Mid-Shore Health Future: The Risks of Repealing the ACA on the Shore with Jeananne Sciabarra

Share

On Thursday, Jeananne Sciabarra, Executive Director of Consumer Health First spoke at the Democratic Club of Kent County about the implications of repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Act (ACA), also known as “Obamacare.”

Founded in 2006 as the Maryland Women’s Coalition for Health Care Reform, the organization transitioned into CHF in 2016 with the same mission: to work collaboratively to promote health equity through access to comprehensive, high-quality and affordable health care for all Marylanders.

While the impact of repealing and replacing ACA with the currently proposed American Health Care Act (ACHA) would cause profound changes to healthcare nationwide, Sciabarra focused on what Marylanders, and specifically Congressional District, 1 would lose.

Talking about the rollback of Medicaid expansion, Sciabarra said that “the bottom line is that will push back the matching (between state and federal) to 50-50 which is going to make it extremely expensive for Maryland to continue that provision.” She added that on top of that, a block grant per capita system for each person enrolled in Medicaid would force the state to decide who doesn’t get services.

Also, in regard to hospitals, Sciabarra noted that Maryland has a unique rate-setting system that provides services at the same rate anywhere in the state and that during the expansion of Medicaid, uninsured costs went down $311 million between 2013-2015, and that with set amounts or “global budgets” hospitals were incentivized to participate in wellness programs to help people stay healthy and out of the hospital. A rollback of those kinds of programs would have a “catastrophic” effect on people not covered in the health exchange, especially older people.

The district’s uninsured rate has gone from 8.3% to 4.1% since the ACA was implemented. This 4.2 percentage point drop in the uninsured rate could be reversed if the ACA is entirely or partially repealed.

401,400 individuals in the district who now have health insurance that covers preventative services like cancer screenings and flu shots without any co-pays, coinsurance, or deductibles stand to lose this access if the Republican Congress eliminates ACA provisions requiring health insurers to cover essential preventative services without cost-sharing.

445,400 individuals in the district with employer-sponsored health insurance are at risk of losing important consumer protections like the prohibition on annual and lifetime limits, protection against unfair policy recession, and coverage of pre-existing health conditions if the ACA is entirely or partially repealed.

15,800 individuals in the district who have purchased high-quality marketplace coverage now stand to lose their coverage if the Republican Congress dismantles the Marketplaces.

11,800 individuals in the district who received financial assistance to purchase Marketplace coverage in 2016 are now at risk of coverage becoming unaffordable if the Republican Congress eliminates the premium tax credits.

8400 individuals in the district who are receiving cost-sharing reductions to lower out-of-pocket costs such as deductibles, co-pays, and coinsurance, are now at risk of healthcare becoming unaffordable is the Republican Congress eliminates cost-sharing reductions.

32,900 individuals in the district who are covered by the ACA’s Medicaid expansion now stand to lose coverage if the Republican Congress eliminates the Medicaid expansion.

This video is approximately nine minutes in length. For more information about Consumer Health First please go here. Sources: US Department of Health and Human Services, Urban Institute, Families USA, The Commonwealth Fund, National Women’s Law Center.

*

Letters to Editor

  1. joe diamond says:

    Could tissue be described:

    Party A says it is not the role of the government to force people to do what is best for they the people. Free people should be able to choose and select what medical care they want…as they choose and select religion, mates, employment. Citizens should all earn enough funds to provide for themselves……they should figure out what they need and earn money to pay for it.

    Party B says this government & nation was founded to provide for the common good. Some citizens will be able to rise great wealth within such a society while others will not. It is the government role to aid those who cannot help themselves while restraining those who rise on the backs of the work of others.

    ?

    Do I have it right?

    Or is there some Dickensian excess population who needs to be dealt with………..Are there not alms houses?

    As we enlarge the largest military force on the planet is there not another way………..cancel free flights on USAF #1 until there is a declaration of war….i. Let the secretary of state sentdthe president on diplomatic missions with public funds. Pay war fighters well while reducing wars…..MANAGE weapons purchases so they are not a welfare state for members of Congress.

    There are other suggestions,

    Such as providing some minimum, basic health maintenance program for all regardless of status. Revoke, discontinue and drop all medical coverage for Congress and their families,,,,,,,,What they get, and have been receiving, the rest of the nation is entitled to.

    Joe

Write a Letter to the Editor on this Article

We encourage readers to offer their point of view on this article by submitting the following form. Editing is sometimes necessary and is done at the discretion of the editorial staff.