POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALhearing transcript
High Impact

House Budget Committee Hearing on the Affordable Care Act

Original title: THE FAILURES OF OBAMACARE: HARMFUL EFFECTS AND BROKEN PROMISES

January 1, 2017

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

This hearing served as a formal legislative step in the 115th Congress to evaluate the performance of the Affordable Care Act and set the stage for potential repeal or reform legislation affecting health insurance coverage and costs for millions of Americans.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Patients

Patients are affected by changes in insurance premiums, deductibles, and access to specific doctors or insurance plans.

Small Businesses

Small businesses face potential changes in hiring practices and benefit offerings due to healthcare law requirements.

Medicaid Recipients

Individuals enrolled in Medicaid are affected by the administration and structure of the healthcare system.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2017.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

The House Committee on the Budget held a hearing on January 24, 2017, to examine the economic and operational impacts of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Lawmakers and invited experts discussed rising insurance costs, changes in coverage, and the potential consequences of repealing the law.

Key Facts

  • The hearing was held on January 24, 2017, by the House Committee on the Budget.
  • Chairman Diane Black stated that average family insurance premiums have risen by $4,300 since the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.
  • Chairman Diane Black stated that deductibles in the employer-sponsored market have increased by 60 percent.
  • The committee discussed a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study regarding the potential impact of repealing the Affordable Care Act.
  • Chairman Diane Black cited that 28,000 people in Tennessee lost coverage when the 'Access Tennessee' risk pool program lapsed.
  • The committee heard testimony from four expert witnesses: Grace-Marie Turner, Robert A. Book, Linda J. Blumberg, and Edmund F. Haislmaier.

Why It Matters

This hearing served as a formal legislative step in the 115th Congress to evaluate the performance of the Affordable Care Act and set the stage for potential repeal or reform legislation affecting health insurance coverage and costs for millions of Americans.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of this hearing?
The hearing was convened by the House Budget Committee to review the performance of the Affordable Care Act and discuss its impact on healthcare costs, insurance coverage, and the economy.
Who testified at the hearing?
The committee heard from Grace-Marie Turner (Galen Institute), Robert A. Book (Health Systems Innovation Network), Linda J. Blumberg (The Urban Institute), and Edmund F. Haislmaier (The Heritage Foundation).

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Show 1 more sponsor

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift100% confidence

Early 2017 Repeal Efforts

The hearing transcript confirms that the House Budget Committee was actively building a case for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act immediately following the 2016 election.

Connected Entities

organizationAccess TennesseeA state risk pool program mentioned as having lapsedMap →
personLinda J. BlumbergSenior Fellow, The Urban InstituteMap →
personEdmund F. HaislmaierSenior Research Fellow, The Heritage FoundationMap →
personRobert A. BookSenior Director, Health Systems Innovation Network, LLCMap →
personJohn A. YarmuthRanking Minority Member of the House Committee on the BudgetMap →
personDiane BlackInterim Chairman of the House Committee on the BudgetMap →
personGrace-Marie TurnerPresident of the Galen InstituteMap →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance85
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy90
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment40
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz30
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record