As CBO made clear, however, its analysis was not a comprehensive analysis of how the ACA will affect the labor market in particular or the economy as a whole. As of January 1, more than 2 million people had selected a plan in the health insurance marketplace, and nearly 80 percent of those people will — thanks to the ACA — benefit from tax credits to help pay their premiums. In11 million people are estimated to benefit, rising to 19 million in Many millions more will gain affordable health insurance coverage through Medicaid.
Matt Broaddus July 6th, We have updated this analysis to incorporate the effects of the Senate Republican health bill. Taken together, these and other provisions would raise the number of uninsured by 24 million byaccording to the Congressional Budget Office CBO.
The harmful effects would be particularly severe in rural America.
Medicaid has long played an even larger role in providing health coverage and paying for care in rural areas than in urban areas. In at least eight expansion states, more than one-third of expansion enrollees live in rural areas: The Medicaid expansion has also become a critical financial lifeline sustaining rural hospitals.
In 12 of the 15 states in which consumers would face the steepest average increases in total out-of-pocket spending under the AHCA, rural residents make up at least one-quarter of marketplace enrollees. And many rural residents could face prohibitive premiums and out-of-pocket spending because the House plan eliminates nationwide protections that enable people with pre-existing conditions to get the coverage and services they need, allowing states to waive these protections.
The uninsured rate among rural non-elderly individuals plummeted by nearly one-third between andfrom 17 percent to 12 percent, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis.
People enrolled in coverage through the Medicaid expansion are receiving needed primary care and critical health services, research shows. For example, a survey of low-income, non-elderly adults in three states found that the share of residents with a primary care physician rose by 8 percentage points more in the expansion states of Arkansas and Kentucky both of which have many rural residents enrolled in coverage through the expansion than in the non-expansion state of Texas.
Inprior to the ACA, 18 percent of rural residents nationwide were enrolled in Medicaid, compared to 15 percent of urban residents.
This reflected various factors unique to rural America, including its lower access to job-based coverage, greater prevalence of self-employed jobs such as farming and contractinglower incomes, and greater share of people with a disability.
The expansion population is more rural than the population as a whole: The Medicaid expansion has been a lifeline for rural areas in other ways.
The ACA coverage expansions, especially the Medicaid expansion, have substantially reduced hospital uncompensated care costs: Rural hospitals in expansion states have had larger gains in Medicaid revenue than urban hospitals.
Rural hospitals are also likelier to turn a profit if located in an expansion state. But the Medicaid expansion was associated with a 4 percentage-point increase in operating margins for rural hospitals, as compared to a 1 percentage-point increase for urban hospitals.
Beginning instates would receive only the regular federal Medicaid matching rate — on average, 57 percent — for any new enrollees under the expansion instead of the permanent expansion matching rate of 90 percent.
This would force states to pay 2. In seven states Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, and Washingtonthese higher costs would automatically trigger immediate or eventual termination of the Medicaid expansion, with no action by state policymakers necessary.
Laws in these states either explicitly require the expansion to end if the federal matching rate falls or require the state to prevent an increase in state Medicaid costs.
But in practice, most or all of the other 25 states that have expanded Medicaid would also see their expansions end due to the size of the cost shift. The House bill would permit states to freeze expansion enrollment and bar any new enrollees, and since CBO estimates that more than two-thirds of those enrolled as of the end of will fall off the program by and fewer than 5 percent of newly eligible enrollees will remain on Medicaid by the end ofthe Medicaid expansion would be eliminated after several years.
In addition, the House bill would radically restructure federal Medicaid financing by converting virtually the entire program for all states to a per capita cap. States would have the option to convert their program to a block grant for children, adults, or both.
Under the cap, states would get less federal funding per beneficiary than under current law, with the cuts growing each year. These deficiencies would leave many of the 1. Low- and moderate-income families without access to other coverage are guaranteed the option to purchase benchmark health insurance for a set percentage of their income, with the credit covering the rest.
Adjusting assistance based on geographic variation in premiums is especially important to people who live in rural areas.
Premiums tend to be higher in rural areas because the low population density often raises the cost of providing medical care, and these areas generally have a limited array of providers and little competition among insurers. In contrast, the House bill would provide flat tax credits varying only by age: Thus, older people could get a credit that is up to twice as large as younger people — but the House bill allows insurers to charge premiums that are five times higher than they charge younger people, based solely on age.
Collectively, these factors would increase net premiums for many people that is, the share of the premium that consumers must pay and disproportionately hurt rural consumers. In fact, 12 of the 15 states that would face the steepest percentage declines in the value of the tax credits have significant rural populations see Appendix Table 2.Here, we present Urban Institute analyses to project and evaluate the impact of the ACA and the implications of the repeal under consideration.
Highlights Map: How ACA and Revised BCRA Premiums and Deductibles Differ within and among States.
Appendix Table 4 shows the combined impact of the House bill’s increases in net premiums and out-of-pocket costs. This is the definition used by the Office of Management and Budget. KFF based its estimates on analysis of American Community Survey data from For more information about Medicaid’s role in rural America prior.
The Center for Medicare Advocacy, is a national nonprofit, nonpartisan law organization that provides education, advocacy and legal assistance an analysis of civilizations in foucaults panopticism an analysis of leadership skills in ronald reagans presidency to help older people.
an analysis of the aca impact on the national budget of america. We analyze the national and state-specific effects of ending the individual mandate and loosening limits on short-term, limited-duration policies on insurance coverage, premiums in the ACA-compliant.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that over fiscal years through , the ACA will reduce the deficit by $ billion.
The ACA’s deficit-reducing effects will grow over time. Five years after passage, there are few clear indications that the ACA has had its intended impact on cost of care and access to it.
Meanwhile, the law costs significantly more than projected. We are unsure how many previously uninsured people have truly gained coverage because of the law.