Advertisement

May 20, 2013

Sacrificing the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the Cost of Avoiding Perpetual Calamity?

Once again, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has a target on its back. Yesterday, the House passed a bill to stave off “sequestration” and the looming specter of a government shut-down on March 27. The bill slashed funding to the ACA’s health insurance exchanges along with other domestic programs.

The bill proposed cuts to domestic programs including health insurance exchanges of up to 11 percent but spared defense spending and veterans programs.  The bill will now be considered by the Senate where Republicans, led by Senator Cruz (R-TX), will offer an amendment that would strip all funding from the ACA.  This measure is unlikely to pass the Democrat controlled Senate; however, it sends a strong message that the battle over Obamacare wages on. This proposed cut would not be the first that health care exchanges have faced. As part of the fiscal cliff deal, 90 percent of the funding for health insurance exchange start-up loans was slashed. 

The Republican controlled House is using its “purse string power” to continue the fight against the ACA, and is sending a strong message to the Obama Administration and the Democrat led Senate that they cannot retire their boxing gloves yet. 

© 2013 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

About the Author

Staff Attorney

Lauren M. Breithaupt is a staff attorney in Barnes & Thornburg LLP’s Chicago, Illinois office and a member of the firm’s Healthcare Department.

312-214-8827

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.