In this column for The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank, Drew Altman discusses the implications of the governor of Alaska’s decision to move ahead unilaterally with Medicaid expansion.
- view as grid
- view as list
In his latest column for The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank, Drew Altman discusses the implications of the governor of Alaska’s decision to move ahead unilaterally with Medicaid expansion. All previous columns by Drew Altman are available.
This fact sheet reviews how coverage of contraceptives varies between private insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and publicly-funded programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, TRICARE, the Indian Health Service, and Title X funded clinics.
A newly-updated infographic from the Kaiser Family Foundation explains the final regulations on employer-based coverage of birth control released today by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. How Does Where You Work Affect Your Contraceptive Coverage? provides a clear explanation of coverage requirements under the new regulations for employers with…
Following the Supreme Court’s King v. Burwell decision, the Affordable Care Act could use a break from the intense political heat, though it may not get a long one as the 2016 election season heats up and presidential candidates play to their bases on health care, writes Drew Altman in…
Following the Supreme Court’s King v. Burwell decision, the Affordable Care Act could use a break from the intense political heat, though it may not get a long one as the 2016 election season heats up and presidential candidates play to their bases on health care, writes Drew Altman in his latest column for The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank.
Poll Finds 62% of Americans Approve of the Supreme Court’s Decision to Continue Allowing ACA Health Insurance Subsidies in All States, While 32% Disapprove
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.
Renewals in Medicaid and CHIP: Implementation of Streamlined ACA Policies and the Potential Role of Managed Care Plans
This brief reviews the new renewal requirements for Medicaid and CHIP that are designed to maintain continuity of coverage for eligible individuals. It provides an overview of state implementation of the new renewal policies and considers the potential role managed care plans can play in supporting renewals. Key findings include: some aspects of the simplified renewal policies have not yet been fully implemented due to a range of challenges; some states, including Washington and Rhode Island, have successfully implemented the new policies and achieved high retention rates with more than nine in ten enrollees successfully renewed; and, managed care plans can support renewals by reminding members to renew and providing direct assistance with the renewal process; however, plans identified challenges to supporting renewal.
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.