whose family income disqualifies them for subsidies and who bought insurance on the individual market for 2014. All had family members with preexisting conditions, which means they benefited from the ACA's prohibition on basing price or eligibility on medical history. All had been paying above-market rates or faced limited choices because of a family member's medical history.As the article points out, this is a very large subset of the U.S. population - somewhere between 19 to 50 percent of individuals, according to an HHS report overviewing various studies -- and a larger proportion of households. Conversely, a large number of subsidy-ineligible buyers who were in the individual market for insurance in 2013 and do not have preexisting conditions have seen their premiums rise, as the article acknowledges at various points. I have recounted the experiences of two of them here.
I have been trying my hand at reporting -- getting information from people and writing it down in context -- since early February. The resulting posts to date are listed below.
What if the (Republican) dog catches the Obamacar(e)?
Children, CHIP, Medicaid and the ACA
Switching from COBRA to the ACA exchanges
Healthcare.gov comes through in a complicated situation
HealthSherpa claims to shorten ACA signup process
COBRA or the ACA?