Reform Rollout May Waver if More Seek Exemptions

Reform Rollout May Waver if More Seek Exemptions

HHS' recent decision to grant waivers for health plans that would not meet a key provision of health reform exposes how stakeholders can weaken implementation by simply resisting its measures.

Thirty companies and groups last month received HHS waivers that grant them a one-year exemption from phasing out annual limits on health coverage, a key provision of health reform.

The decision was preceded by high-profile debate over the reform’s unintended consequences, most prominently in the wake of a Wall Street Journal story reporting that McDonald’s might be forced to drop employee health coverage.

Despite the public posturing, the exemptions were intended. Lawmakers crafting reform had set up a procedure to allow so-called mini-med plans — limited-benefit plans that cap coverage at several thousand dollars per year and that would not have met new annual limits on coverage — to apply for exemptions.

Although the waivers were expected, HHS’ decision points up two related challenges of health reform implementation. First, many U.S. residents who stand to benefit most from the law may not see changes until 2014. Second, industry stakeholders have a chance to derail reform by pushing to weaken its provisions.

The exemptions also showcase the uncomfortable intersection of politics and policy. While few industry experts favor the mini-med model, their potential demise pits the president’s pledge to let U.S. residents keep their coverage against his administration’s goal to phase out ineffective plans.

Waivers Come as Law Has Yet To Be Finalized

The exempted organizations — which include the United Agricultural Benefit Trust, a California-based cooperative that provides coverage to farm workers, and San Diego-based Jack in the Box — had to prove that without the waiver their employees’ premiums would increase significantly or they could lose their coverage. Under the new “Patients’ Bill of Rights,” the companies would have had to provide at least $750,000 in health coverage in 2011 and will need to reapply in successive years to avoid coverage that extends up to $1.25 million in 2012, $2 million in 2013 and unlimited coverage in 2014. Altogether, the waivers preserve coverage for about one million U.S. residents.

The waivers also come as HHS and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners continue to define which benefits are actually essential and finalize plans’ required medical-loss ratios.  Ahead of 2014, “plans may also totally exclude particular benefits; they simply cannot limit the dollar amount of offered benefits except as permitted in the rule,” law professor Timothy Jost writes in Health Affairs. As a result, more plans may seek exemptions as the rules coalesce.

Challenge of Limits

The U.S. residents who stand to be most affected in the short run: the 2.5 million workers, in industries like hospitality and retail, who are covered by mini-med plans that incorporate annual dollar limits. HHS has warned that these annual limits can be “devastating” for patients and “even more aggressive than lifetime limits.” According to the agency, 8% of large employer plans, 14% of small employer plans and 19% of individual market plans use annual dollar limits.

Sustaining these plans has sparked criticism from reform advocates, who say that preserving “under-insurance” for several years defeats the purpose of the law. “Just what was reform supposed to have accomplished?” writes Don McCanne, a senior health policy fellow at Physicians for a National Health Program.

However, health policy consultant Robert Laszewski cautions that many companies can’t afford to spend more on health coverage for their low-wage or part-time workers, Bloomberg reports. For example, roughly three-quarters of restaurant workers turn over every year and nearly half are under age 25; the administrative costs to insure these individuals are prohibitive, some experts warn. For low-margin businesses, “mini-med plans are a temporary stopgap,” according to a Wall Street Journal editorial.

More Waivers Down the Road?

Most policy experts say that doing away with mini-med plans is an optimal outcome of reform — but some argue that keeping them for now is a necessary solution. According to Neil Trautwein, VP and employee benefits policy counsel with the National Retail Federation, “nobody is going to pretend that [a mini-med plan] is the best coverage around, but having that coverage beats not having any coverage.”

The rationalization reflects the balancing act facing the Obama administration in the coming months. Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform, says that the president wants a “smooth glide path to 2014” and acknowledges that there may be compromises ahead. Several states — including Maine, Iowa and South Carolina — already have sought waivers on new medical-loss ratio requirements, and more state insurance commissioners may ask for their own exemptions after the MLR rules are finalized. However, administration officials “don’t like the word ‘phase-in,'” according to Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarthy, and are pushing state officials to demonstrate concrete evidence of potential disruptions in the marketplace, CQ Today reports.

The process also underscores that, for all the focus on Republicans potentially repealing or halting reform’s implementation, the law can be weakened by simple resistance to its measures. Forbes columnist David Whelan contends that the administration’s exemptions were influenced by “the corrupting effect of election-year politics” and create an invitation for other employers to issue similar requests. The industry pressure will “just increase[e] until we get to 2014,” according to Peter Harbage, a former California state health official who is now a policy consultant in Sacramento.

Here’s a look at what else is making health reform news.

Seniors in the Spotlight

Challenging the Overhaul

Coverage Changes

In Public Opinion

Looking Down the Road

Exit mobile version