Home » Matthew Fiedler
About Matthew Fiedler
There is room to modify the bundled payment models to address concerns raised by Secretary Price and others without damaging the integrity of the models. (more…)
In anticipation of the official CBO estimates, this blog post draws upon prior CBO estimates and analysis to assess how they will likely expect this legislation to impact insurance coverage.
How Would the Revised Senate Health Care Bill Affect Individual Market Premiums in 2026 and Over the Long Run?
We find that the current population of individual market enrollees would pay more for the same level of coverage under the BCRA than under current law, before accounting for any premium tax credits for which individuals may be eligible. (more…)
The Cruz amendment would put significant upward pressure on premiums for ACA-compliant plans, shifting costs toward sicker individual market enrollees and the federal government. (more…)
Sen. Cruz’s Proposed Change to Senate Health Care Bill Would Undermine Protections for Enrollees with Significant Health Care Needs
Matthew Fielder examines Senator Cruz’s proposed change to the Senate healthcare bill. (more…)
While many reactions to the CBO analysis focused on how the BCRA would affect insurance coverage, the bill’s effects on individual market insurance premiums have also received considerable attention.
Like the AHCA, the Senate’s Health Care Bill Could Weaken ACA Protections Against Catastrophic Costs
Schaeffer Initiative Senior Fellow Matthew Fielder analyzes the potential effects of the Senate’s health care bill on essential health benefits and ACA protections against catastrophic costs.
Allowing States to Define “Essential Health Benefits” Could Weaken ACA Protections Against Catastrophic Costs for People with Employer Coverage Nationwide
This post addresses the new MacArthur Amendment specifically and provides more detail on why waivers in one state could have effects elsewhere. (more…)
New Changes to Essential Benefits in the GOP Health Bill Could Jeopardize Protections Against Catastrophic Costs, Even for People with Job-Based Coverage
Weakening essential health benefit standards could also have important negative consequences for the coverage offered by employers of all sizes because it would weaken the ACA’s guarantee of protection against catastrophic costs. (more…)
We estimate that premiums would be around 13 percent higher under the AHCA than they are under current law, holding plan generosity and the individual market age distribution fixed at their current law levels. (more…)