Health

Coverage Worries Persist Amid Relief Over Health Care Ruling

Published

11 years ago

June 26, 2015

Affordable Care Act participant Kim Jones poses for a photo in her home in Wake Forest, N.C., Thursday, June 25, 2015. Jones said the Affordable Care Act has been a blessing to her who could not have otherwise afforded the medical care she has received during treatment for a tumor on her brain. The Supreme Court decided Thursday to uphold the Affordable Care Act subsidies. (AP Photo/Gerry Broome)

CARLA K. JOHNSON, Associated Press

CHICAGO (AP) — Throughout the country, relief was the dominant emotion among consumers who get help from the government to lower their health insurance costs following Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling upholding the subsidies underpinning President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.

Many consumers expressed somewhat conflicting views: They were happy their monthly premiums would continue to be affordable but exasperated by the coverage the policies purchased on the new health care exchanges provide.

“I don’t particularly care for Obama. I didn’t vote for him,” said Salt Lake City resident Paige Preece, whose subsidy allows her to buy insurance for $137 a month. “But, honestly, if it weren’t for this, I would be absolutely lost.”

The court’s 6-3 ruling upheld the federal financial assistance to millions of low- and middle-income Americans to help pay for insurance premiums regardless of where they live. An estimated 6.4 million people in the 34 states that used the federal health care exchange were at risk of losing the subsidies because their home states did not set up their own insurance exchanges.

The case turned on just a few words in the mammoth Affordable Care Act that suggested the federal subsidies could go only to consumers in states that operated their own health insurance marketplaces. Consumers in those states or in ones that fell back on the federal exchange when their own exchanges faltered were not affected by the case.

“Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,” Chief Justice John Roberts declared in the majority opinion.

Polls taken before Thursday’s ruling suggested that most Americans wanted the court to uphold the subsidies. In an April Associated Press-GfK poll, 56 percent preferred that the court rule in favor of the Obama administration, while 39 percent wanted the court to rule for the other side.

Lydia DeJesus, who helps people sign up for coverage in Dickinson, North Dakota, said she has noted that division among consumers concerning the health care law, even among those receiving significant subsidies that make their policies more affordable.

“There are people who have services who never had services,” she said. “But there are people who were forced to have insurance and really don’t consider it affordable. Some people have told us they’d rather pay the fine as opposed to having health insurance.”

In Gresham, Oregon, Anna Mar, 28, said she is still no fan of what she calls “Obamacare.” She is a stay-at-home mom with two young boys. Her husband works in construction.

“The plan hardly covers anything, so I avoid going to the doctor,” Mar said. “I love the idea of everyone having health care, but it’s not affordable for us.”

For herself, Mar bought the cheapest plan on the exchange she could find: $134 a month, with a high deductible and high co-pays. Her government subsidy is $40. The couple’s children qualify for Medicaid, the state-federal health program for those with lower incomes.

Other consumers said they were grateful for the health care reforms and for Thursday’s ruling allowing the subsidies to continue.

Kim Jones, a substitute teacher in Wake Forest, North Carolina, said she once used the emergency room for her care. With the health insurance plan she purchased on the federal exchange, she now can afford follow-up treatment after surgery last summer to remove a brain tumor.

Jones, 60, said she was without health insurance for about a decade because of the part-time jobs she took to allow her to care for an elderly parent. Her current coverage costs her about $27 a month, after the government subsidy of more than $500. She continues to take medication and had worried about losing coverage.

“I know it helped so many people, and a lot of folks like myself who had fallen through the cracks were finally getting some kind of help with health issues,” Jones said after the ruling.

In Norman, Oklahoma, Kelli Nicole Smith, a 26-year-old baker who earns $11 an hour at a candy shop, said she was relieved to learn she would still receive the $99 monthly subsidy that she used to purchase a health plan. Without it, Smith said she probably would have considered buying less healthy food or downgrading her mobile phone plan.

“I would have choices, but they wouldn’t be comfortable,” said Smith, who ends up paying about $60 a month for a plan with relatively high co-pays, including $500 for an emergency room visit. “Or I would have to consider finding a job that maybe pays more that I don’t really want to do.”

Advocates such as Walter Davis of the Tennessee Health Care Campaign, used the Supreme Court decision to urge lawmakers in Tennessee to increase Medicaid access, an expansion that was made optional by an earlier Supreme Court ruling.

“Tennessee has failed to expand Medicaid and is falling further behind, leaving thousands of people unnecessarily uninsured and without access to affordable health coverage,” he said in a written statement. “Now Tennessee policymakers should recognize health reform is working, abandon efforts to undermine it, and instead take advantage of the opportunities that health reform offers to improve lives.”

Those with medical issues took the most comfort in the Supreme Court’s ruling and Obama’s assertion afterward that “the Affordable Care Act is here to stay.”

“I’m starting to cry just talking about it,” said Susan Halpern, a 55-year-old breast cancer survivor from Columbus, Ohio, who immediately posted the news to Facebook.

With an irregular income as a freelance contractor, she said the subsidy makes a huge difference. Without it, she said the only way she could continue to pay the premium would be to drain her retirement savings.

“This has saved my ability to retire someday,” Halpern said. “I know tens of thousands of Americans were looking at it the same way.”

___

Associated Press writers Emery P. Dalesio in Raleigh, North Carolina; Travis Loller in Nashville, Tennessee; James MacPherson in Bismarck, North Dakota; Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City; Michelle L. Price in Salt Lake City; and John Seewer in Toledo, Ohio, contributed to this report.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

6 Ways to Get More Love in Your Life

Don't Miss

Coverage Worries Persist Amid Relief Over Health Care Ruling

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Rep. Kamlager-Dove Introduces Bill to Protect Women in Custody After Reports Detailing Miscarriages and Neglect

The Pregnant Women in Custody Act would expand safeguards beyond the federal prison system to include women detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The proposal follows reports of pregnant women being shackled, denied medical care and suffering miscarriages while in immigration detention.

Published

1 day ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA-37) on May 7, reintroduced updated legislation aimed at strengthening protections and healthcare standards for pregnant and postpartum women held in federal custody, including in immigration detention facilities.

The Pregnant Women in Custody Act would expand safeguards beyond the federal prison system to include women detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Office of Refugee Resettlement. The proposal follows reports of pregnant women being shackled, denied medical care and suffering miscarriages while in immigration detention.

The legislation builds on a bipartisan version previously passed by the House during the 117th Congress. The updated bill includes new standards for healthcare access, mental health and substance use treatment, high-risk pregnancy care, family unity protections and increased federal oversight.

“Proper pregnancy care is a human right, regardless of your immigration or incarceration status,” Kamlager-Dove said in a statement. “It’s unacceptable that there are virtually no legal safeguards for pregnant women in federal custody.”

The bill would also limit the use of restraints and restrictive housing for pregnant women, improve data collection on maternal health in custody and require additional staff training and enforcement measures.

Supporters of the measure said the legislation is intended to address long-standing concerns about maternal healthcare and safety in detention settings, particularly for Black women and low-income women who are disproportionately impacted by incarceration and health disparities.

“Pregnant women in custody should never be subjected to dangerous and inhumane treatment that threatens their health, dignity, or the well-being of their babies,” said Patrice Willoughby, chief of policy and legislative affairs for the NAACP and a longtime public policy and government affairs strategist, in a statement.

A 2021 report estimated there are about 58,000 admissions of pregnant women into U.S. jails and prisons each year. Kamlager’s statement also cited a recent investigation by NBC News and Bloomberg Law that identified allegations of severe mistreatment or medical neglect involving at least 54 pregnant women or families in county jails between 2017 and 2024.

Federal policy under the Department of Homeland Security restricts the detention of pregnant, postpartum and nursing immigrants except in extreme cases. However, the agency reported that ICE deported 363 pregnant, postpartum or nursing women between January 2025 and February 2026, including 16 recorded miscarriages during that period.

The bill is cosponsored by several House Democrats and backed by organizations including the NAACP and the Vera Institute of Justice.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Bay Area

How Is AI Affecting California? The State Wants You to Share Your Story

The program marks the first time the state has opened the platform to all Californians. State officials said the effort is designed to give residents a direct role in discussions about how AI should be regulated and used as the technology rapidly expands across industries.

Published

1 day ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced May 7 that California is expanding its Engaged California digital democracy initiative statewide, inviting residents to help shape future state policies on artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on jobs and the economy.

“We’ve got to be clear-eyed about this moment: AI is moving fast, bringing enormous opportunity, but also real risks,” Newsom said in a statement. “Californians deserve a seat at the table as we shape what’s to come.”

The initiative will roll out in two phases. Beginning immediately, Californians can sign up online to share how AI is affecting their work and communities and provide ideas for possible government action. Later this summer, a smaller group reflecting the state’s workforce demographics will participate in live discussions focused on developing policy recommendations.

State officials said the goal is to identify areas of agreement among Californians and provide policymakers with public feedback as the state develops future AI regulations and workforce strategies.

Engaged California is modeled after digital democracy programs used in Taiwan and is intended to encourage structured public discussion rather than social media-style debate. Officials described the effort as a form of “deliberative democracy” aimed at helping residents engage directly in state decision-making.

“The more Californians are engaged in the democratic process, the better able we’ll be to confront the challenges we face together,” said Nick Maduros, California Secretary of Government Operations, in a statement.

The statewide launch builds on two earlier pilot programs. One pilot gathered public input following the Los Angeles firestorms to help guide recovery efforts, while another collected ideas from state employees about improving government operations.

California has positioned itself as a national leader in AI policy and development. Since 2023, the Newsom administration has introduced initiatives focused on responsible AI use in government, cybersecurity protections, workforce training and regulations targeting risks such as deepfakes and AI-generated robocalls.

The state has also partnered with companies in Silicon Valley — including NVIDIA, Google, Adobe, IBM and Microsoft — to expand AI education and workforce training programs across California schools and universities.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

California Launches Free Diaper Program for Newborns Statewide

The initiative, called Golden State Start, will provide 400 free diapers to every newborn delivered at participating California hospitals beginning this summer. The state is partnering with Baby2Baby, a California-based nonprofit that distributes essential items to children in need nationwide.

Published

1 day ago

May 17, 2026

Oakland Post

iStock.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Friday that California will launch a first-in-the-nation program providing free diapers to families with newborns, part of a broader effort to lower costs for parents and improve infant health outcomes.

The initiative, called Golden State Start, will provide 400 free diapers to every newborn delivered at participating California hospitals beginning this summer. The state is partnering with Baby2Baby, a California-based nonprofit that distributes essential items to children in need nationwide.

State officials said hospitals participating in the program will give families the diapers when they are discharged after birth, helping parents leave with an immediate supply of newborn essentials.

“Every baby born in California deserves a healthy start in life,” Newsom said in a statement. He said the program is part of California’s broader affordability efforts, which also include free school meals, universal preschool for four-year-olds and expanded after-school programs.

The announcement comes ahead of Mother’s Day and is tied to the administration’s broader CalRx initiative, which aims to reduce costs for essential products and medications. State officials said California is also exploring ways to lower diaper prices by challenging high costs from major brands.

The first year of the program will prioritize hospitals serving large numbers of Medi-Cal patients, with plans to expand to additional hospitals and birthing centers over time. Officials said the effort is intended to reduce financial pressure on low-income families and improve infant and maternal health by ensuring parents have access to clean diapers.

“California families deserve to feel supported during one of life’s more exciting, yet vulnerable transitions,” First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom said in a statement. She said the program would allow parents to focus on caring for their newborns instead of worrying about basic supplies.

According to Baby2Baby, one in two families in the United States struggles to afford diapers. The organization has distributed more than half a billion items to children over the past 15 years through partnerships with shelters, hospitals, foster care programs and schools.

State officials said Baby2Baby will oversee diaper purchasing, warehousing and distribution through its existing hospital and community partnerships across California.