New York is a little different: For one thing, they haven’t actually released any 2017 Open Enrollment data yet (other than a cryptic “55K enrolled over a 3-day period", which isn't very useful). They should be up to around 200K w/out auto-renewals by now. More significantly, they're one of only 2 states (Minnesota's the other) which features the ACA's Basic Health Plan. Unlike QHPs, which are divided into subsidized and unsubsidized enrollees, the BHP program is entirely dependent on ACA financing, so if the law is repealed, all BHP enrollees are kicked to the curb, just like Medicaid expansion enrollees would be.
OK, this appears to be quickly turning into my next project thing. The methodology here is pretty much the same as the other states; the only major difference is that while I do know the total Medicaid enrollment for each county (as of December 2016), I don't have that broken out between traditional and expanded Medicaid. Fortunately, I have a hard state-wide number for that: Around 398,000, or roughly 20.8% of the state-wide total. I've therefore multiplied each county number by 20.8% to get a rough estimate of the ACA expansion tally for each.
Like Texas, I'm also no longer expecting Arizona to beat last year's Open Enrollment total by much. Assuming 209K QHP selections, there should be around 125K indy market enrollees and 399K Medicaid expansion enrollees who'll be in a world of hurt post-repeal, or roughly 524,000 altogether.
(sigh) OK, after doing this for Michigan earlier today, I said that I wasn't gonna do this for every state, and I'm not...but the irony is that the 19 non-expansion states are actually easier to compile this data for than the expansion states...because you can't rip away healthcare from someone you never provided it to in the first place. Anyway, someone requested that I do a county-level estimate of how many people would likely lose their healthcare coverage in Texas under a full repeal of the Affordable Care Act, so here it is.
Regular readers (and Twitter followers) know that for the past month I've been heavily pushing my state-by-state analysis projecting how many people I expect to lose their healthcare coverage if/when the Republican-held Congress follows through on their promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act. As noted in that post and the various links within it, part of the projection is very specific and confirmed (ie, the exact number of Medicaid expansion enrollees), while the rest is more speculative. For one thing, I don't know exactly how many people will have enrolled in ACA exchange plans, because we're still in the middle of the open enrollment period; even then, the percentage of those enrollees who will be receiving APTC assistance is still unknown as well...and even then, not all of those folks will be receiving substantial subsidy assistance which would make or break their ability to keep their policy.
Remember, the ACA's Medical Loss Ratio rule (80% of all premiums have to go towards actual healthcare, leaving only a 20% maximum margin for administrative/operational costs) already does a pretty good job of keeping carriers from outright gouging enrollees...although that only comes into play when the carriers would otherwise be spending less than 80% on healthcare claims. In cases where they're already spending more than 80%, it's kind of moot...and for the past couple of years, many carriers are at 100% or higher, which is the main reason some of them are pulling out of the market next year in the first place.
In other words, unlike other "retail" markets where more competition is generally considered to automatically help keep prices down, there's only so much that more players can do in the individual health insurance market. If everyone is already losing money, adding one more to the mix isn't gonna make anyone else drop their rates further.
I just noted this morning that Rhode Island's enrollment numbers for 2017 are coming up significantly short of not only my own admittedly unrealistic hopes (I was hoping RI would buck the national trend and beef up enrollment by 15% this year), but is likely to actually come up lower than last year's 33.9K by several thousand people.
Fortunately, the opposite is proving to be the case in Massachusetts:
Through yesterday, we had 240,745 enrolled in January 2017 coverage...these are people who paid their bill. There are an additional 11,803 people who selected a plan but haven't paid for it yet. That's a total of 252,548.
That's, 252,548 QHP selections as of 12/28/16, of which over 95% have actually paid their first monthly premium (well above the 90% payment national average).
Rhode Island is one of three states (along with Washington and Massachusetts) which allowed people to enroll for January coverage as late as December 23rd. RI's numbers have also included auto-renewals for some time now, so today's report includes everyone whose 2017 policies will kick off effective this Sunday, January 1st:
INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILY ENROLLMENT • As of December 24, 2016
Oof. I've been compiling a lot of charts and graphs the past week or so based on what I thought were the most comprehensive 2017 enrollment numbers available to date. The biggest data gaps are Vermont and New York, neither of which has released any enrollment data yet...or so I thought.
In the past three days, more than 55,000 New Yorkers have enrolled or renewed coverage through NY State of Health. The Customer Service Center has answered more than 1,000,000 calls since the start of Open Enrollment on November 1 and an average of 46,000 calls a day this week. The NY State of Health website has also experienced high traffic reaching 12,000 users in peak hours.
...This is also the first time this enrollment period that NYSoH has released any actual enrollment data: 55,000 renewals + new signups. Unfortunately, that number only includes 12/12 - 12/14...no earlier numbers are included. Still, I'll take what I can get...
