For days, Ida Sievers, who was diagnosed with leukemia last fall, has been praying that she doesn’t lose the $620-a-month government subsidy for her health insurance. So she was delighted Thursday when she learned that the Supreme Court had ruled that the financial aid was legal and could continue.
“Thank God, hallelujah, that is so awesome,” said Sievers, a 46-year-old resident of Sioux Falls, S.D. “Oh man! I’m so happy. I’ve been so stressed about it and worried, just every day. I’ve been talking to my husband, ‘What are we gonna do honey’? And he just says, ‘Have faith, honey, it’s gonna be okay.’”
Sievers was one of several consumers who expressed relief that the court sided with the Obama administration in the highly anticipated King v. Burwell decision. Under the administration’s interpretation of the Affordable Care Act, about 6.4 million Americans receive financial aid to reduce the cost of health plans sold on the state and federal insurance exchanges. The suit challenged the subsidies provided through the federal exchange.
Sievers bought her insurance late last year on the federal marketplace, HealthCare.gov, because the state did not set up its own marketplace. She got chemotherapy and is now in remission. But she has been too weak to go back to her part-time job as a cashier at a convenience store. Her husband’s job, which involves operating machinery for the city street department, is seasonal, has limited hours, and doesn’t provide insurance. He earns about $30,000 a year.
Sixteen states and the District of Columbia have created their own exchanges, but three of them — Nevada, New Mexico and Oregon — are using the federal exchange because of technical problems. The remaining 34 states rely to varying degrees on the federal exchange. Pennsylvania, Delaware and Arkansas had recently received conditional approval from federal health officials to set up state exchanges, if needed, to keep subsidies flowing.
Upholding affordable health care View Graphic
About 85 percent of consumers who have bought insurance on state and federal exchanges receive a subsidy; the average amount is $272 a month, according to government data. If the court had ruled against the administration, consumers who are receiving subsidies could have seen their costs for insurance almost triple, according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Mary Kitchens, 50, who lives near San Antonio, Texas, is paying less than $100 a month for her subsidized coverage. She began crying when informed of the decision.
“I don’t even have words,” said Kitchens, who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 2009. “It’s amazing. It’s amazing.”
Kitchens, who works in marketing for a real estate firm, is a single mom with four children.
The decision “means that I’ll have options” in obtaining medication and treatment, she said. “It means I won’t be a burden to my children. Without it, I felt so doomed…Without insurance, you succumb to the disease. And I don’t want to do that.” Without it, her bill could have jumped to $500 to $600 a month.
“Woo! I’m relieved,” said Susan Scheffler who along with her husband owns Nickels & Scheffler, a cafe in Alexandria’s Old Town neighborhood. “Now I don’t have to cobble some kind of health care together...I couldn’t afford to pay the [full] policy.”
Scheffler, 60, pays $119 for her plan, and receives a subsidy of about $500. She’s fairly healthy, but “I definitely need insurance,” she said, “because I work with knives.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...cb900c-15cd-11e5-9ddc-e3353542100c_story.html
“Thank God, hallelujah, that is so awesome,” said Sievers, a 46-year-old resident of Sioux Falls, S.D. “Oh man! I’m so happy. I’ve been so stressed about it and worried, just every day. I’ve been talking to my husband, ‘What are we gonna do honey’? And he just says, ‘Have faith, honey, it’s gonna be okay.’”
Sievers was one of several consumers who expressed relief that the court sided with the Obama administration in the highly anticipated King v. Burwell decision. Under the administration’s interpretation of the Affordable Care Act, about 6.4 million Americans receive financial aid to reduce the cost of health plans sold on the state and federal insurance exchanges. The suit challenged the subsidies provided through the federal exchange.
Sievers bought her insurance late last year on the federal marketplace, HealthCare.gov, because the state did not set up its own marketplace. She got chemotherapy and is now in remission. But she has been too weak to go back to her part-time job as a cashier at a convenience store. Her husband’s job, which involves operating machinery for the city street department, is seasonal, has limited hours, and doesn’t provide insurance. He earns about $30,000 a year.
Sixteen states and the District of Columbia have created their own exchanges, but three of them — Nevada, New Mexico and Oregon — are using the federal exchange because of technical problems. The remaining 34 states rely to varying degrees on the federal exchange. Pennsylvania, Delaware and Arkansas had recently received conditional approval from federal health officials to set up state exchanges, if needed, to keep subsidies flowing.
Upholding affordable health care View Graphic About 85 percent of consumers who have bought insurance on state and federal exchanges receive a subsidy; the average amount is $272 a month, according to government data. If the court had ruled against the administration, consumers who are receiving subsidies could have seen their costs for insurance almost triple, according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Mary Kitchens, 50, who lives near San Antonio, Texas, is paying less than $100 a month for her subsidized coverage. She began crying when informed of the decision.
“I don’t even have words,” said Kitchens, who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 2009. “It’s amazing. It’s amazing.”
Kitchens, who works in marketing for a real estate firm, is a single mom with four children.
The decision “means that I’ll have options” in obtaining medication and treatment, she said. “It means I won’t be a burden to my children. Without it, I felt so doomed…Without insurance, you succumb to the disease. And I don’t want to do that.” Without it, her bill could have jumped to $500 to $600 a month.
“Woo! I’m relieved,” said Susan Scheffler who along with her husband owns Nickels & Scheffler, a cafe in Alexandria’s Old Town neighborhood. “Now I don’t have to cobble some kind of health care together...I couldn’t afford to pay the [full] policy.”
Scheffler, 60, pays $119 for her plan, and receives a subsidy of about $500. She’s fairly healthy, but “I definitely need insurance,” she said, “because I work with knives.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...cb900c-15cd-11e5-9ddc-e3353542100c_story.html
