Obamacare Exchanges Struggle to Foster Competition

In the months leading up to the passage of Obamacare, President Obama often pitched the law as a way to increase competition in the health insurance market. Here's what the president said during a September 2009 speech to Congress, for example:
My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75% of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90% is controlled by just one company. Without competition, the price of insurance goes up and the quality goes down. And it makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly – by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to drop the sickest; by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage; and by jacking up rates.
But for many Americans, there's still very little competition in the individual insurance markets created by Obamacare. As The Wall Street Journal reports today:
Consumers in 515 counties, spread across 15 states, have only one insurer selling coverage through the online marketplaces, the Journal found. In more than 80% of those counties, the sole insurer is a local Blue Cross & Blue Shield plan.
The health insurer cherry-picking President Obama described back in 2009 is a real phenomenon. But if anything, Obamacare gives insurers even more incentive to avoid the sick. That's because the law greatly restricts the way insurers can charge based on age and health history. The result is the insurers end up competing to attract healthy people (who are cheaper to serve), and looking for ways to avoid the sick (who are more expensive). That's exactly what's happened across the exchanges. As the Journal notes:
Aetna targeted areas with stable levels of employment and income to attract desirable customers to its marketplace offerings, Chief Executive Mark Bertolini said last fall. "We were very careful to pick the markets" where the insurer could succeed, he said.
Even still, it has proven difficult to attract a profitably healthy cohort of individuals into exchange plans. Bertlolini said last week that Aetna's exchange plans would lose money this year. And he's suggested that eventually, the company might pull out of the exchanges entirely—leaving an individual market with even less competition than exists now.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Biden looks like he is recoiling from foot odor...
Nah, he's contemplating the next upgrade to that vintage muscle car he owns.
Get...your feet off the People's desk.
^^this^^
rude bastard.
Beat me to it. The only reason I logged in was to say that ass should get his shoe off the good furniture.
Never fear. He'll seek to one-up the Clintons and not only steal the silver from the White House, but the china, the furniture, and the copper wiring.
There's a little captain in all of us.
"And by meddling in the health insurance market, I've made this problem worse."
I guess he missed the bit about each state having its own Insurance Commission and the barriers, if not outright prohibition, to selling insurance across state lines?
No, he probably didn't. And wouldn't have understood it if he had.
But this doesn't square with the notion that insurers control the country, and only by breaking their influence by monopolizing their political control under one dominant agency can we possibly hope to free ourselves from their shackles.
And he's suggested that eventually, the company might pull out of the exchanges entirely?leaving an individual market with even less competition than exists now.
Market failure! Bring on single payer!
That was a pretty good "Tony" there, sarc!
Wouldn't it all be simpler if we simply gave the government labor and money and expected nothing in return? Our path to "Brazil" is clear and ready.
Aren't we already doing that via taxation?
I remember asking why exchanges were supposed to help with costs at all. Somebody here had to try to say "Competition" with a straight face.
Nothing increases competition like mandating it.
How come nobody ever thought of this genius move before?
I see he has the Peter Griffin leg up stance all figured out. My wife would kick my ass if I put my shoes on the good furniture.
My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition.
BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!! Tell me another.
Being fair - A lot of problems with low insurance company participation in the ObamaCare roll-out can be attributed to uncooperative Republican governors. Obama won't say that as it is not politically correct.
In any case - employers should be required to NOT provide insurance plans for their employees. That will up the participation pool and lower paperwork for small businesses. If I'm trying to hire and keep people employed, why the heck should I have to provide medical plans? It's absurd.
We should stop calling them "insurers" since what they are selling is not "insurance".