Learn about the 2018 federal poverty guidelines for people living in the 48 contiguous states or the District of Columbia, as well as Alaska and Hawaii. The 2017 guidelines are also included for reference. Federal poverty levels are used to determine eligibility for certain federal programs, including Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
The uninsured rate is at an all-time low, as the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has made it possible for 20 million, and counting, to get covered and stay covered. Yet premium increases raise real concerns about the affordability of marketplace coverage in the 2017 plan year.
While the headlines focus on the areas of the country with the steepest increases, most consumers will not feel the hit of high premiums personally. Here are four reasons why
A new report released last week confirms the findings that enrollment experts emphasized on our teleconference with reporters last Wednesday: We still have a ways to go in getting “hard-to-reach” populations enrolled in health coverage.
Easy-to-understand information on how to choose a plan, get financial assistance, and enroll in health insurance through the marketplaces, including four new fact sheets on how to keep and use health insurance.
The next big debate over the Affordable Care Act is looming. States are already planning for changes they'd like to make to the ACA using the new 1332 state innovation waivers. Beginning in 2017, the ACA permits states to apply for waivers to begin experimenting with strategies to provide residents with access to high-quality, affordable health insurance. But whether these new strategies will be helpful or harmful is still anyone’s guess.
King v. Burwell: Where Consumers Losing Tax Credits Could See the Biggest Increases in Premium Payments
The Supreme Court will rule any day now on King v. Burwell, the case that will determine whether premium tax credits remain available in the 34 states in which the federal government runs the health insurance marketplace.
If the Supreme Court rules against the government, more than 6 million people in 34 states would lose access to the premium tax credits they rely on to afford their health insurance. All consumers who rely on tax credits in these states would pay substantially more out of pocket on their monthly premium payments. However, residents of some states and congressional districts would experience much higher spikes in their premium payments if they lose their tax credits.
State infographics illustrate how the damage from a decision against the government in King v. Burwell would be spread throughout the country, from Alaska to Florida. Thousands of people would suddenly face higher premiums in every congressional district in the 34 affected states.
When Steve was let go from his job and diagnosed with cancer, he lost his health insurance—and his ability to pay for health care. Through the Affordable Care Act’s premium tax credits, he was able to get the medical attention he needed.
For 25 years, Megan’s dad, Steve, devoted his career to helping others. He worked at a nonprofit for people with disabilities in Beatrice, Nebraska. This work offered life lessons and wisdom he passed down to his daughter.
Later this month the Supreme Court will announce its decision in King v. Burwell, a case that threatens the health coverage of millions.
This overview will bring busy readers up to speed on what’s at stake in the case and what the fallout will be if the justices rule against the government (the case specifically names U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Burwell).
America is on the cusp of becoming a nation with two health care systems. This sharp division is the result of continued resistance to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and it does greatest harm to residents where the resistance is greatest.
Two current developments are animating this division: One relates to state decisions about expanding Medicaid, and the other is the potential outcome of the Supreme Court case, King v. Burwell, which was brought by ACA opponents and was argued on March 4.