Following the U.S. Senate’s failed vote on the “skinny repeal”, the latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll finds that the majority of the public say it is a “good thing” that the Senate did not pass the bill that would have repealed and replaced the ACA. A large share of Americans think President Trump and his administration should do what they can to make the current health care law work and a majority of the public want to see bipartisan efforts to improve the 2010 health care law. However, about half of Republicans and Trump supporters would like to see Republicans in Congress keep working on a plan to repeal the ACA, and most Republicans and Trump supporters endorse using hard-ball tactics to encourage Democrats to start negotiating with President Trump on a replacement plan. The majority of the public are also unaware that health insurance companies choosing not to sell insurance plans or charging higher premiums in certain marketplaces only affect those who purchase their own insurance on these marketplaces.
- view as grid
- view as list
The Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust (HRET) held a reporters-only web briefing on Tuesday, September 19 to release their 2017 benchmark Employer Health Benefits Survey. The 19th annual Kaiser/HRET survey provides a detailed look at the current state of employer-based coverage and trends in private health…
Premiums for Employer-Sponsored Family Health Coverage Rise Slowly for Sixth Straight Year, Up 3% but Averaging $18,764 in 2017
Workers Covered By Smaller Firms Pay More Toward Family Premiums and in Cost Sharing Than Those in Larger Ones Menlo Park, Calif. – Annual family premiums for employer-sponsored health insurance rose an average of 3 percent to $18,764 this year, continuing a six-year run of relatively modest increases, according to the…
In this column for The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank, Drew Altman analyzes whether public or private health insurance does a better job of controlling costs.
In this column for The Wall Street Journal’s Think Tank, Drew Altman finds the public’s healthcare priorities have more to do with drug costs and other real world issues people deal with using the health care system than the ongoing partisan wrangling over the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
The survey is the second in a series exploring the experiences and perceptions of people who purchase their own health insurance, the group perhaps most affected by the Affordable Care Act’s reforms to the individual insurance market and tax subsidies to make such coverage more affordable. It includes people in ACA-compliant plans sold both inside and outside the federal and state marketplaces, as well as those still in non-compliant plans, which took effect prior to January 2014 and in many cases do not comply with all the law’s requirements.
A map and table showing the number of people now receiving premium subsidies who would lose them if the Court finds for the challengers; the total amount of federal subsidy dollars; the average subsidy (or average premium tax credit) that subsidized enrollees have qualified for; and the average increase in premiums that subsidized enrollees would face if the subsidies are disallowed.
New Analysis Details Impact on Residents in Different States If the U.S. Supreme Court Rules for Challengers in King v. Burwell
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this month in the King v. Burwell case that challenges whether low- and moderate-income Americans are eligible for subsidies to help pay for insurance if they live in states where the federal government, rather than the state, established its new insurance marketplace…
This report is based on based on focus group discussions with parents with moderate incomes enrolled in private coverage (employer sponsored or Marketplace) who had children in public coverage (primarily CHIP) or children with private coverage. This report is based on 14 focus group discussions conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and John Snow, Inc. in six cities during February and March 2015. Sites included Birmingham, AL, Chicago, IL, Denver, CO, Philadelphia, PA, and Tampa, FL. Each of these states operate separate CHIP programs. An additional 4 focus groups were conducted in Los Angeles, CA (two in English and two in Spanish). The purpose of the groups was to gain insight into what low and middle-income families value in their children’s coverage, their experiences with CHIP and private insurance, and on parents’ perspectives on the future of CHIP. The information gathered can help inform policy questions such as would private coverage (either employer sponsored coverage or Marketplace) or Medicaid work for children who currently are enrolled in CHIP?