26 million

[grantcart]

Trying to respond to a comment I was curious to find out what the CBO estimated would be the number of people who would use the exchanges run by the OPM.

The OPM will have the power to control the profit margin, MLR, coverage of these plans.

Currently the OPM runs the exchange for federal employees, and this is akin to what politicians say when they are talking about expanding plans so that citizens would be able to buy the same insurance federal employees have.

The exchanges also must include 'not for profit' options. Presumably some of these options could be public options established by state governments.

The CBO estimated that 26 million people would use these exchanges, much larger than I had guessed.

Here is what they say:

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=446

By 2019, CBO and JCT estimate, the number of nonelderly people who are uninsured would be reduced by about 31 million, leaving about 23 million nonelderly residents uninsured (about one-third of whom would be unauthorized immigrants). Under the legislation, the share of legal nonelderly residents with insurance coverage would rise from about 83 percent currently to about 94 percent. Approximately 26 million people would purchase their own coverage through the new insurance exchanges and there would be roughly 15 million more enrollees in Medicaid and CHIP than is projected under current law. Relative to currently projected levels, the number of people purchasing individual coverage outside the exchanges would decline by about 5 million. The number of people obtaining coverage through their employer would be about 4 million lower in 2019 under the legislation, CBO and JCT estimate.

The proposal would call on OPM to contract for two national or multi-state health insurance plans—one of which would have to be nonprofit—that would be offered through the insurance exchanges.

Not as good as the public option which is not as good as single payer but a big step ahead of what we have today - nothing.

[Ozymanithrax]

1. A not for profit option could be a non-protit health insurance plan...

there are some.

[grantcart]

2. Correct and some of those are not very good.

It does not put a limit on the number of not for profit plans that can be included and presumably one that a public option that has state sanction would definitely be included.

[GinaMaria]

3. yes. Several of the blue cross plans

fall in this category. They function similarly to for profits and publicly traded health insurance companies. Similar policies and practices, exec bonus structure, etc. Only difference is they don't allow shareholders to profit b/c they do not have share holders. Some of these have had terrible corruption scandals. No more trust worthy than than the usual suspects.

[Ozymanithrax]

5. I agree with what you say, but I think these are the non-profits mentioned by the OP...

not a some odd sideways creation of a public option.

[grantcart]

6. My point is that the bill creates a platform for inclusion if a state has

a public option, a detail that was mentioned before but has been lost.

After passage of the bill any state could pass a self sustaining public option and ask that it be included in the exchanges.

[Cha]

4. KickR

[eridani]

7. And it will be nothing for another 4 years

--during which time Dems will take the blame for everything wrong with health care if this piece of shit passes.

And the exchanges are founded on the values of sociopaths--the more money you have, the more coverage you get.