The Trump administration issued the final rule on association health plans, which supporters say will make coverage more affordable for some employees but led others to warn about “junk insurance.” Officials in California, aware of the state’s bad experience with such plans, are eager to avert their return.
The Trump administration is arguing that since Congress is repealing the penalty for not having insurance, the federal health law’s protection for people who have illnesses is unconstitutional.
A provision of this massive legislation would provide funding to help agricultural groups set up association health plans — a longtime GOP-favored mechanism to reduce health insurance costs for small groups.
Self-management classes can help the tens of millions of Americans now diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes. But the education can come with a high price tag.
The policy change is likely to entice younger and healthier people from the general insurance pool by allowing a range of lower-cost options that don’t include all the benefits required by the federal health law.
A report issued by the National Academy for State Health Policy shows a small decrease in sign-ups last fall. California saw a 2.3 percent drop, and in general states running their own marketplaces did better than those that didn’t.
Many eyes are on the Trump administration to see how officials respond to Idaho’s approach to health insurance, which flouts some aspects of the Affordable Care Act.
Proponents say the proposed regulation will give some consumers more affordable insurance options. Critics warn that the coverage could be less comprehensive.
Drugs that treat rheumatoid arthritis started out costing about $10,000 a year. Ten years later, they list for more than $40,000.
As biosimilar products reach the market and rival more established RA treatments, the players are exploring legal challenges involving antitrust and anti-competitive behavior.