Protecting Affordable Coverage for Employees Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, 17.6 million Americans have gained health insurance coverage and are no longer one accident, injury, or diagnosis away from financial ruin. This is the largest reduction in the uninsured in four decades.
The ACA has increased access and reduced financial barriers to important preventive services, such as cancer screenings and well-woman visits by requiring their coverage with no cost sharing. The law also stopped insurers from discriminating based on preexisting conditions or placing annual limits on how much health care they will cover.
Though the ACA is already helping millions nationwide, no law is perfect, and there are certainly ways we can improve the ACA and build upon its successes. Given the political theatre that tends to surround the ACA, I am pleased to see that my Republican colleagues are ready to work together on bipartisan proposals such as H.R. 1624 with the goal of strengthening the law. Unfortunately, though, I do not agree with the approach this bill takes.
H.R. 1624 would permanently change the law to make the small group expansion currently required under the ACA optional for states and allow states to ``opt in'' if they choose. Research tells us that some states simply are not ready to expand their small group market and that expansion in these states could result in higher costs for certain consumers. However, the small group expansion was included in the ACA for good reason. The benefits of expansion such as added consumer protections and increased stability for small employers are important and achievable goals. States like Washington are already experiencing the benefits of an expanded small group market.
I am concerned that H.R. 1624 is premature, and I would instead prefer a few year transitional delay of the small group expansion or an ``opt out'' option for states instead. I believe these alternatives would ensure that states continue to work towards the goal of expansion, rather than disregarding the provision altogether.
Mr. Speaker, I am also disappointed that this bill was not considered under regular order. Such an important issue deserves thoughtful discussion and opportunities for amendments. I had hoped to offer an amendment that would allow states to ``opt out'' of the expansion. Since I was unable to discuss this amendment and other potential changes to the bill with my colleagues in a committee markup, I remain uncertain that this legislation is the best course of action.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source