Although it seems unlikely to many, if the Supreme Court rules that the administration cannot provide health insurance subsidies in states that did not set up their own exchanges, Republicans need to have some sort of alternative plan. This has been known for some time now – but where do things currently stand?
So far, not much luck on consensus. In fact, it seems like everyone is all over the place.
“The Republicans potentially have a PR nightmare on their hands, because what’s going to happen when 8 million people are going to be denied subsidies?” said Ford O’Connell, a Republican strategist and member of The Hill’s Contributors Blog.
With the Rise of AI, What IP Disputes in Healthcare Are Likely to Emerge?
Munck Wilson Mandala Partner Greg Howison shared his perspective on some of the legal ramifications around AI, IP, connected devices and the data they generate, in response to emailed questions.
The whole situation is even more complicated as many Republican governors could be potentially setting up presidential campaigns right around the time the King v. Burwell case is decided in June.
Who’s ultimately responsible for fixing this potentially complicated outcome is also up for debate, apparently.
Potential GOP White House contender, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, doesn’t rule out a fix, according to The Hill, but believes the decision is up to Congress. (About 180,000 people in his state would lose subsidies.)
“While we continue to monitor the federal court case and the pending outcome later this year, ultimately, the responsibility rests with the federal government to fix this federal law,” Walker spokeswoman Laurel Patrick said in a statement, The Hill reported. “Following the issuance of a decision, we will continue to work with members of Wisconsin’s federal delegation to enact a solution.”
A Personalized Approach to Medication Nonadherence
At the Abarca Forward conference earlier this year, George Van Antwerp, managing director at Deloitte, discussed how social determinants of health and a personalized member experience can improve medication adherence and health outcomes.
The case centers on the interpretation of a single phrase in the law: “established by the state.” So a federal fix could just mean changing the wording, if it were up to the Democrats. But Republicans don’t seem to be willing to offer that as a solution because that would essentially be enabling Obamacare as is, just with the addition of state marketplaces.
Beyond governors needing to voice opinions on potential solutions, congressional Republicans are offering ideas, but workability and motivation could be questionable for Democrats.
Three House committee chairmen have outlined a plan to allow states to opt out of ObamaCare’s mandates and to provide tax credits to help people buy insurance. Three Senate chairmen, meanwhile, have outlined a plan to provide financial assistance to let people temporarily keep their health insurance plans.
Then, there’s the parliamentary maneuver known as “reconciliation” in the Republicans annual budget that could be used as an approach in the situation. As described by Politico: One leading contender is reserving the technique, which short-circuits filibusters in the Senate by letting tax and spending bills pass with a majority vote, to move any legislative response needed to respond to a Supreme Court decision unraveling the Affordable Care Act.
But it’s not clear how this will be effective right now.
Politico reported some of the current commentary:
“I expect we’ll do some reconciliation,” though “I’m not prepared to speculate” on how, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, a Republican on the chamber’s Budget Committee, said on Wednesday.
“People have ideas” but haven’t settled on a plan, said Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, another Republican budgeter. “Not yet.”
Lawmakers must face the difficult task of agreeing on a single tax-and-spending plan before reconciliation could even be considered, though.
At this point, so much is up in the air. Opinions differ extremely (in general) about what’s currently a hypothetical situation. But the threat of millions of Americans going uninsured justifies a major hustle.
