
Republicans are quietly rolling back Obamacare. Here's how
Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink
Follow
President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans are no longer promising to repeal Obamacare, but that doesn't mean they have given up efforts to take down the landmark health reform law.
Unlike in 2017, when the late GOP Sen. John McCain's dramatic thumbs-down dashed his caucus's hope of overturning the Affordable Care Act, Republicans barely mentioned Obamacare as they swiftly pushed Trump's massive domestic agenda package through Congress this year. Instead, they focused their talking points on eliminating fraud in Medicaid and protecting the program for the most vulnerable.
And this time, they were successful in dealing a major blow to the Affordable Care Act. The 'big, beautiful bill,' along with a new rule from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, is expected to leave millions more people without health coverage, raise costs for those who remain in Obamacare policies, and reverse more than a decade of improvement in the nation's uninsured rate.
In addition, Trump's package is projected to shrink another major provision of the Affordable Care Act — expanding Medicaid coverage to low-income adults — by requiring many of them to work, volunteer or engage in other activities at least 80 hours a month.
'The net effect of the changes they are making is a partial repeal of the ACA,' said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, a nonpartisan research group.
What's more, Republicans may further undermine Obamacare before the end of the year if they do not extend the enhanced federal premium subsidies that former President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats approved in 2021. The beefed-up subsidies, which helped propel record sign-ups for Obamacare coverage but lapse at the end of 2025, will be a subject of debate when Congress returns in September.
Democratic lawmakers are already calling attention to the subsidies' expiration, which would send people's premium payments skyrocketing and prompt millions to drop their policies, experts say. Some Republicans have voiced support in exploring the matter, especially since red-state residents would likely be among those losing coverage.
Even though the 'big, beautiful bill' contains the largest-ever cuts to federal support for health coverage, it remains to be seen whether the Republicans' toned-down rhetoric on Obamacare will help them avoid the retribution they suffered in the 2018 midterms, when the repeal effort was a major factor in the Democrats winning control of the House.
'Many of the changes are so technical, it may be hard for the public to grasp what's happening,' Levitt said. 'Many of the changes will take years to take effect.'
Between them, the new law and rule will make it harder to enroll in and renew Affordable Care Act coverage by increasing verification requirements, hiking out-of-pocket costs for enrollees, and banning certain legal immigrants from qualifying for federal subsidies.
The rule is expected to cause up to 1.8 million people to lose Obamacare coverage next year, and the losses will likely be concentrated in seven GOP-led states, including Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and Texas, as well as North Carolina, which has a Democratic governor, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
Meanwhile, the Affordable Care Act provisions in the law are forecast to lead to 2.1 million more people being uninsured in 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
'It's a radical weakening of what the marketplaces will be able to deliver in the next few years,' said Jennifer Sullivan, director of health coverage access at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
But supporters of the Republicans' efforts say the law and rule aim to eliminate many of the expansions and flexibilities in enrollment and verification that Biden introduced into Obamacare, which also opened it up to more fraud, mainly by insurance brokers. (The Biden administration last year took steps to counter an increase in brokers fraudulently accessing and making changes in consumers' accounts without authorization.)
'The One Big, Beautiful Bill restores the ACA, rather than repeals it,' Brian Blase, president of Paragon Health Institute, a right-leaning think tank, told CNN. 'It actually seems like [it's] upholding the integrity of the program.'
'If you can take sort of simple steps like having people every year update their information and having that verified to reduce billions — if not tens of billions — [of dollars] of waste and fraud expenditures, it doesn't undermine the program,' continued Blase, who served as a health policy adviser at the White House's National Economic Council during the first Trump administration and whose work is closely followed by Republican lawmakers.
The law and the rule make sweeping changes to the Affordable Care Act.
Enrollees will be required to verify their income in advance of receiving federal premium assistance to guarantee they are eligible, instead of only reconciling their earnings and subsidies on their tax returns to ensure they received the proper amount of assistance.
Also, they will not be allowed to receive federal subsidies if they fail to file their taxes and reconcile for one year. Plus, if they received too high a subsidy (because they underestimated their income when enrolling), they will have to pay back the entire amount of the excess assistance. Previously, there were limits on the repayment requirement.
The beefed-up verification mandate effectively ends automatic reenrollment in Obamacare, a key method of keeping people covered. Nearly 11 million people — or 45% of sign-ups — were automatically reenrolled for 2025, according to KFF.
The rule also temporarily requires low-income enrollees who qualify for plans with $0 premiums to pay $5 a month until they verify their eligibility. And it allows insurers to require enrollees to pay both initial and past-due premiums before coverage starts.
In addition, it shortens the open enrollment period on the federal healthcare.gov exchange to November 1 through December 15 and requires state-run Affordable Care Act exchanges to end open enrollment by December 31.
The rule also temporarily repeals the ability for those with household incomes at or below 150% of the federal poverty line to enroll year-round, while the law bars those who sign up via certain types of special enrollment periods from receiving federal subsidies.
What's more, the rule makes technical changes that will hike the annual cost of coverage by hundreds of dollars by reducing the premium subsidies and allowing insurers to raise out-of-pocket costs when people receive care. And certain legal immigrants, including refugees, asylees and victims of sex and labor trafficking, will no longer qualify for federal assistance.
The additional documentation and higher costs are expected to lead to healthier enrollees dropping out of the exchanges in coming years, leaving sicker consumers with greater health care needs in the program. That will likely cause insurers to raise their premiums even more or drop out in coming years.
The rule is being challenged in two lawsuits filed by a coalition of Democratic-led states and by a group of cities and organizations, which argue that it will lead to more people losing coverage. That, in turn, will raise the states' and cities' costs for providing health care services to these newly uninsured residents, the plaintiffs say.
The turmoil is already having an impact. Insurers have proposed a median premium hike of 18% for 2026, more than double last year's proposed increase, in part because of the looming expiration of the enhanced premium subsidies, according to a KFF analysis. And Aetna has already announced it will not offer Obamacare coverage next year.
'It will be a tumultuous few years as insurers and people who rely on the marketplace for health insurance ride this out,' Sullivan said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Axios
a few seconds ago
- Axios
Violent crime in border cities fell below national rate in 2024
Several U.S. border communities saw violent crime drop below the national average in 2024, as nationwide rates fell to 20-year lows, according to new FBI data analyzed by Axios. Why it matters: The findings from last year run counter to claims by President Trump and GOP leaders, who painted border towns as crime hotspots because of newly arrived immigrants. The big picture: Eleven border cities examined annually by Axios — Brownsville, McAllen, Laredo, Eagle Pass, Del Rio and El Paso in Texas; Sunland Park in New Mexico; Nogales and Yuma in Arizona; and Calexico and San Diego in California — had an average violent crime rate of 356.5 per 100,000 residents. That was a sizable drop from 2023 and was slightly below the national average of 359.1 violent crimes per 100,000 residents last year, FBI numbers show. Between the lines: The 11 border communities, all of them majority-Latino, had a homicide rate of 2.5 per 100,000 residents — half of the national average of 5 per 100,000. Four of the border cities — Del Rio, Eagle Pass, Sunland Park and Nogales — reported no homicides in 2024, the data show. El Paso and Yuma had the highest homicide rate among the border communities with 2.9 per 100,000, still well below the national average. The intrigue: McAllen — located across the Rio Grande from Reynosa, Mexico, one of the most dangerous places in the Americas — had one of the lowest violent crime rates on the border. Zoom out: The border communities had low crime rates before Trump took office, boosted border security and canceled millions of dollars in federal money for crime prevention programs. Early numbers for 2025 indicate that overall violent crime in the border cities is continuing to drop, as Trump's lockdown of the border has greatly reduced illegal crossings. Yes, but: Local officials fear that could change if the administration pulls back on anti-crime grants amid fights over immigration enforcement. The Trump administration is threatening to withhold millions of dollars in law enforcement grants unless cities agree to work with federal immigration officials on mass deportations. El Paso has been an exception this year, experiencing a 42% jump in homicides in the first half of 2025, according to the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA). The intrigue: Some border cities, such as Laredo and Sunland Park, are dispatching AI-enhanced drones to help fight crime amid officer shortages. Flashback: Throughout the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump repeated false claims that migrants from Latin America, Africa and the Middle East were responsible for jumps in violent crime, despite studies showing violent crime was dropping.


Axios
a few seconds ago
- Axios
Focus groups: Trump redistricting push could backfire with swing voters
The reaction of Georgia swing voters in our latest Engagious / Sago focus groups shows how President Trump's sudden push for redistricting could backfire on the GOP in the midterms — if Democrats can hold voters' attention. The big picture: Just four of the 11 Biden-to-Trump swing voters in Tuesday night's sessions said they could explain why more than 50 Democratic Texas legislators have left that state. But when provided with neutral facts describing the situation, none of the 11 said they support the GOP redistricting effort. All 11 oppose an effort from the state attorney general to remove some of the Democrats from office. 10 of the 11 said Texas Democrats did the right thing by leaving the state. "Once Georgia swing voters understand what Texas Republicans are attempting, they reject it," said Rich Thau, president of Engagious, who moderated the focus groups. "That said, Democrats have done a lousy job of educating swing voters about mid-decade redistricting." Zoom in: Of the 11 focus group participants, all of whom backed President Trump in November, just three now say they approve of the administration's overall actions. All 11 said they're more anxious about the economy now than when Trump took office. Seven said they disapprove of the tariffs. How it works: Axios observed two online focus groups Tuesday night that included 11 Georgia residents who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and Donald Trump in 2024. Five are Democrats, four are independents and two are Republicans. While a focus group is not a statistically significant sample like a poll, the responses show how some voters are thinking and talking about current events. What they're saying: " The cost of living is ridiculous and it's not slowing down; it shows no signs of getting better," said Todd L., 42, of Atlanta. "It seems like every other day there's a new tariff or he's pissed off some other country, and just every single day there's more news about inflation and job losses," said Gavin E., 52, of Decatur. "It just keeps getting worse and worse. We're hemorrhaging. It's crazy." When it comes to the Texas redistricting dispute, Kevin J., 57, of Woodstock, said: "Doing this now and redrawing their districts, that's just they want to please Donald Trump." Said Chris Z., 36, of Norcross: "He wants it now. He wants it his way. There's a proper way to do things and he doesn't follow. ... There's no balance of power. That's just not how things operate, and it'll be a domino effect with other states doing the same thing." "Once it's done every five years, then some state will push it to two years and some state will push it to a year," said Sherrecia J., 34, of Atlanta. "It's going to become more and more ridiculous. It has to have a boundary." "What's the purpose of having laws and constitutions and protocols if they're not going to be followed?" said Olanrewaju A., 44, of Decatur. Meanwhile, Thau also spent a portion of the sessions asking these swing voters how they are using and thinking about AI. The panels followed the launch of OpenAI's GPT-5. Some communities, including in Georgia, are raising concerns about the growth of data centers and their potential strains on the power grid and the environment. 10 of the 11 said they've used some form of AI; five use ChatGPT at least weekly; eight consider themselves supporters of AI. Nine worried AI will weaken privacy protections, especially related to financial data; nine also feared AI will be used to undermine America's political system; and eight said they fear AI will figure out how to launch weapons on its own, without human commands.


Medscape
a few seconds ago
- Medscape
Calcium Deposition Can Increase Osteoarthritis Risk
Calcium crystal deposition may be a risk factor for knee osteoarthritis (OA), according to a new study. In an analysis including more than 6400 middle-aged to older adults, individuals with knee chondrocalcinosis were 75% more likely to develop knee OA than those without the condition at baseline. Because knee chondrocalcinosis and OA are often observed together, it is commonly considered a feature of the OA disease process, said Jean W. Liew, MD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at Boston University, Boston, and coauthor of the study. 'This study suggests that calcium crystal deposition is a cause of knee OA rather than just a consequence,' she told Medscape Medical News . The analysis included data from two independent cohorts: the Rotterdam Study (RS) and the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study (MOST). RS enrolled individuals aged 55 years or older residing in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. MOST, which recruited participants from Birmingham, Alabama, and Iowa City, Iowa, enrolled adults aged 50-79 years with preexisting knee OA or at increased risk for OA due to overweight status, knee injury, or knee symptoms. Researchers examined the association between baseline knee chondrocalcinosis, measured via x-ray, and development of radiographic knee OA over time. Radiographic knee OA was defined as a Kellgren and Lawrence grade (KLG) ≥ 2 or if the individual had undergone knee replacement at follow-up. The analysis, published online on August 5, 2025, in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases , included 3737 individuals from the RS cohort and 2750 individuals from the MOST cohort. At baseline in the RS cohort, 76.1% of participants had no signs of radiographic knee OA (KLG = 0), and 4.3% had knee chondrocalcinosis. For the MOST cohort, 68.5% had no signs of radiographic knee OA, and 5.0% had knee chondrocalcinosis at baseline. The analysis found that knee chondrocalcinosis increased the risk for incident radiographic knee OA after adjustment for age, sex, and BMI. The pooled odds ratio (OR) between both groups was 1.75 (95% CI, 1.25-2.27; P < .001). There were no cases of regression of chondrocalcinosis during follow-up, which suggests that chondrocalcinosis does not resolve over time, Liew and colleagues wrote. In a subgroup analysis including only individuals with KLG of 0 at baseline, the results were similar (OR = 1.77; 95% CI, 1.04-3.01; P = .035). More severe chondrocalcinosis was also associated with increased risk of developing knee OA. Commenting on the study for Medscape Medical News , Sara Tedeschi, MD, MPH, noted that these findings 'strongly suggest that [chondrocalcinosis] is a risk factor for the new development of osteoarthritis in people who don't currently have radiographic osteoarthritis.' Tedeschi is the head of crystal-induced arthritic diseases at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston. 'One of the unique features of this paper,' she said, 'is that they were able to look at knees that had chondrocalcinosis at baseline but no osteoarthritis at baseline and were able to follow them forward' with years of follow-up data. Treatment Options Liew now wants to explore whether treatments for inflammation related to calcium crystal deposition could also help prevent or delay progression of OA in this subset of patients. 'It's time to look at designing studies focused on this subgroup of people (with chondrocalcinosis on imaging) and testing whether treatments that work for crystal-associated arthritis like gout or calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease would also work for knee OA,' she said. 'Hints of such benefits have appeared in previous cardiovascular randomized controlled trials of colchicine, where patients receiving the drug had a lower risk of joint replacement as a secondary outcome,' noted Tedeschi. It's 'one interesting therapy to consider' for potential future trials, as are other anti-inflammatory medications like interleukin-1 inhibitors, she added.