On Monday (May 22), a motion was filed by both the White House and Congress requesting a 90-day delay regarding an appeal surrounding cost-sharing reduction payments (CSR). The case, known as House vs. Price, originated in 2015 when the Obama administration was sued by the Republican House of Representatives over the CSRs, which were designed to help those with a lower income afford their healthcare through subsidies. The House successfully argued that these subsidies were illegal in a lower court in 2016. However, the Obama administration appealed that win. Now, with the motion being filed requesting a delay, what does it all mean?
Well, considering the original lawsuit was derived from the House’s argument that the CSRs were not congressionally appropriated and therefore “illegal,” the suit could ultimately rule itself out. Reason being, Congress may be allocating funds for this very reason in the near future. Further, the Trump administration is still at war within itself over whether or not to keep these payments for Americans who can’t afford their healthcare. Last week Washington D.C. along with 15 other states filed their own motion for appeal.
This case will be brought back to the table again in August per the 90-day delay. However, providers must submit their entries into the Health Insurance Marketplace by June 21. Should CSRs be eliminated, many individuals would be left without the ability to afford their healthcare. Providers will want to know how the Trump Administration will treat these CSRs before making any commitments to the Marketplace. This delay spells more uncertainty for providers as well as the individuals who would be seeking CSRs.
Adding to the confusion, while the Trump Administration was successful in getting its healthcare plan (the American Healthcare Act, as amended) through the House but with the slimmest of margins, Senate appears to be starting from scratch, potentially turning the Republican healthcare plan unrecognizable from the AHCA. In the end, the CSR subsidies may remain, along with other vital parts of the Affordable Care Act. It’s hard to say at this point.
