Showing posts with label Marco Rubio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marco Rubio. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

Health Insurers' risk corridor suits could seek a lot more than $12.3 billion


Stephanie Armour reports in the Wall Street Journal that a decision should come down soon from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in two of the risk corridor lawsuits against the federal government filed by health insurers seeking reimbursement for losses in the ACA marketplace. Those suits seek a total of about $12.3 billion in risk corridor payments the government failed to make in 2014, 2015 and 2016.  In fact, the bill could be considerably higher if insurers prevail. That's what I'd like to spotlight, below.

The risk corridors, to review briefly, were one of three risk management programs the ACA established to cushion health insurers' plunge into an unprecedented market structure. Insurers with losses above a fixed threshold would get a large chunk of them reimbursed by the federal government, while those with profits above a mirror-image threshold would pay a chunk of those gains in. The ACA statute states that insurer losses will be paid according to this formula, and HHS guidance through 2013 affirmed this. In early 2014, though, with the program under attack from Marco Rubio and other Republicans, HHS and CMS indicated that reimbursements would be revenue neutral, and reduced if the contributions from profitable insurers did not cover unprofitable insurers' losses. Republicans then, in omnibus funding bills for FY 2015 and 2016, banned the agency from using its funding streams to pay any shortfall beyond insurers' contributions. In October 2015, CMS announced that it would pay just 12.6% of $2.87 billion in insurers' compensable 2014 losses. A cascade of failures among the nonprofit insurance co-ops established (and underfunded) by the ACA followed. How many of those co-ops would have survived had the risk corridor promises been kept is debatable.  By 2016, the last year of the program, unpaid risk corridor losses totaled $12.3 billion.

The insurers have a clear case on the merits, regardless of what the courts decide about the paradox of funds promised by statute by unappropriated by Congress (one of several such paradoxes generated by serial Republican sabotage of the ACA, all of them eroding the full faith and credit of the U.S. government). One aspect of the complaint highlighting the extent of the moral debt, and possibly the financial one, caught my eye in the class action complaint joined by some 150 insurers, Health Republic Insurance Company v. The United States of America.

Monday, March 21, 2016

Electoral epigrams, 2015-2016 (GOP edition)

One per candidate:

Walker faced down a recall crisis
which voters declined to equate with ISIS.

Bush was judged dull, to his mishap:
He needed a bigger dose of clap.

Sunday, February 28, 2016

How the GOP can stop Trump

It's obvious by now that barring a sudden radical winnowing of the Republican field, the nomination is Trump's. Therefore....

Cruz, Rubio and Kasich should meet a hold a lightning round of paper-scissor-rock to settle three positions in a unity ticket: president, vice president and secretary of state.

Each will have a much better chance of being nominated than any of them has now. If we're charitable, and assume that a solo rival would have a 50-50 shot at beating Trump, the casting of lots gives each a one-in-six chance of being the nominee -- and a 50/50 shot at standing for one of the highest offices in the land (they can play for Treasury if they prefer. Plus, their unity ticket would be les likely to shed supporters to Trump than any one would have by besting the others in coming weeks.

It might be objected that Kasich does not deserve to compete on equal terms, and Cruz and Rubio probably each believe as much about the other. But each at present has an equal chance (as far as can be discerned) of ruining the others' chances. In fact, all together are virtually certain to ruin the chances of all.

There's still Carson to be dealt with. But all three could pledge to plump for his books.

P.S. If Cruz and Rubio want to band together and insist that Kasich shouldn't get even odds, he could be pushed into doing a qualifying round. That is, he shoots once with either Cruz or Rubio. If he wins, he competes in the round of three on equal terms. If he loses, he goes to SecState (or Treasury), and Cruz and Rubio go one-on-one for prez-veep.

Sunday, February 07, 2016

Rubio on Obama vs. Obama on Reagan

Greg Dworkin, who does the Daily Kos Daily Pundit Roundup, was kind enough to storify a tweetstorm of mine beginning like this:

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

Love the sin, hate the sinner or whatever

Forty five-odd years ago, a popular poster, sweatshirt etc. showed the Peanuts character Linus (blanket in tow), protesting loudly, "I love mankind -- it's people I can't stand."

That flashed back to me last week when I read Marco Rubio's justification for a fresh round of budget terrorism:
“I have tremendous respect for this institution,” Mr. Rubio said in an interview on Friday. “But I’m not all that interested in the way things have always been done around here.” 
"The way things have always been done" in this case means reconciling House and Senate budgets without tying those negotiations to a threat of national default.

The Times editorial board reminded me of that flashback this morning. Their take on Rubio's comment: it exemplifies the mindset of the latest crop of high profile Republicans, who "want to dismantle government, using whatever crowbar happens to be handy, and they don’t particularly care what traditions of mutual respect get smashed at the same time."

As Peanuts characters used to say from time to time: I'd be foolish to deny it.