#NNPA BlackPress
PRESS ROOM: New Analysis Finds Leading State-Based Marketplaces Have Performed Well
NNPA NEWSWIRE — The report examines the impact that federal and state actions have had on state-based marketplaces and the federally facilitated marketplace (FFM). Cumulative premium increases in California, Massachusetts and Washington are less than half of the increases seen in FFM states, but 2019 premium increases spiked in California and Washington compared to Massachusetts, which continued its state-based penalty.
WASHINGTON D.C. — A new report highlights the benefits of state-based exchanges, particularly in the areas of controlling premium costs and attracting new enrollment. The report, which was produced by Covered California, the Massachusetts Health Connector and the Washington Health Benefit Exchange, found that premiums in these states were less than half of what consumers saw in the 39 states that relied on the federally facilitated marketplace (FFM) between 2014 and 2019.
“The lesson is striking: Consumers are the big winners when marketplaces use all the tools of the Affordable Care Act,” said Covered California Executive Director Peter V. Lee. “The policies underway in these three states are easily transferable, and if applied to the federal marketplace, taxpayers would save billions of dollars in subsidies, and middle-class Americans would benefit from much lower premiums.”
The joint report examined how state and federal actions affected premiums and new enrollment.
State-Based Marketplaces Controlled Premium Growth
The report examined the cost of coverage by comparing the average benchmark premium in three states and the FFM between 2014 and 2019. The weighted average increase in California, Massachusetts and Washington was 39 percent, compared to the 85 percent increase in FFM states.
In addition, the report also found if the FFM states had experienced the same lower premium growth seen in the three states, the federal government could have saved roughly $35 billion in lower subsidy payments between 2014 and 2018.
While the report did not quantify the increased costs paid by unsubsidized consumers in FFM states, they would have saved substantially and been less likely to have been priced out of coverage.
State-Based Marketplaces Performed Better at Enrolling New Consumers
The report also examined the impact on new enrollment of recent federal decisions on marketing and outreach and the elimination of the individual mandate penalty.
Figure 1: Average Benchmark Premium Growth by Percentage Compared to 2014
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation. Estimate of cost savings use benchmark premium data. FFM includes SBM-FP states.
During the final days of open enrollment for the 2017 plan year, the federal administration began a series of cuts to marketing and outreach on behalf of FFM states. These cuts have been deepened and maintained, resulting in a significant reduction in new enrollment in states served by the federal marketplace. The decrease in new enrollment likely means a less-healthy consumer pool, which would lead to the larger premium increases seen above.
From 2016 to 2018, the 39 FFM states saw the number of new enrollees drop from 4 million to 2.5 million, a decrease of 40 percent. By contrast, new enrollment in California, Massachusetts and Washington — states that control their own marketing and outreach — remained relatively stable (see Figure 2: New Enrollment Growth by Marketplace, Comparing 2016 to 2018).
“State-based marketplaces know that health insurance is a product that needs to be actively sold to consumers, and getting the word out is a proven way to promote enrollment,” said Pam MacEwan, chief executive officer of the Washington Health Benefit Exchange. “Enrolling more people means a healthier risk pool, which lowers premiums and saves money for everyone in the individual market.”
Figure 2: New Enrollment Growth by Marketplace, Comparing 2016 to 2018
Clear Indication of the Critical Role of the Individual Mandate Penalty in Promoting Enrollment
The open-enrollment period that just concluded for the 2019 coverage year marked the first time the marketplaces would operate without a federal individual mandate penalty, which was zeroed out through the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 and signed into law by the president. During the most recent open-enrollment period, new enrollment in FFM states dropped an additional 16 percent — on top of the already large drop of 40 percent in the prior two years. California and Washington also experienced steep declines in the number of new enrollees signing up for coverage. However, Massachusetts — which kept a state-level mandate penalty — saw new enrollment increase by 31 percent (see Figure 3: New Enrollment Growth by Marketplace, Comparing 2018 to 2019).
Figure 3: New Enrollment Growth by Marketplace, Comparing 2018 to 2019
“The individual mandate in Massachusetts has proven to be an effective part of our effort to provide access to affordable coverage to everyone,” said Louis Gutierrez, executive director of the Massachusetts Health Connector. “Our experience shows that a mandate that provides incentive to participate, while also delivering important protections and benefits to consumers, plays a vital role not only in people getting covered, but also staying covered.”
Other marketplaces have also instituted a penalty, such as New Jersey and the District of Columbia. While critics may point to lower new enrollment in New Jersey as proof that a penalty is not effective, Lee says that is not the case. “The penalty works, and to solely highlight New Jersey — which had a penalty in place, but also had its marketing and outreach efforts undercut — is not a reasonable comparison.”
“While Washington kept premium increases in the early years of the Affordable Care Act to low single digits, the past three years have seen big increases due to federal policy changes that continue to bring uncertainty to the market, including the zeroing of the individual mandate penalty,” said MacEwan. “In particular, 2019 saw an almost 14 percent premium increase. These premium increases are having a large negative impact on the many Washington consumers who do not benefit from a subsidy.”
The release of the report comes on the same day that leaders of the California and Massachusetts marketplaces appeared before the Health Subcommittee of the U.S.
House Committee on Energy and Commerce. View the hearing on “Strengthening Our Health Care System: Legislation to Lower Consumer Costs and Expand Access.”
Read the testimonies of representatives from California and Massachusetts at the committee hearing.
About Covered California
Covered California is the state’s health insurance marketplace, where Californians can find affordable, high-quality insurance from top insurance companies. Covered California is the only place where individuals who qualify can get financial assistance on a sliding scale to reduce premium costs. Consumers can then compare health insurance plans and choose the plan that works best for their health needs and budget. Depending on their income, some consumers may qualify for the low-cost or no-cost Medi-Cal program.
Covered California is an independent part of the state government whose job is to make the health insurance marketplace work for California’s consumers. It is overseen by a five-member board appointed by the governor and the Legislature. For more information about Covered California, please visit www.CoveredCA.com.
Covered California can be contacted at media@covered.ca.gov or (916) 206-7777.
About the Massachusetts Health Connector
The Massachusetts Health Connector is the Commonwealth’s health insurance exchange, and currently provides health or dental insurance to more than 300,000 people. Individuals and small businesses can search for and purchase high-quality, commercial coverage, while reaping the health and financial benefits of being covered. Individuals and small businesses can find health insurance options at www.MAhealthconnector.com.
For information on the Massachusetts Health Connector, contact Jason Lefferts, director of Communications and Media Relations, at (617) 933-3141.
About the Washington Health Benefit Exchange
The Washington Health Benefit Exchange, or Washington Healthplanfinder, is an online marketplace for individuals and families in Washington to compare and enroll in health insurance coverage and gain access to tax credits, reduced cost-sharing and public programs such as Medicaid. The next open-enrollment period in Washington begins on Nov. 1.
The Washington Health Benefit Exchange can be reached at ben.spradling@wahbexchange.org.
#NNPA BlackPress
Remembering George Floyd
#NNPA BlackPress
OP-ED: Oregon Bill Threatens the Future of Black Owned Newspapers and Community Journalism
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Nearly half of Oregon’s media outlets are now owned by national conglomerates with no lasting investment in local communities. According to an OPB analysis, Oregon has lost more than 90 news jobs (and counting) in the past five years. These were reporters, editors and photographers covering school boards, investigating corruption and telling community stories, until their jobs were cut by out-of-state corporations.

By Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr.
President and CEO, National Newspaper Publishers Association
For decades, The Skanner newspaper in Portland, the Portland Observer, and the Portland Medium have served Portland, Oregon’s Black community and others with a vital purpose: to inform, uplift and empower. But legislation now moving through the Oregon Legislature threatens these community news institutions—and others like them.
As President and CEO of the National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA), which represents more than 255 Black-owned media outlets across the United States—including historic publications like The Skanner, Portland Observer, and the Portland Medium—l believe that some Oregon lawmakers would do more harm than good for local journalism and community-owned publications they are hoping to protect.
Oregon Senate Bill 686 would require large digital platforms such as Google and Meta to pay for linking to news content. The goal is to bring desperately needed support to local newsrooms. However, the approach, while well-intentioned, puts smaller, community-based publications at a future severe financial risk.
We need to ask – will these payments paid by tech companies benefit the journalists and outlets that need them most? Nearly half of Oregon’s media outlets are now owned by national conglomerates with no lasting investment in local communities. According to an OPB analysis, Oregon has lost more than 90 news jobs (and counting) in the past five years. These were reporters, editors, and photographers covering school boards, investigating corruption, and telling community stories, until their jobs were cut by out-of-state corporations.
Legislation that sends money to these national conglomerate owners—without the right safeguards to protect independent and community-based outlets—rewards the forces that caused this inequitable crisis in the first place. A just and inclusive policy must guarantee that support flows to the front lines of local journalism and not to the boardrooms of large national media corporations.
The Black Press exists to fill in the gaps left by larger newsrooms. Our reporters are trusted messengers. Our outlets serve as forums for civic engagement, accountability and cultural pride. We also increasingly rely on our digital platforms to reach our audiences, especially younger generations—where they are.
We are fervently asking Oregon lawmakers to take a step back and engage in meaningful dialogue with those most affected: community publishers, small and independent outlets and the readers we serve. The Skanner, The Portland Observer, and The Portland Medium do not have national corporate parents or large investors. And they, like many smaller, community-trusted outlets, rely on traffic from search engines and social media to boost advertising revenue, drive subscriptions, and raise awareness.
Let’s work together to build a better future for Black-owned newspapers and community journalism that is fair, local,l and representative of all Oregonians.
Dr. Benjamin F. Chavis Jr., President & CEO, National Newspaper Publishers Association
#NNPA BlackPress
Hate and Chaos Rise in Trump’s America
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Tactics ranged from local policy manipulation to threats of violence. The SPLC documented bomb threats at 60 polling places in Georgia, traced to Russian email domains.

By Stacy M. Brown
Black Press USA Senior National Correspondent
The Southern Poverty Law Center has identified 1,371 hate and antigovernment extremist groups operating across the United States in 2024. In its latest Year in Hate & Extremism report, the SPLC reveals how these groups are embedding themselves in politics and policymaking while targeting marginalized communities through intimidation, disinformation, and violence. “Extremists at all levels of government are using cruelty, chaos, and constant attacks on communities and our democracy to make us feel powerless,” said SPLC President Margaret Huang. The report outlines how hard-right groups aggressively targeted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives throughout 2024. Figures on the far right falsely framed DEI as a threat to white Americans, with some branding it a form of “white genocide.” After the collapse of Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge, a former Utah legislator blamed the incident on DEI, posting “DEI = DIE.”
Tactics ranged from local policy manipulation to threats of violence. The SPLC documented bomb threats at 60 polling places in Georgia, traced to Russian email domains. Similar threats hit Jewish institutions and Planet Fitness locations after far-right social media accounts attacked them for trans-inclusive policies. Telegram, which SPLC describes as a hub for hate groups, helped extremists cross-recruit between neo-Nazi, QAnon, and white nationalist spaces. The platform’s lax moderation allowed groups like the Terrorgram Collective—designated terrorists by the U.S. State Department—to thrive. Militia movements were also reorganized, with 50 groups documented in 2024. Many, calling themselves “minutemen,” trained in paramilitary tactics while lobbying local governments for official recognition. These groups shared personnel and ideology with white nationalist organizations.
The manosphere continued to radicalize boys and young men. The Fresh & Fit podcast, now listed as a hate group, promoted misogyny while mocking and attacking Black women. Manosphere influencers used social media algorithms to drive youth toward male-supremacy content. Turning Point USA played a key role in pushing white nationalist rhetoric into mainstream politics. Its leader Charlie Kirk claimed native-born Americans are being replaced by immigrants, while the group advised on Project 2025 and organized Trump campaign events. “We know that these groups build their power by threatening violence, capturing political parties and government, and infesting the mainstream discourse with conspiracy theories,” said Rachel Carroll Rivas, interim director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project. “By exposing the players, tactics, and code words of the hard right, we hope to dismantle their mythology and inspire people to fight back.”
Click here for the full report or visit http://www.splcenter.org/resources/guides/year-hate-extremism-2024.
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
MLK Bust Quietly Removed from Oval Office Under Trump
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 7 – 13, 2025
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of April 30 – May 6, 2025
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
Trump Abruptly Fires First Carla Hayden: The First Black Woman to Serve as Librarian of Congress
-
Activism2 weeks ago
New Oakland Moving Forward
-
Activism2 weeks ago
After Two Decades, Oakland Unified Will Finally Regain Local Control
-
Activism2 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 14 – 20, 2025
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
Black America Celebrates African Descent Heritage of Pope Leo XIV