House Dems face choice on ACA compromises
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Lindsey Bailey/Axios
The House is teeing up a series of health care votes this week as Democrats face a choice on their willingness to back anything but a straight extension of enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies.
Why it matters: The question is whether Democrats will ally with a handful of vulnerable Republicans and force a vote on a compromise subsidy plan that GOP leaders have no intention of letting become law.
Where things stand: After the Senate last week voted down competing health care plans, House leadership is set to bring up a Republican proposal that doesn't include an extension of the ACA tax credits, which GOP leaders say is wasteful spending benefiting insurance companies.
- The plan instead includes a grab bag of other measures that could get consensus among House Republicans, including transparency requirements on pharmacy benefit managers and measures to help small businesses purchase health coverage.
- GOP leaders will also give centrists an amendment vote on some type of modified subsidy extension that's likely to fail.
- "The House GOP health plan does not include any federal funding to help ACA enrollees pay for premiums or health care directly," Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, wrote on X.
The intrigue: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries must decide whether to support either of two bipartisan compromise plans to extend the subsidies. He told reporters Friday he would have more to say on that front early this week.
- Bringing either up would involve teaming with moderate Republicans on a discharge petition — a procedural move requiring a majority of members to force a vote over the objections of Speaker Mike Johnson.
- Jeffries has raised some concerns with with one plan, from Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Jared Golden (D-Maine). It would modify the subsidies by making recipients pay a minimum premium that some Democrats warn will lead to coverage losses among low-income people.
- The other plan, from Reps. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) and Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), includes a one-year subsidy extension with changes like an income cap on who can be eligible for the tax credits.
The bottom line: Democratic leaders are seen as preferring the Kiggans-Gottheimer plan. But there are doubts they will support either one amid a range of questions, including about whether either can get through the Senate.
- Many Democrats continue to argue for a multiyear "clean" extension without changes, saying there's no time to make changes before coverage for the 2026 calendar year begins. Jeffries has pushed his own discharge petition with a clean three-year extension, backed by all 214 Democrats.
- There is also the political question of whether to give political cover to vulnerable Republicans on a plan that likely won't become law.
- "I want a two-year clean extension," top Ways and Means Democrat Richard Neal (Mass.) told reporters on Thursday. "I don't know why we would consider a one-year anyway that helps them just get through an election cycle. And that's all this is about for them."
