Preexisting Condition Protections Under the Affordable Care Act: Changes in Insurance Coverage,Premium Contributions,and Out-of-Pocket Spending

ObjectivesIn January 2014, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) preexisting condition protections prohibited coverage denials, premium increases, and claim denials on the basis of preexisting conditions. This study aimed to examine changes in coverage and premiums and out-of-pocket spending after the implementation of the preexisting condition protections under the ACA.MethodsWe identified adults aged 18 to 64 years with (n = 59 041) and without preexisting conditions (n = 61 970) from the 2011-2013 and 2015-2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We used a difference-in-differences and a difference-in-difference-in-differences approach to assess the associations of preexisting condition protections and changes in insurance coverage, premium contributions, and out-of-pocket spending after the ACA. Simple and multivariable logistic or multivariable 2-part models were fitted for the full sample and stratified by family income (low ≤138% federal poverty level [FPL]; middle 139%-400% FPL; and high > 400 FPL).ResultsThe ACA increased nongroup insurance coverage to a similar extent for individuals with or without preexisting conditions at all income levels. Decreases in premium contributions were observed to a similar extent among families with nongroup private coverage regardless of declinable preexisting condition status, whereas no significant changes were observed among families with group coverage. We found greater decreases in out-of-pocket spending for individuals with preexisting conditions than those without conditions among both individuals covered by nongroup and group insurance, and a greater difference was observed among those covered by nongroup insurance (difference-in-difference-in-differences ?$279; 95% confidence interval ?$528 to ?$29).ConclusionsThe ACA protections were associated with decreases in out-of-pocket spending among adults with preexisting conditions.     

Health reform under the patient protection and Affordable Care Act: characteristics of exchange-based health insurance enrollees

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) reformed and expanded healthcare coverage with an exchange-based health insurance program. While millions of Americans have benefited from enrollment in ACA marketplace insurance plans, many individuals are likely to be affected by potential future policy changes. Since few studies on the features of marketplace enrollees exist, we adopted a retrospective, cross-sectional study design using 2016 National Health Interview data to identify sociodemographic and health characteristics of enrollees, comparing them to those without insurance. Chi-square tests and logistic regression examined factors associated with enrollees. Adults with multiple chronic diseases (AOR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.44, 2.50), a history of smoking (AOR = 2.44, 95% CI = 1.82, 3.26), females, married, age 50–64 years, higher educational attainment, and retirees (AOR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.06, 3.27) were more likely to be enrollees. Since enrollees are largely higher risk individuals with greater healthcare needs, policies that modify the ACA should take these factors into account to reduce potential adverse impacts on enrollees.     

The Affordable Care Act's insurance market regulations' effect on coverage

Much of the debate surrounding reform of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) revolves around its insurance market regulation. This paper studies the impact on health insurance coverage of those provisions. Using data from the American Community Survey, years 2008–2015, I focus on individuals, ages 26 to 64, who are ineligible for the subsidies or Medicaid expansions included in the ACA to isolate the effect of its market regulation. To account for time trends, I utilize a differences‐in‐differences approach with a control group of residents of Massachusetts who were already subject to a similarly regulated health insurance market. I find that the ACA's regulations caused an increase of 0.95 percentage points in health insurance coverage for my sample in 2014. This increase was concentrated among younger individuals, suggesting that the law's regulations ameliorated adverse selection in the individual health insurance market.     

The effect of health insurance on crime: Evidence from the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion

Little evidence exists on the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on criminal behavior, a gap in the literature that this paper seeks to address. Using a simple model, we argue we should anticipate a decrease in time devoted to criminal activities in response to the expansion, because the availability of the ACA Medicaid coverage raises the opportunity cost of crime. This prediction is particularly relevant for the ACA expansion because it primarily affects childless adults, a population likely to contain individuals who engage in criminal behavior. We validate this forecast empirically using a difference‐in‐differences framework, estimating the expansion's effects on panel datasets of state‐ and county‐level crime rates. Our estimates suggest that the ACA Medicaid expansion was negatively associated with burglary, vehicle theft, homicide, robbery, and assault. These crime‐reduction spillover effects represent an important offset to the government's cost burden for the ACA Medicaid expansion.     

Impacts of the Affordable Care Act dependent coverage provision on health-related outcomes of young adults

The first major insurance expansion of the Affordable Care Act – a provision requiring insurers to allow dependents to remain on parents’ health insurance until turning 26 – took effect in September 2010. We estimate this mandate's impacts on numerous outcomes related to health care access, preventive care utilization, risky behaviors, and self-assessed health. We estimate difference-in-differences models with 23–25 year olds as the treatment group and 27–29 year olds as the control group. For the full sample, the dependent coverage provision increased the probabilities of having health insurance, a primary care doctor, and excellent self-assessed health, while reducing body mass index. However, the mandate also increased risky drinking and did not lead to any significant increases in preventive care utilization. Subsample analyses reveal particularly large gains for men and college graduates.     

Health insurance reform and retirement: Evidence from the Affordable Care Act

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has provided millions of Americans with medical insurance but may have led to an increase in retirement among older individuals who are utilizing the newly available coverage options as a substitute for employer‐provided insurance. Using data from the American Community Survey from 2009–2016, this hypothesis is tested by estimating the effect of the premium subsidies and Medicaid expansions of the ACA on retirement transitions for the non‐Medicare eligible cohort of older Americans aged 55–64. Research results indicate a 2% and 8% decrease in labor force participation resulting from the premium subsidies and Medicaid expansions, respectively. Slightly larger estimates are found among a subgroup of adult couples. The study also finds suggestive evidence of crowd‐out of employer‐sponsored insurance by subsidized marketplace plans but finds no such effects from the Medicaid expansions.     

Health insurance and self‐assessed health: New evidence from Affordable Care Act repeal fear

Self‐assessed health is one of the most commonly used health measures by economists. However, changes in self‐assessed health are not always accompanied by changes in physical health as measured by clinical outcomes. This study provides suggestive evidence that this discrepancy arises because self‐assessed health is significantly influenced by psychological factors. Specifically, when the perceived risk of Affordable Care Act (ACA) repeal increased, as documented by Google Trends data, self‐assessed health declined among low‐income childless adults living in states that expanded Medicaid under the ACA.     

Public validation and its impact on the initial Affordable Care Act enrollment

The 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA) resulted in the creation of state-based marketplaces (SBMs) and federally facilitated marketplaces (FFMs), and provided financial assistance to a portion of those eligible to enroll. This study looks at how choosing to create a SBM rather than a FFM, and the financial assistance provided to some, influenced enrollments rates as signals of support for the ACA in the eyes of those eligible to enroll. The findings show that the enrollment behavior of those most strongly in support of the ACA legislation was influenced by those external signals of support for the ACA.     

The impact of the Affordable Care Act on self‐employment

This paper estimates the impact of the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2014 on the decision to be self‐employed. Using data from the Current Population Survey, we employ two identification strategies. Utilizing prereform variation in state nongroup health insurance market regulations, we find that the ACA did not increase self‐employment overall in states that lacked similar provisions in their nongroup markets prior to 2014. In specifications that utilize variation across individuals in characteristics that could make it harder for them to purchase insurance if they left their current employer, we also do not find that the ACA differentially increased self‐employment. However, in states that lacked the ACA nongroup market provisions, we do find a statistically significant increase in the second year of implementation (when individuals had more time to adjust behavior and the exchanges functioned properly) among individuals eligible for insurance subsidies, suggesting that a combination of time to adjust, low uncertainty and low insurance costs may be necessary for nongroup health insurance reforms to impact self‐employment.     

Rural Affordable Care Act Outreach and Enrollment: What We Learned During the First Marketplace Open Enrollment Period

As part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act) of 2010, 2 new opportunities for health care coverage were established for many uninsured individuals beginning on January 1, 2014. The first opportunity was through Medicaid expansion where states had the opportunity to expand Medicaid coverage to individuals with household incomes up to 133% of the federal poverty level. The second opportunity was through the establishment of Health Insurance Marketplaces where individuals could purchase private health plans and potentially qualify for financial assistance in paying for their plans. The Office of Rural Health Policy (ORHP) provided supplemental grant awards to help stimulate Affordable Care Act outreach and education efforts in rural communities that were being served by the Rural Health Care Services Outreach (Outreach) Grant Program. As a result, Outreach grantees enrolled 9,300 rural Americans during the initial Open Enrollment period. Valuable outreach and enrollment lessons were learned from rural communities based on discussions with the Outreach grantees who received the supplemental funding. These lessons will help rural communities prepare for the next Open Enrollment period.     

Unintended consequences of health insurance: Affordable Care Act's free contraception mandate and risky sex

Health insurance is a primary driver of rising medical expenditures. Economic theory suggests that insurance induces an increase in risky behaviors, but previous empirical evidence is mixed. I use a mandate in the Affordable Care Act in which contraceptives were covered at zero cost to consumers to test for unintended effects of insurance on risky sex. Leveraging mandated zero cost‐sharing for contraception and pre‐policy insured rates as a measure of treatment intensity, I provide evidence that this 2012 policy reduced fertility but caused unintended consequences: a decline in condom use and a subsequent increase in sexually transmitted infections (STIs). I discuss shortcomings of controlling for nonparallel pre‐trends using state‐trends, and I suggest an alternative to control for pre‐trends directly in the context of dose‐response difference‐in‐differences. Finally, estimates based on the 2010 dependent coverage mandate indicate health insurance provides an overall net positive effect on insurance and STI prevention.