Readers weigh in on changes to Affordable Care Act coverage
Note: A version of this appeared in Granite Post’s newsletter. Subscribe here.
The Trump administration canceled Affordable Care Act coverage for more than 760,000 people after federal officials said their enrollments were unauthorized. Federal officials say the move will save about $2.2 billion in taxpayer-funded subsidies.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) coverage cancellations raise questions about what should happen before someone loses their health insurance.
This week, we asked readers: Should the government be able to cancel someone’s health insurance over suspected fraud before the case is individually reviewed?
What readers said about the Affordable Care Act coverage cancellations:
“Definitely not! This is another example of the current administration’s policy of using a shotgun to kill a mosquito. Health care is a life and death issue and should be handled on a case-by-case basis as much as possible. If we weren’t involved in an illegal war and an illegal and unconstitutional ICE campaign, we might have the time and money to give our citizens affordable and adequate health care.” — JoAnn Carlson
“NO! I believe that everyone deserves the right to healthcare if they live or on this soil. There is a thing called due process that it seems as though a certain party, which I will not mention, does not believe in. This is a very sad state of affairs as to what this country has become.” — Charles Wetzel
“The government should NOT be able to cancel anyone’s health insurance over suspected fraud before an individual review. It is incomprehensible to me how this administration seems to be doing everything in its power to create an unwell society, from the damaging steps taken by the EPA to the slashing of subsidies on the Affordable Care Act, and so many other examples. Health care should be available to everyone without going into debt. A good way to save money would be to stop spending it on things like wars, ballrooms, and arches.” — Jane Duggan
“Normally I would say ‘yes,’ but in the age of ICE and a government that has no moral center, I would say that the claim of fraud would need to be proved before someone loses health insurance!” — N. Cook
“I agree with Joann Carlson. The Trump administration will take that money and fund things like ICE or else stuff it in Trump’s pockets. It is part of the Trump plan to abolish all the programs that help the people of this country.” — Marghi Bean
“Due process is one of our guarantees, so the answer is NO!” — Mike
“Absolutely not! This is because no claims have been filed? This is theft, plain and simple, something the Trump regime specializes in.” — Bill Carr
“What JD Vance is doing sounds remarkably similar to what Musk did with DOGE, and we all know how that went. Vance declared all of these people fraudulent so quickly, that we know that no research was performed. This was purely an algorithmic exercise. Among these thousands of people who are about to get their healthcare terminated, no doubt include those receiving lifesaving care and without the means to pay for it themselves.
“I’m also willing to bet that there are many others that are eligible for the program, but clerical mistakes have put them in the crosshairs of Vance’s algorithm. Everyone in this country deserves a process where their situation is individually reviewed. This smells like a Republican stunt to curry favor with their shrinking base before the mid terms.” — William Urbon
The Affordable Care Act coverage changes have sparked questions about how suspected fraud should be handled
“Apparently they think that if you don’t use your insurance in a certain year, you obtained it fraudulently. Their ignorance continues to astound” — Jan Leavitt
“Hell no! Absolutely not surprised that Dementia Don is doing this—he has a thing about unproven fraud (despite his own very proven frauds), and this way, he gets to grift even more from the government. Quite a few countries in the world have free healthcare and education, just with slightly higher taxes (not that higher, though). But the US has always had ‘pay per view’ (so to speak) for a lot of things.
“This country is one where if you don’t have money, they don’t care about you. But getting back to basics: canceling someone’s healthcare because of suspected, unproven fraud is completely wrong — it’s like saying ‘guilty until proven innocent.’ And heck, most fraud in the healthcare industry is caused by the insurance companies and the providers.” — David Masters
“Absolutely not! It is obvious, common sense that ‘suspected’ fraud is not the basis for which to make a decision on anything, and certainly not something as serious to the well-being of American citizens as health insurance. Anyone can cry fraud but that doesn’t make it so. Positively outrageous! “ — Mary Langdon
“No, it is like saying guilty before tried. People need to be given notice and the right to appeal decisions.” — Sharon Omand
