The U.S. Supreme Court is deciding on a case that may affect Utahns who benefit from government subsidies under the Affordable Care Act.
In King v. Burwell, the plaintiff is arguing that the federal government should not give subsidies to people who buy health insurance in states that do not run their own exchanges.
Since Utah does not have an exchange, a ruling in favor of the plaintiff would take subsidies away from Utahns.
Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA — an advocacy group that backs healthcare reform — said the 86,000 Utahns who receive federal subsidies are paying premiums of $89 per month on average. He said this could increase to $248 if subsidies are taken away.
“This court case, which should be decided over the next week and a half, could make a huge difference as to whether Utahns can afford health insurance,” Pollack said.
Derek Monson, director of public policy at the Sutherland Institute — a conservative think tank — argued that while parts of the ACA have made premiums more affordable for some, others have to pay more.
Monson said a decision in favor of the plaintiff would give lawmakers an opportunity to repeal certain regulations under the act.
“The reality is premiums have continued to go up and have gone up most specifically in recent years because of these mandates and these regulations under the ACA,” Monson said. “And so if you repeal those it would lower the health insurance premiums for everybody.”
Pollack said because of the subsidies, young, healthy people have been able to afford insurance. He argued taking subsidies away can lead to a “death spiral,” where these young people will drop out of insurance.
“Insurance pools only get made up of people who are older and sicker,” Pollack said. “And as that occurs, premiums just keep on escalating and skyrocketing, so that at some point, fairly quickly, insurance is unaffordable for virtually everybody.”