ACA Marketplaces

A new issue brief from the Kaiser Family Foundation finds that Arkansas’ “private option” Medicaid expansion has helped reduce the number of uninsured and bring down uncompensated care costs while strengthening the state’s ACA marketplace. A Look at the Private Option in Arkansas draws upon early data as well as…

Based on stakeholder interviews and early data on coverage, reduced uncompensated care costs, and other topics, this issue brief provides an initial look at implementation of Arkansas’ Section 1115 Medicaid expansion demonstration waiver to require most adults newly eligible for Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion to enroll in Marketplace plans.

In his latest column for The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank, Drew Altman discusses whether the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ broad new responsibilities implementing the Affordable Care Act and a more proactive approach to Medicare payment signals that it’s time for (another) name change. All previous columns by Drew Altman are…

In his latest column for The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank, Drew Altman discusses whether the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ broad new responsibilities implementing the Affordable Care Act and a more proactive approach to Medicare payment signals that it’s time for (another) name change.

Media-only web briefing that released a new survey tracking the experiences of California’s previously uninsured residents under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). New survey provides a detailed assessment of how well the ACA is working for previously uninsured residents in a state that embraced the ACA’s coverage expansion opportunities by establishing the Covered California insurance marketplace and expanding its Medi-Cal program.

The Kaiser Family Foundation California Longitudinal Panel Survey is a series of surveys that, over time, tracks the experiences and views of a representative, randomly selected sample of Californians who were uninsured prior to the major coverage expansions under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The initial baseline survey was conducted with a representative sample of 2,001 nonelderly uninsured Californian adults in summer 2013, prior to the ACA’s initial open enrollment period. The second survey in the series followed up with the same group of previously uninsured Californians who participated in the baseline (a longitudinal panel survey). The third in the series, and the focus of this report, followed up with them again after the second open enrollment period in spring 2015 to find out whether more have gained coverage, lost coverage, or remained uninsured, what barriers to coverage remain, how those who now have insurance view their coverage, and to assess the impacts that gaining health insurance may have had on financial security and access to care.

Public’s View of the Health Care Law Remains Nearly Evenly Divided Immediately Following King v. Burwell Ruling Nearly Eight in 10 Americans Expect More Major Battles about the ACA in the Future Just over six in 10 Americans (62%) say they approve of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last week…

The latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll finds that when told that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to keep the Affordable Care Act (ACA) as it is, allowing subsidies to be provided to low- and moderate-income people in all states regardless of who runs their Marketplace, about 6 in 10 say they approve of the decision while about a third disapprove. The King v. Burwell ruling does not appear to have had an immediate effect on the public’s overall views of the health law. Still, most Americans do not think the ACA has cleared its last big hurdle with the June 25 Supreme Court ruling; just 18 percent think the King v. Burwell case was the last major battle over the ACA, while nearly 8 in 10 think there will be more to come.

The Kaiser Family Foundation held a media-only conference call with key experts on the Affordable Care Act (ACA), state marketplaces and more to explain the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the King v. Burwell case and to answer questions about its implications. The petitioners in the case are challenging the legality of premium and cost-sharing subsidies for low- and middle-income people buying health plans in 34 states where the federal government rather than the state is operating an insurance marketplace established by the Affordable Care Act.

With the Supreme Court ruling on King v. Burwell upholding the Affordable Care Act’s federal subsidies, Drew Altman’s column in The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank explores what the decision means and what’s next for the health law.