公共选择后的负担能力权衡:从科罗拉多选择中学习。

IF 2.7
Health affairs scholar Pub Date : 2025-08-28 eCollection Date: 2025-08-01 DOI:10.1093/haschl/qxaf160
Andrew Shermeyer
{"title":"公共选择后的负担能力权衡:从科罗拉多选择中学习。","authors":"Andrew Shermeyer","doi":"10.1093/haschl/qxaf160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In 2023, Colorado implemented a public option, called the Colorado Option, and required all insurers in its Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace to offer plans following a uniform benefit design. While the Colorado Option aimed to lower the cost of Marketplace coverage, it is unclear whether the policy has had its intended effect. In this study, I examine how the affordability of Marketplace coverage changed after the Colorado Option for both subsidized and unsubsidized enrollees.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This descriptive analysis used the HIX Compare Individual Market datasets from 2020 to 2025 to measure changes in benchmark Silver plan premiums and premium spreads (the difference in premium between the benchmark Silver plan and lowest-premium plan) in Colorado following the Colorado Option.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between 2020 and 2025, benchmark Silver plan premiums in Colorado increased by $295.84 while premium spread increased by $79.53. These increases were greater than in comparison states.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the years following the Colorado Option, Marketplace coverage in Colorado became more affordable for subsidized enrollees but less affordable for unsubsidized ones. States considering public options should weigh this potential trade-off as they design and implement them to make sure the public option aligns with their policy goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":94025,"journal":{"name":"Health affairs scholar","volume":"3 8","pages":"qxaf160"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392888/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Affordability trade-offs following a public option: learning from the Colorado Option.\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Shermeyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/haschl/qxaf160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In 2023, Colorado implemented a public option, called the Colorado Option, and required all insurers in its Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace to offer plans following a uniform benefit design. While the Colorado Option aimed to lower the cost of Marketplace coverage, it is unclear whether the policy has had its intended effect. In this study, I examine how the affordability of Marketplace coverage changed after the Colorado Option for both subsidized and unsubsidized enrollees.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This descriptive analysis used the HIX Compare Individual Market datasets from 2020 to 2025 to measure changes in benchmark Silver plan premiums and premium spreads (the difference in premium between the benchmark Silver plan and lowest-premium plan) in Colorado following the Colorado Option.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between 2020 and 2025, benchmark Silver plan premiums in Colorado increased by $295.84 while premium spread increased by $79.53. These increases were greater than in comparison states.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the years following the Colorado Option, Marketplace coverage in Colorado became more affordable for subsidized enrollees but less affordable for unsubsidized ones. States considering public options should weigh this potential trade-off as they design and implement them to make sure the public option aligns with their policy goals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94025,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health affairs scholar\",\"volume\":\"3 8\",\"pages\":\"qxaf160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392888/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health affairs scholar\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxaf160\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health affairs scholar","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxaf160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:2023年,科罗拉多州实施了一项公共选择,称为科罗拉多州选择,并要求其平价医疗法案(ACA)市场中的所有保险公司提供统一福利设计的计划。虽然“科罗拉多选择”旨在降低市场保险的成本,但目前尚不清楚该政策是否达到了预期效果。在这项研究中,我研究了在科罗拉多州选择补贴和非补贴的登记者之后,市场覆盖的可负担性是如何变化的。方法:该描述性分析使用HIX比较个人市场数据集,从2020年到2025年,测量基准白银计划溢价和溢价差(基准白银计划和最低溢价计划之间的溢价差)在科罗拉多期权之后在科罗拉多州的变化。结果:在2020年至2025年期间,科罗拉多州基准白银计划保费增加了295.84美元,而保费价差增加了79.53美元。这些增长比比较州更大。结论:在科罗拉多选择之后的几年里,科罗拉多州的市场覆盖范围对有补贴的参保者来说变得更负担得起,而对没有补贴的参保者来说则更负担得起。考虑公共选择的国家在设计和实施公共选择时应该权衡这种潜在的权衡,以确保公共选择与他们的政策目标保持一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Affordability trade-offs following a public option: learning from the Colorado Option.

Affordability trade-offs following a public option: learning from the Colorado Option.

Affordability trade-offs following a public option: learning from the Colorado Option.

Introduction: In 2023, Colorado implemented a public option, called the Colorado Option, and required all insurers in its Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplace to offer plans following a uniform benefit design. While the Colorado Option aimed to lower the cost of Marketplace coverage, it is unclear whether the policy has had its intended effect. In this study, I examine how the affordability of Marketplace coverage changed after the Colorado Option for both subsidized and unsubsidized enrollees.

Methods: This descriptive analysis used the HIX Compare Individual Market datasets from 2020 to 2025 to measure changes in benchmark Silver plan premiums and premium spreads (the difference in premium between the benchmark Silver plan and lowest-premium plan) in Colorado following the Colorado Option.

Results: Between 2020 and 2025, benchmark Silver plan premiums in Colorado increased by $295.84 while premium spread increased by $79.53. These increases were greater than in comparison states.

Conclusion: In the years following the Colorado Option, Marketplace coverage in Colorado became more affordable for subsidized enrollees but less affordable for unsubsidized ones. States considering public options should weigh this potential trade-off as they design and implement them to make sure the public option aligns with their policy goals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信