Alaska, one of the reddest states in the country, is essentially bailing out its insurance market to prevent Obamacare from collapsing.

A bill passed by the heavily GOP state Legislature to shore up its lone surviving Obamacare insurer is awaiting the signature of Gov. Bill Walker, a Republican-turned-independent who was endorsed two years ago by former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. The legislation, originally proposed by Walker, sets up a $55 million fund — financed through an existing tax on all insurance companies — to subsidize enrollees’ costs as the state struggles with Obamacare price spikes and an exodus by all except one insurance company.

. . .

A proposed Medicare experiment encouraging doctors to use cheaper meds is either a necessary fix for America’s high drug prices — or the first step to President Donald Trump dismantling Obamacare.

It all depends whom you ask. And experts interviewed for POLITICO’s “Pulse Check” podcast showed the sides couldn’t be further apart.

The Obama administration’s Medicare experiment would test whether the program’s payment system encourages doctors to prescribe more expensive drugs, since they’re paid a set percentage of a drug’s price — therefore getting more for a higher-cost drug.

. . .

Most big employers provide wellness programs now, and the Affordable Care Act gave the idea a boost in 2010 by letting companies offer employees financial incentives— such as lower health insurance premiums, gift cards or prizes—worth up to 30 percent of the cost of their health insurance.

But as the wellness industry has grown, questions have started to arise about just how effective these programs really are—and how fair. It’s not clear the programs financially benefit employers, and evidence is also mixed on whether they make employees healthier. And now, some employees have begun to bristle at the omnipresence of wellness in corporate culture and see the requirement to share personal health data with their employer as an intrusion on their privacy.

. . .

Health plans would likely feel the financial hit if the courts ultimately strike down Obamacare’s cost-sharing subsidies. That’s because those payments go directly to insurers to make up for lower payments from their poorest customers.

A federal court ruled today that the Obama administration has been improperly funding the cost-sharing subsidies. The ruling is stayed pending appeal, so there will be no immediate fallout for health plans.

But at stake is approximately $175 billion over a decade that insurers would receive to subsidize their Obamacare customers. Cost-sharing subsidies are available to enrollees with incomes below 250 percent of the federal poverty level who enroll in silver plans. They’re designed to reduce out-of-pocket costs when those individuals access medical care.

. . .

A federal judge on Thursday ruled the Obama administration has been improperly funding an Obamacare subsidy program, a huge win for the House of Representatives’ lawsuit against the White House.

The judge said that the program can continue, pending appeal. The ruling, if it stands, could be a significant financial setback for the millions of low-income Americans who benefit from the cost-sharing subsidies, which help people pay for out-of-pocket costs like co-pays at the doctor’s office.

Congress authorized the program but never actually provided the money for it, wrote U.S. District Court Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, a George W. Bush appointee.
. . .

The last thing Democrats want to contend with just a week before the 2016 presidential election is an outcry over double-digit insurance hikes as millions of Americans begin signing up for Obamacare. But that looks increasingly likely as health plans socked by Obamacare losses look to regain their financial footing by raising rates.

Just a week after the nation’s largest insurer, UnitedHealth Group, pulled out of most Obamacare exchanges because it anticipates $650 million in losses this year, Aetna’s CEO said Thursday that his company expects to break even, but legislative fixes are needed to make the marketplace sustainable.

. . .

The GOP has big reasons to move ahead with sending an ObamaCare repeal to President Obama’s desk: it will force the president to veto the bill, will fulfill a promise to its base, and will lay the groundwork to truly repeal the health care law under a Republican president in 2017. It’s not just optics. Republicans are carefully constructing a legislative strategy, based on Senate rules and precedents, to make it easier to unravel the health law in 2017 if a Republican wins the White House.

Texas — In rural Borden County, 12 people signed up for Obamacare this year. Livid over the government telling them they must buy something and loath to take anything that looks like a “handout,” the uninsured here are likely to stay that way. As Obamacare’s third open enrollment season began Sunday, this rock-solid conservative community of about 650 people offers a window into the challenges health law advocates face to expand coverage around the country.

Texas — In rural Borden County, 12 people signed up for Obamacare this year. Livid over the government telling them they must buy something and loath to take anything that looks like a “handout,” the uninsured here are likely to stay that way. As Obamacare’s third open enrollment season began Sunday, this rock-solid conservative community of about 650 people offers a window into the challenges health law advocates face to expand coverage around the country.