Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

The early consensus on President Trump's executive order is that it could cause problems with insurers — because it's so vague, but could be read as an attack on the individual mandate. Insurers want clear signals about what's next, so it's a good bet that muddying the waters isn't going to help.

The possible weakening of the mandate is the angle that's dominating the national coverage, including the Washington Post's writeup, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement Saturday that the order "appears to target the individual mandate."

There's an important caveat, though: The executive order doesn't do anything more than set goals for the agencies, which won't officially be under new leadership until President Trump's team is in place.

"This order doesn't by itself do anything. It sends marching orders to federal agencies but doesn't grant them any new powers," said Larry Levitt of the Kaiser Family Foundation. However, he said, "my reading is that the order is signaling loosening up on the individual mandate and required benefits, and giving states more flexibility."

Nicholas Bagley, a respected legal expert on Obamacare, has a good post up about how to decode the language on flexibility. He says the broad language on waivers or exemptions for costs, fees, taxes, and other burdens:

[R]eads like bureaucratic code for 'kill the individual mandate by any means possible.'

And here's how Andy Slavitt, the outgoing chief of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, responded to the executive order on Twitter:

Unsupported embed type

Levitt agreed that the uncertainty itself is the biggest problem: "Something we can be certain of is that this order creates much more uncertainty for insurers just as they're formulating their plans for 2018."

Go deeper

Dion Rabouin, author of Markets
1 min ago - Economy & Business

Big Tech's share of the S&P 500 reached record level in August

Expand chart
Reproduced from The Leuthold Group; Chart: Axios Visuals

The gap between the weighting of the five largest companies in the S&P 500 and the 300 smallest rose to the highest ever at the end of August, according to data from the Leuthold Group.

Why it matters: The concentration of wealth in a few massive U.S. tech companies has reached a scale significantly greater than it was before the dot-com bubble burst.

Fortune 100 companies commit $3.3 billion to fight racism and inequality

Data: Fortune 500, Axios analysis of company statements, get the data; Chart: Andrew Witherspoon, Naema Ahmed/Axios

Big businesses continue to push funding toward fighting inequality and racism, with the 100 largest U.S. companies' monetary commitments rising to $3.33 billion since the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police earlier this year, according to an Axios analysis.

Why it matters: The continued pace of funding commitments shows that months after Floyd's death there remains pressure for the wealthiest corporations to put their money behind social issues and efforts.

Kendall Baker, author of Sports
12 mins ago - Sports

Lakers vs. Heat for the NBA's bubble title

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

Six years after the "Big Three" broke up, the Heat are back in the NBA Finals, where they will face the Lakers and LeBron James, the man who brought them to four straight last decade.

The state of play: For the first time in NBA history, both finalists didn't make the playoffs in the prior season.