Font Size
    • Share to Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Email
    • Print

Analysis of the Congressional Budget Office's Estimate of the House Affordable Care Act Repeal Legislation

On March 13, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released an estimate on the budget impact of the American Health Care Act (AHCA), which recently passed the House Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means Committees. According to CBO’s projections, over the next decade, 24 million people will lose health insurance under the proposed legislation compared to current law. The CBO projects that losses will occur due to the proposal’s repeal of the Medicaid expansion, restructuring of the Medicaid program into per capita caps, changes to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) individual market reforms, and repeal of the individual mandate.  Seniors and near retirees would make up the largest demographic group to lose health care coverage under the AHCA.

The CBO estimates that changes to Medicaid will result in 14 million fewer Medicaid enrollees by 2026, a reduction of about 17 percent relative to the number under current law. Changes to the ACA’s individual market reforms will cause the number of individuals age 50-64 without insurance to climb from just over 10 percent under current law to nearly 30 percent.

Private Insurance Changes

Age Rating

Under the ACA, marketplace plan enrollees, including “near seniors” age 50 to 64, can be charged no more than three times what a 21-year-old would pay. The House bill would broaden the age bands to 5 to 1, allowing insurers to charge the oldest consumers five times more than younger ones.  By 2026, the CBO predicts that this provision will substantially raise premiums for older people, e.g., 20 percent to 25 percent higher for a 64-year-old.

Changes to premium tax credits

For individuals with income over 150 of the federal poverty level, the legislation would reduce the percentage of income that younger people have to pay toward their premiums while increasing that percentage for older people, according to CBO.

Continuous coverage

The American Heath Care Act replaces the ACA’s individual mandate with a different mechanism to encourage individuals to purchase insurance. Individuals who don’t maintain continuous health insurance coverage would have to pay a 30 percent surcharge on their premiums for 12 months when reenrolling after a break in coverage of more than 63 days. This would ultimately drive healthier individuals out of the individual market who would be unwilling to pay the surcharge, driving up premium costs for those who remain.

IMPACT ON SENIORS

As a result of these changes, the CBO finds that people between 50 and 64 years old with income of less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) would make up a larger share of the uninsured, from just over 10 percent under current law to nearly 30 percent under AHCA.

Changes to Medicaid

Millions of Medicare beneficiaries rely on Medicaid to help fill in Medicare’s coverage gaps.  Medicare does not pay for most long-term services and supports; consequently, middle class Americans often rely on Medicaid for long-term services and supports when they exhaust their savings.  Medicaid also helps seniors through innovative programs such as Community First Choice, which allows people in need of long-term care to remain in their homes. Additionally, the Medicare Savings Program administered through Medicaid helps low-income seniors pay for their Medicare premiums, copays, coinsurance and deductibles. 

Medicaid Expansion

Under the ACA’s Medicaid expansion, the federal government pays for 90 percent of the cost for states to expand Medicaid eligibility, a higher rate than for the non-expansion Medicaid population.  Beginning in 2020, the House bill would end this enhanced match for all new enrollees made eligible under the ACA’s Medicaid expansion. Funding for these new enrollees would instead revert to the regular federal Medicaid matching rate – on average, 57 percent of Medicaid costs.  States wishing to continue covering this population would have to pick up the other 43 percent for any new enrollees made eligible by Medicaid expansion. 

While the House bill allows states to get the ACA expansion matching rate for current beneficiaries, obtaining the enhanced match is contingent upon these beneficiaries staying continuously enrolled in the program.  But Medicaid beneficiaries often churn in and out of the program.  As a result, most current enrollees are likely to fall off the rolls after two years.  As a result, within a few years, most federal Medicaid expansion funding would lapse to the pre-ACA matching rate.  

Medicaid Restructuring

Per capita caps limit federal funding for state Medicaid programs to an arbitrary per beneficiary funding level. This would ultimately shift costs to states by eliminating the guarantee of additional federal funds if state costs increase because of underlying health care costs, demography or complexity of care.  For example, as the baby boom generation nearly doubles the senior population, state Medicaid programs would be unable to keep up with demands for long-term services and supports. 

Repealing Community First Choice

Under current law, states can elect the Community First Choice option, allowing them to receive a six percentage point increase in their federal matching rate for some services provided by home and community-based attendants to certain Medicaid recipients. CBO finds that AHCA would cut $12 billion dollars over 10 years from this vital program that allows disabled individuals to stay in their homes.

IMPACT ON SENIORS

Over time, states that lose money under per capita caps would have to make up the funding themselves, by cutting benefits and/or limiting eligibility, if federal funds do not keep up with their Medicaid population’s needs. States that expanded their Medicaid programs under the Affordable Care Act would be especially hard hit if the Medicaid expansion is eliminated or reduced as part of ACA repeal.

States could address their funding shortfalls in ways that would harm seniors and their families, including:

  • Scaling back nursing home quality, service and safety protections.

 

  • Requiring patients' spouses, children or other family members to cover the cost of nursing home care, exhausting much or all of their savings.  
  • Tightening eligibility criteria for home and community-based services, resulting in more individuals moving into nursing homes. 
  •  Limiting the number of people served. 

Impact on Medicare

Repeal of the High Wage Earner Medicare Payroll Tax

The ACA included a 0.9 percent Hospital Insurance Trust fund payroll tax on wages above $200,000.  By repealing this tax on high wage earners, the House bill would accelerate the exhaustion of Medicare’s Part A Trust fund by three years, from 2028 to 2025, according to the Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in a letter to Senator Ron Wyden.  The CBO estimates that the Part A Trust fund would forgo $177.3 billion over ten years if the ACA Medicare payroll tax is repealed. In addition to raiding the trust fund, this could lead to cuts in Medicare, including privatizing the program, that would be detrimental to current and future beneficiaries.

Increase in Medicare Disproportionate Share Hospital Payments

Medicare makes “disproportionate share hospital” (DSH) payments to facilities that serve a high percentage of uninsured patients.  Given that the AHCA would increase the number of uninsured people and decrease the number of beneficiaries covered by Medicaid, CBO projects that Medicare DSH payments would increase by $43 billion between 2018 and 2026.  Since part of DSH payments are paid by the Part A Trust fund, this spending increase – in addition to the repeal of the ACA high wage earner Medicare payroll tax – would reduce the fund’s solvency


Please support our public policy and research

 



   

Subscribe e-Alerts

Sign up to receive National Committee updates on Social Security and Medicare.

Read Our Blog

New Bill in U.S. House Boosts Social Security Benefits, Keeps System Solvent for Decades

Legislation just introduced in the U.S. House would put extra money in Social Security beneficiaries’ pockets while keeping the system solvent through the rest of this century. Rep. John Larson’s Social Security 2100 Act does all of that and something more: It gives lie to the myth that Social Security is going bankrupt and the only way to fix it is by cutting benefits.

Read More




 

            

 

Copyright © 2017 by NCPSSM
Login  |