2017, is Dec. 15.

This is the final sign-up campaign for the Obama administration before it turns the reins over to the next president. Federal and state officials will scramble to enroll as many people as possible, in hopes of growing the exchanges and, especially, bringing in more younger and healthier customers to offset the costs of older and sicker people. If they succeed, these new markets could be shored up for the coming years, making them an appealing place for insurers to do business and for consumers to find coverage.

Beyond the politics, exchange customers are facing some very real practical concerns. So this open enrollment period provides an opportunity to go over the basics of what the Affordable Care Act does for them.

Health insurance exchanges serve two main purposes.

The original idea behind these marketplaces was to make it easier for consumers to compare the costs and benefits of private insurance policies. Exchange websites like HealthCare.gov and Covered California may not be as simple to use as Amazon ― and health insurance is inevitably more complicated to buy than airline tickets ― but comparison shopping was more difficult before.

The other, and more crucial, role of the exchanges is to connect individuals and families with the financial assistance that can reduce their health insurance costs and even out-of-pocket expenses, or to direct people toward government programs like Medicaid for which they qualify.

The exchanges aren’t for most people.

About half of Americans obtain health insurance from employers, and most of the remainder are covered by government programs like Medicare and Medicaid. The health insurance exchanges, and the overall market for individual and family policies, are for people who don’t get health benefits at work or through one of those public programs.

That’s not very many individuals. The Congressional Budget Office projects that 21 million people next year will be covered by policies obtained through an exchange or “off-exchange” (that is, purchased directly from an insurer or through a broker). This amounts to less than 7 percent of U.S. residents.

Premiums are going up ― in some cases, by a lot.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the average premium increase under the exchanges’ “benchmark” plans is 25 percent in the 39 states where the federal government runs the exchanges via HealthCare.gov. (Benchmark plans are the midlevel policies used to set the size of Obamacare subsidies for eligible households.) That’s high, and significantly higher than the rate hikes of the previous two years.

Insurance companies are raising prices because many of them lost money during the first three years of the exchanges. The customer base turned out to be sicker and costlier than expected ― and smaller, too ― which has led to the big rate hikes many people will see. Temporary provisions of the Affordable Care Act designed to financially protect insurers that enrolled a disproportionate share of sick people are also expiring this year.

That doesn’t mean all insurance on the exchanges is going up 25 percent, or even that all plans will go up. The benchmark plans are important because of their connection to the subsidy amounts and because plans like those, in the midlevel “silver” category, are the most popular.

But that average increase is higher in some states than others, and prices will vary between “bronze,” “silver,” “gold” and “platinum” plans. And some states that run their own exchanges, like California and Washington state, are seeing average premium increases that are lower than in many of the states with federal exchanges.

Not everyone will pay those higher prices.

The Affordable Care Act created tax credits for low- and moderate-income individuals and families. They’re available on a sliding scale to people who earn between the federal poverty level and four times that amount ― or about $12,000 to $47,000 for a single person, and about $24,000 to $97,000 for a family of four.

Federal officials expect that 13.8 million people will choose plans during this open enrollment period ― most of them current customers renewing coverage ― and that the average monthly enrollment next year will be 11.4 million people. Of those, about 85 percent will qualify for tax credits, which can completely shield many customers from rate increases.

That’s because the subsidies are tied to household income in a way that effectively caps the percentage of a family’s earnings that can go toward health insurance, with the federal government picking up the rest. The cap ranges from 2 percent to 9.5 percent of income.

The tax credits get less and less generous the higher a household’s income is. But since about 80 percent of exchange customers earn less than 250 percent of the poverty level, they qualify for big tax credits and additional subsidies that reduce out-of-pocket costs like deductibles and copayments.

Some people will see big premium hikes.

Those exchange customers with incomes higher than 250 percent but lower than 400 percent of the poverty level usually qualify for smaller subsidies. Plus, there are about 2 million exchange customers who receive no subsidies and as many as 9 million who buy unsubsidized policies off-exchange. This is the segment of the market facing the worst potential hardship.

These people will have little to no protection against rate hikes, especially if they live in a geographic area with limited ― or zero ― competition between insurance companies. The number of people in this situation who can’t afford the higher prices and drop out to become uninsured will be key to the future of this part of the health insurance system ― and the politics of health reform.

The Obamacare mandate penalty is likely higher than you think.

Arguably the least popular thing about the Affordable Care Act is its individual mandate that nearly every U.S. resident must have health insurance. While there are a slew of exemptions, most people who have access to insurance but don’t buy it next year will owe the Internal Revenue Service when they file their 2017 tax returns.

The minimum penalty is around $700, but it’s likely to be higher than that for the majority of households. That’s because the penalty is also calculated as a percentage of income, and taxpayers owe the higher of that number or $700. So a person earning $100,000 would pay 2.5 percent of about $90,000 (approximately $10,000 isn’t counted). That’s $2,250.

Shopping around can save money, and there’s help out there.

Exchange officials are urging all consumers to do their research, because the best deal for 2016 isn’t necessarily the best deal for 2017.

People whose insurance companies have pulled out of their home markets, of course, will be forced to switch insurers. But the Department of Health and Human Services estimates that subsidized exchange enrollees could actually spend 20 percent less next year than this year by choosing the cheapest policy available with the same level of coverage they currently have.

Shopping around has limits, however. Overall, there are 167 insurers on the exchanges for next year, which is 68 fewer than this year. In five states, a single insurer is the only option available to exchange customers.

Switching one’s insurance company from year to year is a hassle. It can also mean losing access to certain doctors, hospitals and other medical providers, which can be especially difficult for people with chronic health conditions or in the midst of a course of treatment.

There are federal and state programs that employ enrollment counselors who can help consumers navigate all these complicated choices. Insurance agents and brokers can also assist.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.

What's worse? Visiting the dentist or picking a health insurance plan?

$
0
0
About one-fourth of consumers would rather file their taxes than go through the ordeal of selecting a health insurance plan, according to a recent UnitedHealthcare survey.

About 28 percent would rather get a teeth cleaning.

But this month, many Americans will have no choice but to begin the often-reviled... Reported by ChicagoTribune 19 hours ago.

Public Health: Need to Pick an Insurance Plan? Start Here

$
0
0
Insurance is a hard product to buy. Here’s The Upshot’s simplified guide to finding the plan that’s right for you. Reported by NYTimes.com 12 hours ago.

N.C. gets $1M ACA consumer protection grant

$
0
0
Open enrollment starts Tuesday, and North Carolina has secured a hefty Affordable Care Act consumer protection grant. The grant, valued at more than $1.1 million, was awarded by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), and will be used for health insurance enforcement and consumer protections. It is for a period of 24 months. In its announcement Monday, CMS said, “State Departments of Insurance are vital to the oversight of health insurance issuers and are responsible for ensuring… Reported by bizjournals 19 hours ago.

It's do or die for Obamacare ($AET, $UNH)

$
0
0
It's do or die for Obamacare ($AET, $UNH) The Affordable Care Act is facing a huge test.

Tuesday marks the start of open enrollment for the 2017 plan year of the ACA's public exchanges. That's the part of the law, better known as Obamacare, that is designed to give people access to health insurance if they can't access it through their employer or the government.

After news of rising premiums, the withdrawal of several insurance companies, and the US campaign season, we'll finally get a chance to see how healthy the public exchanges — the most talked-about part of the law — really are.

After all the negative headlines, it appears that this open-enrollment period is especially important for the future of one of President Barack Obama's signature achievements.

*How we got here*

The ACA doesn't exclusively pertain to the exchanges. There are other elements of the law that affect all Americans, such as a child's ability to stay on his or her parent's insurance until they're 26 years old and the removal of lifetime limits on insurance payouts.

For better or for worse, the sustainability of the exchanges is probably the most often used benchmark for people judging its success or failure, despite the fact that only roughly 5% of Americans get their insurance through the exchanges.

The problems with the Obamacare exchanges are now well documented. Fewer healthy people have signed up for the plans, and that has caused the pool of people in the exchanges to be older, sicker, and more expensive to cover. That's led to losses for many insurers.

Some of the biggest and most high profile of these insurers — such as Aetna and UnitedHealthcare and startup Oscar — have pulled back their offerings in these markets. And the exchanges have become political fodder for everyone from Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan to presidential nominee Donald Trump. Even former President Bill Clinton has talked about flaws in the marketplace, though he later clarified he supports the ACA.

The law's supporters say these are growing pains.

"This is one of the most complex social programs in the country's history," Kevin Counihan, the CEO of the Marketplace at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said in an interview with Business Insider. Counihan oversees the exchanges. "We only have three years of operation. Big programs like Social Security and Medicare also had problems in their first three years."

Counihan said that many insurance companies are not used to these types of markets, which are more like "Medicaid-plus" than the employer-based market so a "learning curve" isn't surprising.

*Make or break year*

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which is responsible for administering the law, projects that 13.8 million Americans will sign up or continue to get coverage through the exchanges in 2017, up from 12.7 million last year.

The 2017 enrollment also features massive jump in the average premium cost from last year — the HHS projects it to be 25% for the baseline silver-level plan for the country. These jumps are even more severe in certain states, with Arizona leading the way with a 116% increase over the average premium in 2016.

According to Cynthia Cox, associate director for the Program for the Study of Health Reform and Private Insurance at the nonpartisan research group Kaiser Family Foundation, these price increases and market shifts have been coming for some time.

"The premium increases were something we were expecting," Cox told Business Insider. "They're a bit higher than we thought they would be, but insurers have been signaling for months that this year they needed to dramatically increase premiums to make up for losses on the exchanges."

Counihan said that these increases came about in part because many insurers did not have experience with the type of coverage needed for Obamacare, so they underpriced their plans to attract patients without properly rating the costs.

Additionally, the jump now brings premiums roughly in line with the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's original 2010 projection for premiums on the exchanges for 2017.

This year is also more important because this is the first time the exchanges will be without their "training wheels." Insurers previously had three different ways provided by the government to mitigate losses from the exchanges: reinsurance, risk corridors, and risk adjustment. Now that is being shaved down to only the risk-adjustment program.

Additionally, 2017 will be the first year that the full penalty for not having insurance will go into effect, but the fee will not show up on tax bills until after the open-enrollment period.

Counihan downplayed the idea that this is a pivotal year for the exchanges, saying that it is a "retooling year." Additionally, Counihan said the HHS and CMS has plans to make sure it meets its targets and grows the exchanges, including outreach targeted at young people who would help stabilize the risk pools.

"We have a lot of data and good outreach plans for this year to get all kinds of people to sign up," said Counihan. "I mean, we know what we're doing — we're not just throwing darts and hoping it hits."

The real figure of success, Cox said, will be if the exchanges can sustain the number they have now.

"If we start to see sign-ups decrease, that would raise a lot of questions about the long-term sustainability of the exchanges," Cox said. "If people are deciding to leave the exchanges, that could lead to more insurer exits and be a real problem."

That may be a low bar to clear, but given the negativity surrounding the exchanges for much of the past six months, perhaps no bad news is good news.

*The future is uncertain*

The real proof of the success or failure of the law likely won't come from the sign-up numbers alone, according to Cox. Instead, the real tell will be the proposals for 2018 premiums that the health-insurance companies have to submit to individual state regulators in the spring of 2017.

"That's really when we'll know whether this was just a one-year change or something larger and longer-lasting," Cox added. "If premiums rise significantly again and you start to see more providers leaving the exchanges, that will raise a lot of long-term questions."

As Aetna CEO Mark Bertolini put it in an interview with Bloomberg, this could lead to a constant chase of healthy people opting out of the exchanges because of high costs, which in turn leads to higher premiums to cover the ever-sicker pool in the exchanges.

"So what happens is the population gets sicker and sicker and sicker and sicker, the rates get higher to try and catch it — it's a fruitless chase, and ultimately you end up with a very bad pool of risk," said Bertolini.

So with a very bad pool of risk, more insurers dump their exchange business until it becomes unsustainable.

Given these issues, most people agree that the law could use some tweaks. Even Obama said that the law was like a new phone that rolls out with "a few bugs" and needs to be updated to stabilize it.

There have been several proposals, mostly split on ideological lines. Mostly conservative detractors of the law have suggested repealing the ACA altogether, while on the other end of the spectrum observers have used the shortcomings to call for a nationalized health system. In the middle, there proposals include adjusting a rule that only allows insurers to charge older people three times what they charge young people, strengthening the tax on people without insurance, and more variety instead of sticking with the four-tiered system in place now.

According to Cox, pretty much any of these adjustments would help fix the issues the Obamacare exchanges are facing.

"Any or all of these changes could have the effect of stabilizing the marketplace," Cold told us. "Also, they don't have to be done in isolation — any number of them could be used in combination to address the challenges facing the market."

The problem is that all these changes can be enacted only if Congress passes a law amending the ACA.

"The HHS and CMS are really limited in what they can do now to address these issues," said Cox.

In the end, however, most of the changes come down to a political vote and given the current make-up of Washington, it is unlikely anything comes to fruition. Counihan even called it a "less than helpful political environment."

Cox agreed that much of the law's long-term survival has little to do with its impact on healthcare, but rather the political appetite for the law.

Regardless of possible changes, Counihan said that the law has earned a permanent place in the health care system of America (though he is admittedly biased).

Cox, on the other hand, said that the ACA and its exchanges have certainly made an impact, but whether or not they survive remains to be seen.

"It depends on politics and market stability," said Cox. "It's equally, if not more, important how Americans perceive the law, and right now they're pretty split."

Based on Kaiser's polling, 45% of Americans have a favorable view of the ACA and 45% have an unfavorable view.

Open enrollment closes January 31.

*SEE ALSO: Donald Trump is going scorched earth on Obamacare in a last-ditch campaign effort*

*SEE ALSO: Here's how much Obamacare premiums are going up in every state*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: FEMA is tracking Hurricane Matthew using the 'Waffle House Index' Reported by Business Insider 19 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images