As you may have heard, the federal government is currently shut down, although for many federal workers – those deemed “essential” – that just means they keep on working but don’t get paid (and, in fact, some might never get paid). The cause is the now-standard failure of Congress to pass a budget. As it often does in these instances, the House did pass a continuing resolution (CR) to keep the government open (for seven weeks), and Senate Republicans are willing to go along, but Senate Democrats are balking. Even though they’re usually the ones who advocate “clean’ CRs, this time they’re holding out to include some other legislative fixes. Their key demand: continuing the expanded ACA premium tax credits.
I am a
little puzzled why this is the hill upon which they’re willing to keep the
government shut down.
Let’s back
up. When ACA was passed in 2010, a crucial component was subsidies to help low-
income people afford ACA coverage (along with subsidies for cost-sharing
features like deductibles). Subsidies were, and are, crucial for the ACA
marketplace to survive. These subsidies came in the form of premium tax
credits.
If you
recall the dismal individual health insurance marketplace pre-ACA, individuals
couldn’t get coverage unless they passed medical underwriting, and, even then, preexisting
conditions exclusions applied. As a
result, few qualified and everyone complained. ACA did away with medical
underwriting and pre-existing conditions exclusions, but the only way to ensure
that enough healthy people would join the risk pool was to generously subsidize
their coverage, much as employers do with employment-based health insurance. Thus
the premium tax credits.
The
trade-off worked for almost ten years. About ten million people got coverage
through the exchanges. Then the pandemic hit. People needed coverage more than
ever, yet many people’s incomes crashed. So in 2021 Congress passed “enhanced”
premium tax credits as part of the American
Rescue plan Act. They increased the amounts of the credits and made them
available to some higher income families. Those expanded credits were extended
to the end of 2025 as part of the Inflation
Reduction Act.
It is
those expanded premium tax credits that are expiring. The original credits would
remain. Things would go back to the way they were pre-pandemic (although, of
course, premiums are now higher due to inflation). It’d be more of a setback
than a catastrophe.
The expanded
tax credits did have a dramatic impact. Enrollment went
from about ten million to over 24 million – 22 million of whom had the
expanded credits. So it certainly is a non-trivial matter if they expire. KFF estimates
that average premiums would double in 2026.
Still,
though, CBO estimates loss of the expanded credits would result in about 3.8
million people losing coverage, which is a far cry from the 14 million whom gained
coverage since they were implemented.
I’m not
sure if the CBO is being overly optimistic, or if ACA has taught people to appreciate
their coverage.
Everyone in
Congress knew, or should have known, that these tax credits were expiring this
year. Congress could have ensured that they persisted longer when they extended
them as part of IRA. Congress could have extended then as part of H.R.1 (the
so-called Big, Beautiful Bill). But neither of those happened, so here we are.
House and Senate Republicans have indicated an
openness to extending them, although not as a condition of ending the shutdown,
but appear to be in no hurry. Speaker Mike Johnson sees only the December 31
ending date of the expanded credits and says:
“We have effectively three months to negotiate. In the White House and in the
halls of Congress, that’s like an eternity.”
That ignores,
of course, that open enrollment starts November 1, and insurers are already
preparing their materials, so something like whether an expanded tax credit would
be available or not would seem like an important factor for anyone making such
a decision.
This is
not an issue that is primarily a Democrat one. Most people with ACA coverage live
in Republican districts. Over three-quarters of Americans think
the tax credits should be extended – including 59% of Republicans. Even 57% of self-identified
MAGA supporters want them extended. MAGA stalwart Margorie Taylor Greene has
been vocal about the need to extend them. So you’d have to think that, one
way or another, they’re likely to get extended.
So why
allow the government to be shut down over them?
There are
plenty of other issues the Democrats could be striking over, such as Medicaid
cuts. The cuts to Medicaid that HR1 made are
estimated to cause more than twice as many people to lose Medicaid coverage
as ACA coverage, not to mention the huge impacts on state Medicaid budgets due
to loss of provider taxes. But reversing those Medicaid cuts cost way more than
the ACA premium tax credits, would require Republicans to retreat from favorite
policy positions like work
requirements, and won’t, for the most part, impact people as soon as the
premium tax credits. Plus, the work requirements may blow up on their own due
to the administrative
difficulties. The Democrats have
mentioned reversing the Medicaid cuts as part of the negotiation, but don’t
appear to have them as part of their red line.
Or the
Democrats could insist that Congress regain its Constitutional duties about
controlling federal spending or enacting tariffs, rather than abdicating those to
the Administration, but finding enough Congressional Republicans who care more
about the Constitution than risking Trump’s ire is probably a fool’s errand. So
premium tax credits it is.
Look, I think the subsidies should be extended. Too many people now rely on them, especially with so little notice. Even more, I think they probably will be; there’s too much risk of blowback to swing Republican districts for the GOP to simply ignore the problem. But I think it’s more likely to Republicans can wait the Democrats out, betting on pealing off five more Democrat Senators to pass the CR. They can then deal with the tax credits late in the year, damage to the enrollment process be damned.
If anything,
the furor over the subsidies highlights a central flaw with ACA: it focused on
expanding coverage, not on reforming our health care system. As a result, costs
continue to rise unabated, making subsidies all-the-more important. But that’s
not a sustainable approach. At some point, we’re going to have to rationalize
how much we pay for health care and what we should be paying for. But, alas, we’re nowhere near that point.
No comments:
Post a Comment