Anyway, what we're talking about is, this is what you wrote about one of the most important legislative achievements since the 1960s, which is responsible for over 40 million Americans currently having health care.

And yet, NYT is somehow paying you to be an economics reporter. This is not normal.

you think that’s something? There’s an alarming correlation no one is talking about that the longer someone is on Medicare, the more likely they are to die.

From the liquidation order… it’s shocking they didn’t get shut down sooner. The word “mandatory” in “mandatory control level” apparently doesn’t mean what I think it means.

I wonder if CMS or states will ever push back on this nonsense.

I’ve been driving electric since 2014 when my Nissan Leaf got 75 miles to a full charge. Even then the range wasn’t a problem for the vast majority of my driving needs.

Can you help me understand why funding violates the Byrd rule? I get why the non-Hyde abortion language was struck but funding CSR seems very germane to the budget.

In Tennessee, Ambetter (also known as centene) is filing some plans under the Bankers Reserve Life Insurance Company of Wyoming subsidiary. Corporate structures are wild.

TN filings are out on their SERFF public access FYI

Assuming the CBO’s interpretation is correct, it’s an interesting policy choice that the GOP would effectively be giving more subsidy money (in the form of APTC) to states if they mandate abortion coverage.

BHP Programs, state premium subsidy, state CSR, state individual mandates… I find so often when I’m doing analysis that these confounds really matter but I always end up just DuckDuckGoing these…

The way I read the bill was that it was just codifying that CSRs couldn’t be used for non-Hyde abortion services, not that in those states, CSR isn’t funded at all. But I trust CBO knows how to read a bill better than I do.