Is it just me, or does it seem like lawmakers aren't particularly concerned about whether the stuff they propose is actuarially workable?
-
-
Not at all



2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @bjdickmayhew @LouiseNorris and
Jeepers... and the areas without insurers are likely to be high cost rural areas
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wcsanders @bjdickmayhew and
I made exactly this point in my write-up: http://acasignups.net/17/05/18/claire-mccaskill-has-interesting-idea-re-bare-countieswith-three-potential-problems …pic.twitter.com/poLupZwIWu
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @charles_gaba @wcsanders and
Not just that--their risk pool AND total potential enrollment pool would change dramatically year to year.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @charles_gaba @wcsanders and
It could include 16 counties in Tennessee next year, 5 counties in Arizona in 2019... they wouldn't know which ones until late in the year.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @charles_gaba @wcsanders and
And the Risk adjustment would be so hard to manage
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @rebeccastob @charles_gaba and
Yeah how the hell do you set the GCFs?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wcsanders @charles_gaba and
Well with SHOP it's all the location of the business right - don't know how that would even work all these areas charged the same?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rebeccastob @charles_gaba and
Yeah that's what baffles me. What rating area do you assign someone buying a D.C. plan who lives in rural TN??
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
That being said I also have a gazillion unanswered questions about this idea!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.