Expand search form

A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943

What’s at Stake if SCOTUS Rules Out Subsidies in Federal Exchanges?

This Week’s Health Policy News Roundup Curated by Jane M. Orient, M.D.

There are five stakeholders at risk if the U.S. Supreme Court rules in King v. Burwell that taxpayer-funded insurance subsidies are only available in State Exchanges, according to HealthData Management.

The stakeholders are: employers, employees (who might lose their employer-sponsored benefits if the employer drops them), benefit advisors, insurers, and hospitals and providers. http://www.healthdatamanagement.com/news/How-King-Versus-Burwell-Could-Impact-Healthcare-Stakeholders-49923-1.html

Notice that patients are not on the list. Loss of “coverage” is not the same as loss of care, and obtaining coverage is not the same as getting care, as even The New York Times is reporting. http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2015/02/12/obamacare-insured-but-not-covered-n1956180

Many employees dropped their previous coverage and “bailed into” the Exchanges to get the subsidies. The Administration still refuses to tell them of the risk that they could lose the “free” money taken from taxpayers, and face steeply higher premiums as low-risk insured people bail out.

Enrollees are likely unaware of the problem “because the exchanges were designed to camouflage the subsidies. The Obama Administration likes to pretend that it has actually lowered the cost of health insurance in the individual market. So, the exchanges are designed to present to applicants only the premiums net of subsidies,” writes John Graham. http://healthblog.ncpa.org/the-obama-administration-should-disclose-legal-risks-of-losing-coverage-to-obamacare-applicants

With or without subsidies, ObamaCare is hitting employees in the pocketbook. Money that might have gone for wages is going into nonwage benefits, causing wage stagnation, writes Ben Domenech. http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=c7c578f94365a99fb2dd164c1&id=8e51831cc8&e=0a7fbc92f5

If subsidies are lost, and people drop coverage, the one and only way in which ObamaCare can arguably be said to be “working”—expanding coverage—will clearly be proved false. http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/02/26/4-simple-and-objective-ways-to-tell-if-obamacare-is-working/

A large portion of newly covered individuals comes from expanding Medicaid—with the adverse consequence of 2.6 million Americans dropping out of the labor force. http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/02/24/obamacares-medicaid-expansion-could-cause-2-6-million-able-bodied-adults-to-drop-out-of-labor-force/

If the subsidies are ruled out, “we all win,” writes Betsy McCaughey. http://nypost.com/2015/03/02/we-all-win-if-supremes-gut-obamacare/ It will protect taxpayers from illegal taxes, writes Michael Cannon. http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-the-supreme-court-strike-down-obamacare-subsidies-in-king-v-burwell/protect-taxpayers-from-illegal-taxes

Senators Orrin Hatch, Lamar Alexander, and John Barrasso have a plan to allow recipients of illegal taxpayer largesse (insurance plans) to keep the subsidy during a transition period. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-have-a-plan-for-fixing-health-care/2015/03/01/e0925502-becc-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html

“Republicans are in no way duty bound to ‘fix’ this problem with a continuation of redistributive benefits,” writes Ben Domenech. “Of course, I expect them to do exactly that.” It’s another “kick the can” strategy. http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=c7c578f94365a99fb2dd164c1&id=9046f85407&e=0a7fbc92f5

Seen on Social Media:

Previous Article

Health Policy Legislative Update February 2015

Next Article

What Will Happen If Supreme Court Cuts ObamaCare Subsidies?