ICYMI: Cramer-Backed Attacks on Health Care Could Impact Millions of Americans Who Get Insurance Through Work

Lawsuit to roll back coverage for pre-existing conditions may hurt the 175 million Americans who get coverage through their employer

(BISMARCK, ND) – Americans who get health insurance through their employer – some 175 million people – could be susceptible to changes in their coverage, according to a new article in the Wall Street Journal. The Department of Justice is supporting an effort to roll back coverage guarantees for people with pre-existing health conditions and to relax limits on how much insurers can charge older individuals and women. Should the efforts succeed, parts of the health care law that benefit workers who get coverage through work would also be revoked, potentially affecting millions of Americans.

Since arriving in Washington, Kevin Cramer has supported legislation aimed at rolling back the protections provided by the Affordable Care Act. In 2013, Cramer voted for a bill that would have delayed parts of the Affordable Care Act that guarantee coverage for individuals with pre-existing conditions, who Cramer famously accused of “gaming the system.” That same year, Cramer voted against a law that would prohibit employers from reducing insurance coverage for their workers.

Read a quick recap of the article below:

Wall Street Journal: Get Health Coverage at Work? Lawsuit Against ACA Could Affect You, Too

• Tens of millions of people who get health insurance through their job could face waiting periods for coverage or find that specific medical conditions aren’t immediately covered if the courts back a request by the Trump administration to toss key provisions of the Affordable Care Act.

• … the request would also rewind some protections for the vast majority of Americans—some 175 million people—who get health coverage via small and large employers, analysts said.

• “Anyone who just thinks this is just impacting the 12 to 15 million individuals with individual coverage is wrong,” said Timothy Jost, an emeritus law professor at Washington and Lee University.

• That means employers would again be able to impose lengthy waiting periods for health coverage on new hires.

• Employers could also opt not to cover a new hire’s specific health problem, like cancer, for up to a year even if they provide them insurance.

• And when smaller companies shop for insurance, they could be charged more to cover their workers if they have a large number of older or sicker people. That can indirectly lead to higher costs for workers who pay a share of their premiums, health analysts said.