Breaking News
0
Ad-Free Version. Upgrade your Investing.com experience. Save up to 40% More details

U.S. Supreme Court justices lean toward insurers on $12 billion Obamacare claims

Stock MarketsDec 10, 2019 01:57PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This article has already been saved in your Saved Items
 
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Demonstrators in favor of Obamacare gather at the Supreme Court building in Washington

By Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Supreme Court justices on Tuesday appeared sympathetic to claims made by health insurers seeking $12 billion from the federal government under a program set up by the Obamacare law aimed at encouraging them to offer medical coverage to previously uninsured Americans.

The justices considered a challenge by a group of insurers of a lower court's ruling that Congress had suspended the government's obligation to make such payments. The insurers have said that ruling constituted a "bait-and-switch" that would enable the government to withhold money the companies were promised.

The court's four liberal justices, in addition to Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, all asked questions indicating they are inclined to vote for the insurers.

"Why doesn't the government have to pay its contracts just like everybody else?" said Justice Stephen Breyer.

Moda Health Plan Inc and other insurers sued in an effort to compel the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to make the payments. The program in question was designed to help insurers recover from early losses they suffered after the 2010 passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) under Democratic former President Barack Obama.

The law, dubbed Obamacare, has enabled millions of Americans who previously had no medical coverage to obtain insurance, including those with pre-existing medical conditions.

Unlike other court cases involving Obamacare, this dispute before the justices concerns only payments to insurers and does not directly challenge the law itself.

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito seemed most supportive of the government.

"Has there ever been a case where this court has, in effect, required Congress to appropriate ... billions of dollars for private businesses?" he asked the insurers' lawyer, Paul Clement.

Other insurers involved in the case include Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Maine Community Health Options and Land of Lincoln Mutual Health Insurance Company.

If the Supreme Court sides with the insurers, it could result in a significant one-time cash infusion for major companies such as Humana Inc (N:HUM), Anthem Inc (N:ANTM) and Centene Corp (N:CNC), according to a note by Evercore ISI. Shares of all three were up slightly on Tuesday.

Payments would have come through the law's risk corridor program designed to mitigate insurers' risks from 2014 to 2016, when they sold coverage to previously uninsured people through exchanges established under the ACA.

Under the program, insurers that paid out significantly less in claims on policies sold through the exchanges than they took in from premiums provided some of their gains to the government. Insurers that paid out more were entitled to government compensation for part of their losses.

Roberts questioned whether any of the insurers would have participated in the program if the payments were not available.

"Its a good business opportunity for them because the government promised to pay," he said.

Republicans, who have opposed Obamacare from the outset and numerous times sought to repeal it in Congress, have called the risk corridor program a "bailout" for the insurance industry.

From 2015 through 2017, Congress each year passed appropriations bills that included language barring HHS from using general funds to pay the government's risk corridor obligations.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled 2-1 in 2018 that Congress effectively repealed its obligation to pay the insurers.

U.S. Supreme Court justices lean toward insurers on $12 billion Obamacare claims
 

Related Articles

Add a Comment

Comment Guidelines

We encourage you to use comments to engage with other users, share your perspective and ask questions of authors and each other. However, in order to maintain the high level of discourse we’ve all come to value and expect, please keep the following criteria in mind:  

  •            Enrich the conversation, don’t trash it.

  •           Stay focused and on track. Only post material that’s relevant to the topic being discussed. 

  •           Be respectful. Even negative opinions can be framed positively and diplomatically. Avoid profanity, slander or personal attacks directed at an author or another user. Racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination will not be tolerated.

  • Use standard writing style. Include punctuation and upper and lower cases. Comments that are written in all caps and contain excessive use of symbols will be removed.
  • NOTE: Spam and/or promotional messages and comments containing links will be removed. Phone numbers, email addresses, links to personal or business websites, Skype/Telegram/WhatsApp etc. addresses (including links to groups) will also be removed; self-promotional material or business-related solicitations or PR (ie, contact me for signals/advice etc.), and/or any other comment that contains personal contact specifcs or advertising will be removed as well. In addition, any of the above-mentioned violations may result in suspension of your account.
  • Doxxing. We do not allow any sharing of private or personal contact or other information about any individual or organization. This will result in immediate suspension of the commentor and his or her account.
  • Don’t monopolize the conversation. We appreciate passion and conviction, but we also strongly believe in giving everyone a chance to air their point of view. Therefore, in addition to civil interaction, we expect commenters to offer their opinions succinctly and thoughtfully, but not so repeatedly that others are annoyed or offended. If we receive complaints about individuals who take over a thread or forum, we reserve the right to ban them from the site, without recourse.
  • Only English comments will be allowed.

Perpetrators of spam or abuse will be deleted from the site and prohibited from future registration at Investing.com’s discretion.

Write your thoughts here
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
Post also to:
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Thanks for your comment. Please note that all comments are pending until approved by our moderators. It may therefore take some time before it appears on our website.
Comments (1)
Howl Jenkins
Howl Jenkins Dec 10, 2019 2:49PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This comment has already been saved in your Saved Items
Sorry guys. You gleefully ran to that free govt money and now you need to pay the piper.
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Add Chart to Comment
Confirm Block

Are you sure you want to block %USER_NAME%?

By doing so, you and %USER_NAME% will not be able to see any of each other's Investing.com's posts.

%USER_NAME% was successfully added to your Block List

Since you’ve just unblocked this person, you must wait 48 hours before renewing the block.

Report this comment

I feel that this comment is:

Comment flagged

Thank You!

Your report has been sent to our moderators for review
Disclaimer: Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. All CFDs (stocks, indexes, futures) and Forex prices are not provided by exchanges but rather by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual market price, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Therefore Fusion Media doesn`t bear any responsibility for any trading losses you might incur as a result of using this data.

Fusion Media or anyone involved with Fusion Media will not accept any liability for loss or damage as a result of reliance on the information including data, quotes, charts and buy/sell signals contained within this website. Please be fully informed regarding the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, it is one of the riskiest investment forms possible.
Continue with Google
or
Sign up with Email