A quick thread on yesterday’s Gallup data: I would caution against concluding that there has already been a large increase in the uninsured rate under the Trump Administration on the basis of these data. Notably, Gallup’s estimate of the uninsured rate has been drifting upward relative to estimates from the ACS and NHIS, the two most comparable federal surveys, for about 10 years now.

The indexing provisions of the new payment notice are technical, but important. They would reduce the premium tax credit for all who receive it. Would also increase allowable out-of-pocket maximum (incl. in group coverage) and increase the employer mandate penalty. More below. Starting with premium tax credit, a refresher: people eligible for the PTC pay a sliding-scale percentage of their income toward the second-lowest-cost silver plan. Fed gov’t pays the rest.

Good to see this new @CEA report acknowledging that the 2017 individual market premium increases were a transitional phenomenon, particularly after a year of WH claims that the individual market was in a “death spiral”: whitehouse.gov/wp-content/upl…. Remain proud of this January 2017 report from the Obama CEA that predicted exactly this outcome when it was far from conventional wisdom: obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/….

It’s important to read CBO’s new analyses of the “stabilization” package JOINTLY. Reading just the official cost estimate suggests the package would increase coverage (& the deficit). Reading it with the companion letter shows the package would REDUCE coverage (& the deficit). CBO’s cost estimate (see cbo.gov/system/files/1…) measures the package against a baseline where CSR payments are still be made. CBO does this because it’s required to, but it’s not the world we’re living in!