IBJNews

Study: Newly insured to be poorer, less educated

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

New health insurance coverage created by the 2010 health reform law will attract a lower-income, less-educated and more diverse set of customers than the insurance markets that exist today, according to a new analysis by PricewaterhouseCoopers. And that could create challenges for doctors and hospitals trying to care for those patients.

The accounting firm’s Health Research Institute issued its predictions last week after analyzing government databases on the demographics of the insured and uninsured in America.

The law, called the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act, is expected to extend coverage to an additional 30 million Americans either through the state-federal Medicaid program or through subsidies to buy private health insurance in online marketplaces called exchanges.

In Indiana, state officials have yet to decide whether to expand the state’s Medicaid program to cover adults with incomes up to 138 percent of the federal poverty limit. State officials also have until Nov. 16 to notify the federal government whether they will start a state-run insurance exchange or instead let Hoosiers use a federally run exchange.

PricewaterhouseCoopers expects one-third of the newly insured to gain coverage through Medicaid, 45 percent to shop on the exchanges and the rest to enroll in employer-sponsored plans.

These new customers will have about half as much income as those who are currently insured. Pricewaterhouse predicts the average newly insured person will earn 166 percent of the federal poverty limit, compared with an average of 333 percent for those who have health insurance today.

Those differences even factor out the fact that far more of the newly insured will be single—52 percent—than is the case among those with health insurance today, where the rate of single patients is 29 percent.

A big reason for that income gap is that only 42 percent of the newly insured will have full-time jobs, versus 59 percent of insured patients today. Another 31 percent of the newly insured will either be unemployed or have only a part-time job, compared with just 17 percent of those who are insured today.

Another reason for the expected income gap: differences in education levels. Among the newly insured, just 22 percent will have an associate’s degree or higher, the analysis said, compared with 48 percent who have that much education among today’s insured population.

There will be slightly more minorities among the newly insured—25 percent, compared to 21 percent among today’s insured Americans. But the bigger diversity will be in language. Among the newly insured, Pricewaterhouse predicts, 24 percent will speak Spanish as their first language, compared to just 7 percent of those who are currently insured.

“The new patient population is more likely to have difficulty with English and be unaccustomed to deciphering the vagaries of the health system,” wrote the Pricewaterhouse researchers. “And although the new group reports feeling healthy, physicians suspect there will be a range of undetected medical issues to address.”

One physician interviewed by the Pricewaterhouse team said that the influx of new patients who have not received much medical care in recent years—while helpful for doctors and hospitals financially—likely will create a huge initial strain on the system.

“Even the initial health care assessment might be a problem for some of those patients and providers,” said Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association. “Because they may not have seen a physician recently, they will require more hours of assessment and care.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Looking at the two companies - in spite of their relative size to one another -- Ricker's image is (by all accounts) pretty solid and reputable. Their locations are clean, employees are friendly and the products they offer are reasonably priced. By contrast, BP locations are all over the place and their reputation is poor, especially when you consider this is the same "company" whose disastrous oil spill and their response was nothing short of irresponsible should tell you a lot. The fact you also have people who are experienced in franchising saying their system/strategy is flawed is a good indication that another "spill" has occurred and it's the AM-PM/Ricker's customers/company that are having to deal with it.

  2. Daniel Lilly - Glad to hear about your points and miles. Enjoy Wisconsin and Illinois. You don't care one whit about financial discipline, which is why you will blast the "GOP". Classic liberalism.

  3. Isn't the real reason the terrain? The planners under-estimated the undulating terrain, sink holes, karst features, etc. This portion of the route was flawed from the beginning.

  4. You thought no Indy was bad, how's no fans working out for you? THe IRl No direct competition and still no fans. Hey George Family, spend another billion dollars, that will fix it.

  5. I live downtown Indy and had to be in downtown Chicago for a meeting. In other words, I am the target demographic for this train. It leaves at 6:00-- early but doable. Then I saw it takes 5+ hours. No way. I drove. I'm sure I paid 3 to 5 times as much once you factor in gas, parking, and tolls, but it was reimbursed so not a factor for me. Any business traveler is going to take the option that gets there quickly and reliably... and leisure travelers are going to take the option that has a good schedule and promotional prices (i.e., Megabus). Indy to Chicago is the right distance (too short to fly but takes several hours to drive) that this train could be extremely successful even without subsidies, if they could figure out how to have several frequencies (at least 3x/day) and make the trip in a reasonable amount of time. For those who have never lived on the east coast-- Amtrak is the #1 choice for NY-DC and NY-Boston. They have the Acela service, it runs almost every hour, and it takes you from downtown to downtown. It beats driving and flying hands down. It is too bad that we cannot build something like this in the midwest, at least to connect the bigger cities.

ADVERTISEMENT