House members voted today on the ACAlitigation section of proposed 116th Congress rules. (Image:House)
U.S. House members this week voted 235-192 to adopt a proposedrule that will let the new Democratic House speaker, NancyPelosi, go to court to defend the Affordable Care Act.
|House Democrats put the ACA litigation authorization provisionin Title III of House Resolution 6.
|House Resolution 6 is a three-title measure that establishes theguidelines Democrats plan to use to run the House while the 116thCongress is in session. The 116th Congress came to life Jan. 3.
|Related: ACA litigation and 3 other policy issues to watchas Democrats take the House
|All 232 of the Democrats who participated voted for theprovision. Republican House members voted 192-3 against theprovision.
|House members last week voted 234-197 to adopt Title I of HouseResolution 6, and 418-12 to adopt Title II of House Resolution6.
|House Republicans today said during debate on the House floorthat Title I of House Resolution 6 already includes anotherprovision that authorizes Pelosi to intervene in ACAlitigation.
|“The speaker does not need to be given this authority again,”Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, said.
|Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., called the ACA litigation measure “awaste of time, paper and ink.”
|Many Democrats have said that they support a pure,government-run, single-payer health care system, and the mostinteresting question is where the Democrats' single-payer healthcare bill is, Walden said.
|House Democrats said they need to intervene in ACA litigation toprotect provisions ordinary Americans like.
|If the courts gutted the ACA in rulings on the Texas v. United States suit, “women may onceagain face buying insurance that doesn't cover maternity care,”Rep. Donna Shalala, D-Fla., said. “Our bipartisan efforts to phaseout the Medicare [Part D] doughnut hole could come toan end.”
|Burgess argued that House Democrats' defense of ACA provisionssuch as the ACA restrictions on medical underwriting is a facademeant to obscure their efforts to protect theACA individual mandate provision.
|The ACA individual mandate provision, or “individual sharedresponsibility” provision, requires many people to own a minimumamount of major medical coverage or else pay a penalty. The TaxCuts and Jobs Act of 2017 set the penalty for 2019 and later years at zero.
|Resources
Congress.gov makes a variety of House Resolution 6resources available here.
|Read more:
|
- 5 possible consequences of the Texas ACAruling
- GOP candidates playing defense onObamacare
- Brokers and the ACA ruling: Keep calm and carryon
Complete your profile to continue reading and get FREE access to BenefitsPRO, part of your ALM digital membership.
Your access to unlimited BenefitsPRO content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Critical BenefitsPRO information including cutting edge post-reform success strategies, access to educational webcasts and videos, resources from industry leaders, and informative Newsletters.
- Exclusive discounts on ALM, BenefitsPRO magazine and BenefitsPRO.com events
- Access to other award-winning ALM websites including ThinkAdvisor.com and Law.com
Already have an account? Sign In
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Allison Bell
Allison Bell, ThinkAdvisor's insurance editor, previously was LifeHealthPro's health insurance editor. She has a bachelor's degree in economics from Washington University in St. Louis and a master's degree in journalism from the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University. She can be reached at [email protected] or on Twitter at @Think_Allison.
