Recent quotes:

#The27Percent: Patients with preexisting conditions rally online

As the Kaiser Family Foundation report pointed out, a sizable portion of this group is covered by employer insurance or a public option like Medicaid, but they could be denied coverage if Trump administration reverts to pre-ACA policies. Indeed, there could be many more than 55 million at risk, Kaiser said, since its surveys didn’t include questions about conditions like HIV or hepatitis C, which would have also barred respondents from coverage in pre-Obamacare insurance markets.

Crossing State Lines Is No Easy Jaunt for Insurers and Local Regulators - WSJ

Insurance executives question how much interstate sales would unleash competition. Premiums are closely tied to underlying costs, such as rates paid to local doctors and hospitals and projected health needs of enrollees. The regulatory environment notwithstanding, selling coverage in any given state would require an insurer to have a local network of allied doctors and hospitals, something new entrants to a market might find costly to arrange. “In order to offer more value, you will need to have relationships and contracts with the providers in a state,” said Paul Markovich, chief executive of Blue Shield of California. Insurers almost certainly wouldn’t sell coverage at the same price in multiple states, said Jim O’Connor, a principal at consultants Milliman Inc. They would adjust rates to reflect costs in each location, even if all the policies were under the same regulatory regime, he said.

BCBSNC amps up security due to 'frustrated customers'

A so-called "system failure" at BCBSNC enrolled thousands of customers in the wrong health insurance. Customers across the state complained of long wait times with customer service representatives and problems with their bills.

The Sticks and Carrots of Employee Wellness Programs - The New York Times

Most significantly, the law said employers could provide more rewards — or levy more surcharges, depending on how it’s framed — than they could previously: Maximum rewards or penalties now cannot exceed 30 percent of the total cost of the worker’s insurance, up from 20 percent, including both the employee’s and employer’s shares. (And if a tobacco cessation program is included, the figure rises to 50 percent). Advertisement Continue reading the main story So for a family with coverage that is valued at $17,545 — that was the annual average total cost in 2015, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation — it would be perfectly fine for the employer to charge up to about $5,264 more, or 30 percent, for not fulfilling a goal like filling out a health risk assessment form or completing a biometric screening. That is a significant chunk of most families’ budgets.