April 15, 2017

No Image

U.S. Health Care Wrestles With The 'Pre-Existing Condition'

Carl Goulden, of Littlestown Pa., developed hepatitis B 10 years ago. Soon his health insurance premiums soared beyond a price he and his wife could afford.

Elana Gordon/WHYY

hide caption

toggle caption

Elana Gordon/WHYY

For most of his life, Carl Goulden had near perfect health. He and his wife, Wanda, say that changed 10 years ago. Carl remembers feeling, “a lot of pain in the back, tired, fatigue, yellow eyes — a lot of jaundice.”

Wanda, chimes in: “Yellow eyes, gray-like skin.” His liver wasn’t working, she explains. “It wasn’t filtering.”

Carl was diagnosed with hepatitis B. Now 65 and on Medicare, he had a flower shop in Littlestown, Pa., back then, so had been buying health insurance for his family on the market for small businesses and the self-employed.

The medications to manage Carl’s hepatitis cost more than $10,000 a year — and if he ever needed a liver transplant, as some people with hepatitis eventually do, the further costs could be formidable. Thank goodness they had health insurance, the couple thought.

But then, Carl says, “the insurance renewals went way up.”

After a few years he could no longer afford to buy the coverage — more than $1,000 a month — and also maintain his business. So he dropped the health insurance.

“I was devastated,” he says, “because I didn’t know when my liver might fail.”

But that steep increase in his insurance rate was completely legal, says Pennsylvania insurance commissioner, Teresa Miller. And back then, before the Affordable Care Act became law, a patient like Carl Goulden might have had a very hard time buying another policy; he likely would have been turned down by other insurers because he now had what’s called a “pre-existing” medical condition.

A family like the Gouldens would “just have been out of luck,” Miller says.

Pennsylvania: The wild, wild West

Before the ACA, states had differing approaches to handling pre-existing conditions.

Pennsylvania was typical. Until the ACA mandated that insurers treat sick and healthy people equally, buying insurance was the wild, wild West.

Insurers couldn’t overtly kick people off a plan if they got sick, but they could find ways to charge them a lot more, even those whose chronic condition wasn’t all that serious — such as acne. For individuals looking to sign up in the first place, “an insurance company could simply decline to offer you insurance at all because of your pre-existing condition,” Miller says.

Insurers who did offer a policy to someone with a pre-existing medical condition might have done so with a catch — the plan could require a waiting period, or might exclude treatment for that condition.

“So, let’s say you had diabetes, for example,” Miller says. “You might have been able to get coverage for an unexpected health care need that arose, but you’d still be on your own for any treatment and management of your diabetes.”

From the perspective of the insurance company, these practices were intended to prevent the sick from signing up for a health plan only when they needed costly care.

Pennsylvania did try to partially solve this problem. It created a more scaled-back health plan, called Adult Basic, for those with lower incomes who didn’t have any coverage. Lots of people signed up, but the plans didn’t include coverage for mental health care, prescription drugs or more than two nights in a hospital. Even so, Miller says, the strategy proved too expensive for the state.

“That program was spending $13 million to $14 million a month when it was shut down,” she says.

High-risk pools

More than 30 other states dealt with pre-existing conditions by setting up what are called “high-risk pools,” a separate insurance plan for individuals who couldn’t get health coverage in the private market.

These plans could be real lifesavers for some people with conditions like cancer — which can cost tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat.

The experiences with high risk pools varied, but states faced lots of challenges, says John Bertko, an insurance actuary with the state of California. And the main problem was the high cost.

“The one in California, which I was associated with, limited annual services to no more than $75,000, and they had a waiting list. There was not enough money,” Bertko says. “The 20,000 people who got into it were the lucky ones. At one point in time, there were another 10,000 people on a waiting list.”

The pools also had catches; premiums were expensive, as were out-of-pocket costs. And plans often excluded the coverage of pre-existing conditions for six months to a year after the patient bought the policy.

New Jersey: Pre-existing conditions were covered, but with a catch

Around that same time, across the Delaware River, the state of New Jersey was trying something different.

“Insurers could not take health status into account,” says Joel Cantor, director of Rutgers University’s Center for State Health Policy who has been analyzing the New Jersey experience.

Before the ACA, New Jersey was one of just a handful of states that prohibited insurers from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Insurers also weren’t allowed to charge people a whole lot more for having a health issue, and the plans had to offer robust coverage of services.

There was a one-year waiting period for coverage of a pre-existing condition, but a larger issue became cost. The entire individual market in New Jersey became expensive for everyone, regardless of their health status, Cantor says. Because there was no mandate to have health insurance coverage, those who signed up tended to really need it, and healthy people did not enroll.

And so, “the prices went up and up,” he says. And the premiums and enrollment “went down and down.”

The state tried to address this in the early 2000s by introducing a “skinny” health plan, Cantor says.

“By that I mean very few benefits,” he explains. “It covered very, very limited services.”

The plan was affordable and really popular, especially among young and healthy people and about 100,000 people signed up. But if something did happen, or if a person had a chronic health need, lots of the costs shifted to the individual.

“It left people with huge financial exposure,” he says.

That’s, in part, why the ACA included a rule that insurance plans now have to offer good benefits and be available to everybody. In exchange, insurers have the mandate and subsidies — so that everybody will buy in.

Cantor says these experiences point to an ongoing dilemma in health care: A small portion of people consume a big chunk of health care costs. It’s hard to predict who among us will cost a lot — or when. So, the question becomes, what kind of care should insurance plans cover and who should shoulder that cost?

This story is part of a reporting partnership with NPR, WHYY’s health show The Pulse and Kaiser Health News.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Saturday Sports: NBA Playoffs Begin

NBA playoffs are underway with Cleveland and Golden State as the mainstream favorites to win; and in the world of hockey, the Washington Capitals look poised to win their first championship.

LINDA WERTHEIMER, HOST:

This is WEEKEND EDITION from NPR News. I’m Linda Wertheimer, and time for sports.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

WERTHEIMER: The NBA playoffs begin today. The Indiana Pacers are playing in game one against the Cleveland Cavaliers. Round one is at Quicken Loans Arena this afternoon. And in hockey, the playoffs are already underway. So let’s turn to NPR’s sports correspondent Tom Goldman. Tom, hi.

TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Hi, Linda. How are you?

WERTHEIMER: Well, moderate to good. Cleveland has had a rocky regular season, right?

GOLDMAN: You’re better than Cleveland. The Cavaliers were great, actually. The first couple of months, they looked very much like the defending champions that they are. Since the All-Star break in February, though, their record is 12 and 15. They slipped to the second seed in the Eastern Conference. And most worrisome, their defense has been crummy. There’s an important metric called defensive efficiency. And the Cavs ranked 22nd out of 30 teams in defensive efficiency, so that sure thing.

Cleveland versus Golden State match up in the finals has looked a tad shaky. But remember a few important things – Cleveland’s conference, the East, isn’t that strong. It’s going to be hard for any team including the number one seed Boston to beat the Cavs four times in the series. And they have LeBron James. He’s the best basketball player on the planet. And in the postseason, he ratchets that up. He’s taken his teams to six straight NBA finals. He definitely thinks he can get there for a seventh.

WERTHEIMER: So do you think it’s going to be a problem for Cleveland that they will not have a home court advantage?

GOLDMAN: Maybe, we’ll see. I mean, playing on your home court traditionally helps teams win but not as much now as it has in the past. Tom Haberstroh of ESPN wrote a story in 2015 that’s been cited a lot. And the article shows statistically how home court advantage has dwindled due to several factors, including the rise of three-point shooting.

Essentially, this is the theory. Referees are influenced by a home crowd. They call more fouls on visiting teams. When a team is playing inside near the basket, more fouls are called, meaning more fouls against the visitor, thus, giving the advantage to the home team. But when the game is played far out at the three-point line, fewer fouls called, less influenced by the referees and, thus, not as great an advantage for the home team.

I should note that Cleveland was second in the league this season at taking and making three-point shots. So according to this theory, this might help the Cavs now that they don’t have home court advantage throughout the entire playoffs.

WERTHEIMER: Now, we’ve obviously heard a lot about Cleveland and the Golden State Warriors, but there are some other teams, some other players?

GOLDMAN: (Laughter) Yeah, 14 others and lots of other good players. You know, must-see first round series, Linda, Houston versus Oklahoma City. Houston is led by guard James Harden, Oklahoma City by guard Russell Westbrook. One of those guys will win this year’s MVP award. They’ve both been phenomenal.

The juicy matchup to watch in that series is when Houston’s Patrick Beverley guards Westbrook. Patrick Beverley is a dogged and annoying defender. And he was guarding Westbrook a few years back when Westbrook injured a knee, and Beverley is despised in Oklahoma City because of that.

A few other teams – the Washington Wizards won their division for the first time in 38 years. They have one of the best, best backcourts in the NBA with guards John Wall and Bradley Beal. And the expectations by you and other Washingtonians are very high.

And then Milwaukee playing Toronto in the first round. Milwaukee won 20 of its last 30 regular season games. The Bucks have this fascinating player in Giannis Antetokounmpo. He’s a 6′ 11″ point guard who led his team in every possible statistical category. He’s nicknamed The Greek Freak. And he’s worth watching, and he might just dominate this league in a few years.

WERTHEIMER: Now, while we’re talking about Washington stars, what about the Washington Caps?

GOLDMAN: They look like a nervous team right now. The Caps had the best regular season record in the NHL and are considered serious contenders to win their first Stanley Cup trophy. They lead their series against Toronto 1-0. But they looked shaky in game one. They played tight. They appear to be feeling the weight of expectations. And Cav’s fans are hoping the team can settle down, forget the past playoff failures – and there are many – and play the way they played this regular season.

WERTHEIMER: Speaking to us from Portland, Ore., NPR’s Tom Goldman. Thank you very much for being with us.

GOLDMAN: Thank you, Linda.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

Copyright © 2017 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Tax Day And Health Insurance Under Trump

People who lacked health insurance for more than three consecutive months in 2016, or who bought individual insurance and got federal help paying the premiums, will need to do a little work to figure out what, if anything, they owe the IRS.

Brennan Linsley/AP

hide caption

toggle caption

Brennan Linsley/AP

Your federal income taxes are due April 18 this year, and — for perhaps several million people — a fine for failing to get health insurance is due that day, too.

Despite a lengthy debate, Congress has not yet acted on a bill to repeal portions of the Affordable Care Act. That means the law and almost all of its regulations remain in force, at least for now.

For the majority of tax filers, who had health insurance through an employer for 2016 or through a government program, all they have to do is check the box on the 1040 form that says they were covered for a full year. That’s it.

The Obama administration had called for the IRS to begin rejecting tax returns for 2016 that left that box blank. But the IRS under the Trump administration has canceled that policy, citing a Trump executive order that calls on federal agencies to “minimize the burden” of the health law.

Still, those who lacked insurance for more than three consecutive months, or who bought individual insurance and got federal help paying the premiums, need to do a little more work to figure out what, if anything, they owe.

Those with no insurance, and those who have had a lengthy gap in coverage, may be required to pay what the federal government calls a “shared responsibility payment.” It’s a fine for not having coverage, on the theory that even those without insurance will eventually use the health care system at a cost they can’t afford, which means that someone else other patients, hospitals, health care providers and taxpayers — will have to pay that bill.

Many people who don’t have insurance, however, qualify for one of the several dozen “exemptions” from the fine. Nearly 13 million tax filers claimed an exemption for 2015 taxes, according to the IRS. Most often those exemptions came from people whose income was so low (less than $10,350 for an individual) that they are not required to file a tax return, or from Americans who lived abroad for most of the year, or from people for whom the cheapest available insurance was still unaffordable (costing more than 8 percent of their household income).

The fine for 2016 taxes is the greater of $695 per adult or 2.5 percent of household income. Fines for children who lack insurance coverage are half the amount for uninsured adults. Fines are pro-rated by the number of months each person was uninsured.

The maximum fine is $2,676; that is the national average cost of a “bronze” level insurance plan available on the health exchanges. But most people do not pay anywhere near that much. Last year, said the IRS, an estimated 6.5 million tax filers paid a fine that averaged $470.

If you bought your own insurance from the federal marketplace or a state health insurance exchange and you got a federal tax credit to help pay for that coverage, you have to take another step before you can file your taxes.

People who got those tax credits must fill out a form that “reconciles” the amount of subsidies they received based on their income estimates with the amount they were entitled to according to their actual income reported to the IRS.

In tax filings for 2015, about 5.3 million taxpayers had to pay the government because they got too much in tax credits, compared to 2.4 million who got additional money back. But among those who underestimated their incomes and had to pay back some of those tax credits, 62 percent still received a net refund on their taxes.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)