NASHUA – Monday marked the 10-year anniversary of President Barack Obama’s signing of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into law, though it faces new obstacles and scrutiny in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.

While the economy teeters on the brink of a recession due to the COVID-19 outbreak, there are new concerns about the ACA’s future, as the country’s health system is straining in an unprecedented fashion.

U.S. Rep. Annie Kuster, D-NH, released a statement, lauding the significance of the legislation.

“The Affordable Care Act was an important step in improving access to health care for Granite State families and people across the country,” she said. “The ACA expanded access to care for tens of millions of Americans and the expansion of Medicaid has been critical in our efforts to combat the opioid epidemic in New Hampshire.”

Across the nation, most people still rely on their employers for health insurance coverage, but the ACA provided a new open market, compelling people to buy coverage on their own while mandating plans to provide basic protections such as guaranteeing coverage to those with pre-existing conditions. 

New Hampshire state Rep. Cindy Rosenwald, D-Nashua, said over the 10n-year period, people have accepted the fact that pre-existing condition coverage is an essential part of having insurance.

“I think people feel secure about that,” she said. “The fact that you can’t be denied insurance because of your health status is a good thing. And the fact that as costs for things like new biologics and expensive, fantastic prescriptions drugs go up, there are no more limits on your coverage.”

Rosenwald also cited, “no more rescinding” as another benefit of the ACA.

“If you get sick, your policy cannot be canceled,” she said. “And women cannot be charged more than men just because of their gender.

After a Supreme Court ruling, states were given the option to expand Medicaid, allowing coverage for those who did not meet income requirements. Prior to that, many Americans had to meet those requirements and also fit into certain categories like having children or a disability status. 

“Unfortunately, since coming to Congress, I have had to vote more than 50 times not to repeal the ACA,” Kuster’s statement continued. “We’ve seen President Trump and Republicans in Congress fail over and over to repeal the health care law. Now, the president is directing his administration to dismantle the ACA through the courts, all while promising to protect Americans with pre-existing conditions.”

U.S. Sen. Maggie Hassan also lauded the ACA, while noting the importance of access to health care during the coronavirus outbreak.

“As our country grapples with the unprecedented effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, access to quality health insurance could not be more important,” Hassan said.

“Since its passage 10 years ago, the Affordable Care Act has been critical for expanding quality, affordable health coverage to millions of Americans, including those with pre-existing conditions,” Hassan added. “As we work to build on and improve the law, including by bringing down prescription drug costs, I continue to call on the administration to drop its support for a lawsuit that would strip coverage and vital protections away from hard-working people.”

Although there is a safety net in place for people who are at risk of losing their jobs and health insurance, some fear that there’s a hole in that net as some states have opted out of expanding Medicaid.

Kuster further said that rather than strip millions of Americans of their health insurance, “We should be building upon the progress we have made and working to improve the ACA and expand access to quality, affordable health care while ensuring protections for the most vulnerable among us.”

New Hampshire state Rep. Alicia Lekas, R-Hudson, called the ACA “catastrophic.”

“It was a mistake,” she said. “It’s harmed a lot of people, my son in particular, had a care plan that he had for a long time. He then lost his coverage with Obamacare and couldn’t get Obamacare because he lives on a boat.”

Lekas said without a physical address, he went from having coverage to having none.

“That’s just one example,” she said. “People were promised they could go to the same doctors – that wasn’t true. And people who were happy with their previous coverage and then lost it. So, I see it as a bad thing.”

As the debate continues, The Supreme Court has been doing its work remotely, but it’s unclear whether and how public hearings will go forward as large gatherings are banned in Washington, D.C.

——

EDITOR’S NOTE: This content is being provided for free as a public service to our community during the coronavirus outbreak. Please support local journalism by subscribing to The Telegraph at https://home.nashuatelegraph.com/clickshare/checkDelivery.do;jsessionid=40C089D96583CD7318C1C1D9317B6162.