tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8512362.post442940566203482249..comments2024-03-10T13:59:19.230-04:00Comments on xpostfactoid: What about a state-level public option (with a remixed subsidy schedule?)Andrew Sprunghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17601269968798865106noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8512362.post-80426561161641907492016-01-04T10:07:34.995-05:002016-01-04T10:07:34.995-05:00I'm not sure where you got the $5200/yr figure...I'm not sure where you got the $5200/yr figure, but if you're in your 60s that's not a bad rate if you earn too much to qualify for subsidies. What if MinnesotaCare allowed you to buy in at cost? It's a high-AV plan.Andrew Sprunghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601269968798865106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8512362.post-14613744852973526952016-01-02T09:51:56.564-05:002016-01-02T09:51:56.564-05:00Given that I am one of America's few buy-in wo...Given that I am one of America's few buy-in wonks, can you expand on how Minnesota could expand its Minnesota Care program to the entire indivdual market?<br />Say the cost remains $5200 a year per adult person.<br />If my ACA subsidy would have been $2400 a year, do I just pay the difference of $2800 a year myself?<br />I do see a big problem in that I am not sure it is feasible to have a community rated plan like Minnsota Care compete with age rated plans.<br /><br />Comments welcome!<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />5bob.hertzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09686373408419885558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8512362.post-50885064797279757532015-12-31T09:16:03.465-05:002015-12-31T09:16:03.465-05:00Thanks, Bob. Yesterday MN DHS tells me that this y...Thanks, Bob. Yesterday MN DHS tells me that this year, the fed contribution, boosted when MinnesotaCare became a BHP, accounted for 70% of costs. If the state opts to extend the program up to 275% FPL via a 1332 waiver, the overall percentage paid by the federal government may increase. It should also increase because of the spike in private plan prices, which means higher subsidies, increasing the estimate of costs the feds pay 95% of (or possibly 100% if MN gets a 1332 waiver proposal accepted).Andrew Sprunghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601269968798865106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8512362.post-49135234168254542112015-12-31T05:41:55.759-05:002015-12-31T05:41:55.759-05:00good question, here you go
In fiscal year 2014, t...good question, here you go<br /><br />In fiscal year 2014, the MinnesotaCare program paid $520 million for medical services provided to enrollees. Forty-seven percent of this cost was paid for by the state, 47 percent by the federal government, and 6 percent by enrollees through premium payments (this last category also includes enrollee cost-sharing).<br />Through 2014, the state received federal funding at the MA match rate for health care services provided to enrollees under a federal waiver. Since January 1, 2015, the state has received from the federal government a payment for each enrollee equal to 95 percent of the subsidy that the individual would have otherwise received through MNsure.<br />State funding for MinnesotaCare and other health care access initiatives is provided by a tax of 2 percent on the gross revenues of health care providers and a tax of 1 percent on the premiums of nonprofit health plan companies. The tax on health care provider revenues is scheduled to sunset January 1, 2020. Prior to that date, the Commissioner of Management and Budget is required to reduce the rate of the tax on health care provider revenues if cbob.hertzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09686373408419885558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8512362.post-73680502086290914902015-12-30T13:25:07.198-05:002015-12-30T13:25:07.198-05:00Bob, when MinnesotaCare became a BHP, it must have...Bob, when MinnesotaCare became a BHP, it must have become funded by the feds to the level that QHP premiums would have cost for Minnesotans up to 200% FPL. Do you know for sure that the state still partly funds?<br />Andrew Sprunghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601269968798865106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8512362.post-84764106769639368642015-12-30T11:49:11.488-05:002015-12-30T11:49:11.488-05:00Bob, when MinnesotaCare became a BHP, it must have...Bob, when MinnesotaCare became a BHP, it must have become funded by the feds to the level that QHP premiums would have cost for Minnesotans up to 200% FPL. Do you know for sure that the state still partly funds?<br />Andrew Sprunghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17601269968798865106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8512362.post-82618393791108633642015-12-29T20:08:33.229-05:002015-12-29T20:08:33.229-05:00Another excellent article!!! The people who run th...Another excellent article!!! The people who run this blog do not pay you enough.<br /><br />But seriously folks, I love the concept of buy-ins. I favored (with Jeff Goldsmith of Health Affairs) the idea of a Medicare buy-in as the national pubic option. I was even interested in Kerry's proposal to let small businesses buy into the Federal Employee insurance plan.<br /><br />Minnesota Care (which you reference) is a great program. My son and two of my friends are on it. Here are some interesting figures.<br /><br />Minnesota Care covers 105,000 people and costs $565 million, so about $435 a month in average costs.<br /><br />Its funding comes about $265 from a federal program of some kind, $265 from a 2% state tax on medical providers, and only about $35 million in premiums.<br /><br />The premiums are based solely on income, not age. There are no premiums to cover children. Deductibles and copays are under $10 (I kid you not.)<br /><br />If this were introduced broadly, it would probably kill the private individual insurance carriers. A person aged 60 could pay $435 a month for a crappy bronze plan with a $6850 deductible, or pay $435 a month for no deductible. And maybe less than $435 if they had tax credits to apply.<br /><br />Given how many carriers are losing money on ACA plans, or at best breaking even, they might not mind being priced out of the ACA.<br /><br />However, as my earlier comments suggested, the funding of a plan like Minnesota Care must be firmed up before the plan goes on Broadway. The 2% provider tax is a quirk that barely survives legislative challenges every two years.bob.hertzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09686373408419885558noreply@blogger.com