Morning Briefing
Summaries of health policy coverage from major news organizations
Different Takes: Changes Put Health Law On Shaky Ground; New Policies Are Good For Small Businesses
Seattle Times: Affordable Care Act Is Worth Saving
The Affordable Care Act has been difficult to kill. But that doesn’t mean it hasn’t been weakened by the Trump administration’s repeated efforts to sabotage the program that made health care available and somewhat affordable for millions of Americans. This month, the Justice Department announced it would stop defending the ACA’s pre-existing conditions protections in court. Insurance companies may start refusing to insure people who have already been diagnosed with cancer or diabetes, for example, and not worry about facing government legal action. The Trump administration also wants to allow insurance companies to sell cheaper plans with less coverage than now required under Obamacare. Unfortunately, each attack pushes the ACA further onto shaky ground — and for no good reason. (6/18)
The Wall Street Journal: A Health Fix For Mom And Pop Shops
Small-business owners and their employees often struggle to find affordable health-care options. A major reason is that ObamaCare, among other laws, makes coverage more expensive for small businesses than large companies. That’s why the Trump administration is expanding access to association health plans, or AHPs, beginning Tuesday. ObamaCare imposes starkly different rules on large companies and small businesses. (Alexander Acosta 6/18)
The New York Times: An Obamacare Case So Wrong It Has Provoked A Bipartisan Outcry
The legal and policy battles over the Affordable Care Act have divided the nation along predictable partisan lines. As legal academics, we were on opposite sides when the Supreme Court considered constitutional challenges to the so-called individual mandate and again when the court considered whether tax credits would be available in federally created health insurance exchanges. The latest A.C.A. challenge, however, has brought us together — an unholy alliance that conveys an enormous amount about the weakness and dangerousness of the newest legal challenge to a statute that continues to be a political and legal flash point. (Jonathan H. Adler and Abbe R. Cluck, 6/19)
Gainesville Sun: Fight Efforts To Sabotage Health Care
In the upcoming federal and state elections, voters should cast their ballots like their health care depends on it. For those with preexisting conditions, that certainly is the case. The Trump administration is now arguing in court that the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that insurers cover preexisting conditions is invalid, along with other parts of the law.It is the latest move by the administration to sabotage the ACA, following the repeal of the individual mandate in last year’s tax-cut legislation. The repeal and other changes approved by the administration are driving up insurance costs, threatening the health coverage of the 1.7 million Floridians and others who have obtained coverage through the federal marketplaces. (6/17)
Newsday: Save Provisions Of Health Law
The Affordable Care Act is one of the more controversial laws ever enacted in the United States, but for all the furor that accompanied its debate and passage in 2010, there were a few provisions in it that practically everyone supported. The law made it illegal to refuse health insurance to customers with pre-existing conditions, a boon to people for whom such refusals meant not receiving needed medical care or enduring bankruptcy. And it barred using people’s health history or those pre-existing chronic conditions as a justification to charge exorbitant amounts for coverage. It’s hard to imagine anyone fighting to return to a system that left many people with pre-existing conditions unable to buy health insurance, and many sicker and older Americans paying staggering rates, but that’s exactly what many Republican-led states and the Trump administration are doing. (6/17)
Cincinnati Enquirer: Trying To Protect Pre-Existing Conditions
The ACA has a provision that bans insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions like Bailey’s amputation, my asthma, her friend’s diabetes, or my aunt’s cancer. It’s arguably the most popular component of the 2010 health care law and is the key to our family’s ability to afford our monthly insurance premiums. The Trump administration’s attack on its constitutionality was only made possible by the purely partisan vote by my congressman, Steve Chabot, and my senator, Rob Portman, to eliminate the individual mandate on health insurance. They did this while in the same piece of legislation they passed a massive tax cut that gives 83 percent of its benefits to the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. So we might not be able to afford health insurance, or even have access to it, but Chabot’s biggest donors in his district – my district – will get a tax cut of over $47,500. The average family living here only makes around $55,700 per year. These are the priorities of those who are supposed to be representing my family. (Michaela Rawsthorn, 6/18)
