Discussion
Bobby_57
Californiahealthinsuranceexchange.edited.docxRunning head: COVERED CALIFORNIA 1
COVERED CALIFORNIA 2
Covered California
Name
Institution
Course
Date
Introduction
As a state, California is among those states that have chosen and undertaken the activity of creating its marketplace for health care, and this has been done under the Affordable Care Act. The practice is what is regarded as Covered California and also stretches to cover California’s Health Insurance Exchange. The above exchange is a free service and one that is offered by the government agency that provides subsidized Obamacare plans for the state of California. It was established so that it could help the citizens of this state as well as the legal residents to apply for marketplace coverage so that it could comply with the Affordable Care Act.
It is also important to mention that the insurance exchange is aimed at connecting the residents of California with a brand-name for the health insurance under the Patient Care program or plan. After being put into place, the program has managed to cover a large number of individuals, and this has been in line with what it was meant to carry out/execute, which was reducing the costs of health insurance so that more and more individuals would be insured under the program, (Jones et al., 2014). The majority of low-income families have also been beneficiaries or managed to benefit from the program since, through this exchange, those families that sign/signed up via this exchange can qualify for the tax credits.
As far as what California's health insurance exchange would be, it is worth mentioning that it would become California’s rescue plan/program for the majority of the legal residents in California. A notable reason exists for arguing as such concerning what this exchange would be maybe in the future. As an example, since its inception, the health insurance exchange has undergone tremendous steps and changes, and this is all meant to ensure that there are better outcomes for those that will be getting the above free service. It is also seen that a lot of individuals have managed to enroll in the Affordable Care Act under the insurance exchange, and more of the Californian residents are expected to join into the Affordable Care Act, also regarded as Covered California in this state (Gabel et al., 2017). The above instances form the basis of arguing that the health insurance exchange is anticipated to be California's Rescue Plan enhancement. Also, the individuals will be at a point of adding their parents like dependents if at all they will be at a point of providing around 50% of the support to their parents. As a result, and overall, this exchange is likely to be California's Rescue Plan in terms of health care and would most likely replace the Obama Care program.
As for the reasons of arguing as above, all Californians are entitled or are supposed to be assured of their health conditions, and this can only be attained if at all they can access not only affordable but also high-quality health care. The above activity is one that can be achieved by having such a health insurance exchange which will make sure that the people of the state of California can access this high-quality health care (Scheffler et al., 2015). At the core of this aspect are the costs associated with the acquisition of this health care. In such an instance, the health insurance exchange is one that will ensure the bargaining power of the residents, and this is a condition that will lower the cost of registering for the Affordable Care. The reduced costs of acquiring health are also one that will make sure that even those people that have a lower income can access affordable and also high-quality health care as it is entitled to them.
The redesign
In case I was at a point of redesigning a certain aspect of the California health insurance exchange, the specific aspect that I would redesign is that of the tax issue which is imposed on those that fail to buy the health insurance. As of 2014, the Federal Affordable Care Act made it a requirement that the personal taxpayers, as well as their dependents, were to keep a Minimum Essential Coverage (Drake, 2019). In case such individuals were unable to go as per this requirement, then they were to face some tax penalty. The same aspect was applied to those people that were capable of purchasing the health insurance under the exchange scenario but failed to do so, and they were to be subjected to a tax penalty (Schwartz, 2012). In combination, the above two issues bring about a single thing or aspect of the tax penalty under the Californian health insurance exchange. Therefore, in case there was an opportunity of redesigning the health insurance exchange, the aspect of the tax penalty is one that would be redesigned. The manner of redesigning would be coming up with an essential way of sensitizing the people to purchase health insurance as opposed to imposing certain taxes on those that would fail to buy it. As it will be seen in the reasons given below, the above aspect is worth or important to be redesigned so that the image of the health insurance exchange may be improved and enhanced.
Among the essential reasons for arguing that this is an aspect worth to be redesigned is that the tax penalty appears as an inappropriate way of dealing with those that fail to take part in the exchange despite them qualifying for it. In other words, imposing the tax penalty appears to be a way of punishing the residents as opposed to influencing or sensitizing them. Instead of forcing the people, it would be important to teach them about why they have to engage in the health insurance exchange or purchase the health insurance instead of imposing the tax penalty on those failing to purchase the health insurance, especially the low-income individuals. The other reason is that the tax penalty would interfere with the other spheres of life of an individual apart from the medical scheme. For instance, the tax penalty applies whenever the people are filing their yearly state taxes, which covers other areas of the people such as housing and employment spheres. Therefore, it becomes important to redesign the tax penalty to avoid such an occurrence.
Conclusion
Covered California is an important aspect of the program since it has a significant impact on the lives of Californians (Lytle et al., 2013). Since its inception, the majority of the residents from California have benefited from the program. As an example, most of them have their medical costs reduced and have attained or can access affordable and quality care, which has led to better health outcomes. However, certain aspects of the health insurance exchange are those that might require being redesigned due to the consequences that the aspects come with them. As discussed in the body section, the tax penalty that is imposed on those that fail to purchase the health insurance under this exchange scheme might require being redesigned so that it does not appear as a punishment in the scheme.
References
Drake, C. (2019). What are consumers willing to pay for a broad network health plan? Evidence from covered California. Journal of health economics, 65, 63-77.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2018.12.003
Gabel, J. R., Arnold, D. R., Fulton, B. D., Stromberg, S. T., Green, M., Whitmore, H., & Scheffler, R. M. (2017). Consumers buy lower-cost plans on Covered California, suggesting exposure to premium increases is less than commonly reported. Health Affairs, 36(1), 8-15.
https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2016.0902
Jones, D. K., Bradley, K. W., & Oberlander, J. (2014). Pascal's Wager: health insurance exchanges, Obamacare, and the Republican dilemma. Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law, 39(1), 97-137.
https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-2395190
Lytle, Elizabeth C., Dylan H. Roby, Laurel Lucia, Ken Jacobs, Livier Cabezas, and Naderah Pourat. "Promoting Enrollment of Low-Income Health Program Participants in Covered California." (2013).
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6s27k46v
Scheffler, R. M., Kessell, E., & Brandt, M. (2015). Covered California: The Impact of Provider and Health Plan Market Power on Premiums. Journal of health politics, policy, and law, 40(6), 1179-1202.
Schwartz, M. D. (2012). Health care reform and the primary care workforce bottleneck. Journal of general internal medicine, 27(4), 469-472.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-011-1921-4
