Protect Our Care Campaign Chair Leslie Dach released the following statement on the sham, partisan Alexander-Collins health care stabilization bill:
“The Alexander-Collins legislation should be rejected. It is bad for Americans’ health care. This proposal would result in net coverage losses, higher out-of-pocket costs, and fewer coverage options for many Americans. Despite what Republicans may be publicly saying, Alexander-Collins is not a serious attempt to stabilize the marketplaces. House Republicans admit they oppose stabilization. And Republicans are insisting on a poison pill that would further their war on women’s health. This proposal is a partisan bill designed to fail, and it represents nothing more politics at its worst from elected officials who otherwise have voted to repeal Americans’ health care.”
BACKGROUND
- The Republican “stabilization” bill includes expansive and restrictive new anti-abortion policy that would have far-reaching consequences for women’s health. Republicans claim they want to apply the existing ‘no federal funding for abortions’ Hyde Amendment to stabilization legislation, but are in fact proposing something entirely new: language that would result in an effective ban on private insurance coverage for abortion, including in plans purchased by private individuals using no federal money, which experts predict would coerce insurance companies into dropping abortion coverage from all plans, both on and off the Marketplace, in order to receive CSRs or reinsurance payments.
- This proposal would ban a woman from using her own money to buy insurance that covers a medical service the Supreme Court says she has a constitutional right to access and represent a new frontier in Republicans’ war on women’s health. And it’s entirely hypocritical, because the Affordable Care Act was signed into law with restrictions that prohibit insurance companies from using public funds for abortion coverage, with President Obama even having signed an executive order emphasizing that none of its funds can be used to cover abortion services.
- As Aviva Aron-Dine with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities explains, the CBO finds that this legislation would result in net coverage losses, with larger losses for moderate-income consumers than gains for middle- and upper-income consumers. Ultimately, this legislation would result in net coverage losses between 500,000 and one million people.
- Moreover, Aron-Dine notes that the CBO has confirmed that the federal savings from restoring CSRs come from coverage losses, higher premiums, and higher out-of-pocket costs for those with incomes below 400 percent of the federal poverty line, which would result in worse outcomes for consumers between 200 and 400 percent of the poverty line. In fact, the savings would come from a combination of consumers dropping coverage and those maintaining coverage being forced to pay more for doing so.
- When Republicans’ constituents face double-digit premium increases in the fall because their Congressmen scuttled stabilization, they’ll know exactly who to blame.
Key Quote: ‘Nobody in that room voted for Obamacare, so the idea you’re going to vote for billions of dollars to stabilize a system you never supported in the first place — pretty hard to choke down,’ said Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla).”