ST. PAUL, Minn.—Nate Clark, Chief Executive Officer of MNsure; Grace Arnold, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Commerce; Jodi Harpstead, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Services; and Jan Malcolm, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Health issue the following statement:
“Today, the United States Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the Affordable Care Act. This is a huge relief for the hundreds of thousands of Minnesotans who get health care coverage through the law - whether from Medicaid or MinnesotaCare, or if they purchase health insurance through MNsure.
“This year, because of actions by President Biden and Congress, more Minnesotans than ever will qualify for financial help that makes their health coverage more affordable when they seek a plan through MNsure.
From: Heather Korbulic, Executive Director, Silver State Health Insurance Exchange
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge from 18 states to the Affordable Care Act (ACA)—a decision that keeps the law intact and saves health care coverage for hundreds of thousands of Nevadans. For more than a decade, the ACA has helped Nevadans secure coverage, whether it is through the expansion of Medicaid, subsidies on the Exchange, or consumer protections built into the law.
The urgent need for comprehensive and affordable health care coverage has only increased throughout the pandemic and both Nevada Medicaid and the Nevada Health Link, the online health insurance marketplace operated by the Silver State Health Insurance Exchange, have been there to support Nevadans throughout this crisis and will be there as the state recovers. This is an important day for our country and an important win for Nevadans.
Millions of New Yorkers have embraced the health care expansion provided by the Affordable Care Act and I applaud today's decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the ACA. New York State has codified critical consumer protections from the Affordable Care Act into State law; including preexisting conditions, prohibition on annual and lifetime dollar limits, the guarantee of quality essential health benefits and the ability to keep children on their parent's plans through age 26.
NY State of Health has provided seamless access to affordable coverage and remains open for enrollment through the end of the year. The ACA has been a lifeline for many New Yorkers throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and I encourage all uninsured New Yorkers to enroll today.
Today, Pam MacEwan, CEO of the Washington Health Benefit Exchange, issued the following statement regarding the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) upholding the Affordable Care Act (ACA):
“The Exchange is relieved to see the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act. Over 860,000 Washingtonians receive health care coverage through the ACA. The ACA is here to stay.
“Today Washington residents continue to benefit from the consumer protections that have been incorporated into both federal and state law which includes protections from annual and lifetime caps, excessive waiting periods, pre-existing condition exclusions, and discrimination based on gender, race, national origin or disability.
“The American Rescue Plan Act expanded the ACA allowing Washingtonians to save on the cost of their individual health insurance. The new act now makes it easier to get covered and stay covered, with the opportunity to take advantage of savings by signing up or switching plans by August 15, 2021.
Millions of Americans are nervously awaiting the official ruling on the fate of the Affordable Care Act in response to the CA v. TX lawsuit (previously Texas vs. U.S. or Texas vs. Azar, though I've given it the hashtag #TexasFoldEm due to the Trump Administration's Justice Department deciding to not only throw the fight but to actively support the plaintiffs against the law of the land).
The challenge concerns the Origination Clause, which provides that “[a]ll Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.” The original idea was to give control over the power to raise revenue to the House, which was thought to be more directly accountable to the people than the Senate, whose members were then selected by state legislatures.