A Republican Congressman has introduced to help individuals who would 
lose their insurance subsidies if the Supreme Court rules in favour of the plaintiffs in the “King v. Burwell” case.
A verdict in the case, which challenges the administration’s ability to provide Affordable Care Act subsidies in states that do not operate their own healthcare exchanges or online marketplaces, is expected to be announced at the end of June.
Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., introduced HR 2650, dubbed the Restoring Equity, Saving Coverage , and Undoing Errors (RESCUE) America’s Health Care Bill of 2015. The bill would provide tax credits adjusted for the age of recipients.
It would also mandate changes to the health insurance market that would expand consumers’ access to affordable plans, including providing insurance to individuals with pre-existing conditions.
“It is important that Congress have a solution ready to go if and when the Supreme Court rules that the exchange subsidies under Obamacare are unconstitutional,” Price said in a statement. “States ought to have the freedom and flexibility to ensure their citizens have access to the highest quality health care possible. Individuals and families ought to have the financial wherewithal to purchase the type of coverage they want for themselves.”
The ‘King’ plaintiffs argue that the wording of the ACA legislation allows the government to grant tax credits or subsidies only to residents of states that have “established” marketplaces. Some 34 states have not done so, instead directing their residents to the federal Healthcare.gov exchange. The administration argues that the intent of Congress was to make subsidies available to all Americans.
Speaking to reporters after the G7 Summit in Germany, President
Obama said his administration is not making any preparations for an adverse ‘King’ ruling because “it’s important for us to go ahead and assume that the Supreme Court is going to do what most legal scholars who’ve looked at this would expect them to do.” He added that the court “probably shouldn’t even have … taken up” the case.
