Today the Supreme Court will end its three days of healthcare reform hearings with oral arguments on the severability of the law and Medicaid expansion, according to a Washington Post report.
The severability argument will consider whether the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act should be struck down if the individual mandate is found to be unconstitutional, a question the court discussed yesterday.
The federal government says striking the individual mandate would invalidate only two other provisions in the law: the prohibition of insurers discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions and the limitations on premium charges. The latter provision holds that insurers can vary premiums for different customers only based on age, geographic location and tobacco use. Without the individual mandate in place, the government argues, these provisions would drive up premium rates and harm the insurance market.
Challengers of the law say the entire law should be repealed if the individual mandate is found unconstitutional, as insurance companies would not have an incentive to expand coverage to more people, which is one of the major goals of the law.
A court-appointed attorney will argue that the rest of the law should remain if the individual mandate is excluded.
The Medicaid expansion argument will consider whether opening the federal program to more Americans coerces states into action. The 26 states challenging the reform law say expanding Medicaid will cost them millions of dollars due to the expected influx of poor enrollees trying to meet the requirement that most Americans have health insurance by 2014.
The Obama administration holds that the expansion is not coercive because the government will cover the entire cost of newly eligible individuals through 2016 and 90 percent in 2020 and after. In addition, states can drop out of Medicaid. As Medicaid is jointly funded by states and the federal government, however, the states say dropping out of the program is not an option because they cannot fund healthcare for the poor on their own.
How the Supreme Court's Decision Will Impact Healthcare Delivery: Q&A With Dr. Jeffrey Lobosky of UCSF
States, Insurers Prepare Backup Plan for Health Insurance Requirement
The severability argument will consider whether the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act should be struck down if the individual mandate is found to be unconstitutional, a question the court discussed yesterday.
The federal government says striking the individual mandate would invalidate only two other provisions in the law: the prohibition of insurers discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions and the limitations on premium charges. The latter provision holds that insurers can vary premiums for different customers only based on age, geographic location and tobacco use. Without the individual mandate in place, the government argues, these provisions would drive up premium rates and harm the insurance market.
Challengers of the law say the entire law should be repealed if the individual mandate is found unconstitutional, as insurance companies would not have an incentive to expand coverage to more people, which is one of the major goals of the law.
A court-appointed attorney will argue that the rest of the law should remain if the individual mandate is excluded.
The Medicaid expansion argument will consider whether opening the federal program to more Americans coerces states into action. The 26 states challenging the reform law say expanding Medicaid will cost them millions of dollars due to the expected influx of poor enrollees trying to meet the requirement that most Americans have health insurance by 2014.
The Obama administration holds that the expansion is not coercive because the government will cover the entire cost of newly eligible individuals through 2016 and 90 percent in 2020 and after. In addition, states can drop out of Medicaid. As Medicaid is jointly funded by states and the federal government, however, the states say dropping out of the program is not an option because they cannot fund healthcare for the poor on their own.
More Articles on Healthcare Reform:
Justice Kennedy's Vote May Decide Individual Mandate's ConstitutionalityHow the Supreme Court's Decision Will Impact Healthcare Delivery: Q&A With Dr. Jeffrey Lobosky of UCSF
States, Insurers Prepare Backup Plan for Health Insurance Requirement