logo
The quiet Obamacare overhaul needs a loud reveal

The quiet Obamacare overhaul needs a loud reveal

Gulf Today6 days ago
The unprecedented cuts to Medicaid in President Donald Trump's tax bill rightfully garnered headlines in recent months. After all, the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office predict some 10 million people eventually will lose their public insurance. But attention now should turn to the less visible ways his policies are undermining the Affordable Care Act. Instead of the full-blown attack on the ACA waged in his first term, when Trump tried — and failed — to repeal the law, he is letting crucial parts of it wither on the vine, and millions of Americans will be affected while potentially not even realising who is to blame.
Some will log in to sign up for care in 2026, only to discover their plan has gotten a lot more expensive — and an estimated 4.2 million of them will risk going uninsured because of it. Others will never know they could have had affordable insurance, because the government will make far less of an effort to advertise its existence.
'It's a stealth sabotage,' says Benjamin Sommers, a physician and health economist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. 'Many folks won't even see the small print that led to that outcome.' Enrollments for marketplace plans soared under the Joe Biden administration. That was largely due to two things: enhanced subsidies, which made insurance more affordable for a broader swath of the population, and an incredible outreach effort to help people find and enroll in policies.
Both helped bring the number of uninsured people in the US to an all-time low in 2023, and by the end of Biden's term, a record-breaking 24.2 million people bought coverage through the government. That's more than twice the number of people who accessed plans under Trump's last watch. This time around, his administration is quickly unraveling both factors underpinning that progress. The biggest impact will come from an anticipated spike in the cost of federal or state-run marketplace plans as the government takes away extra subsidies that make them affordable.
The ACA has always included tax credits that vary based on someone's income, but they got a lot more generous under the Biden administration. Since 2021, those additional benefits made it cheaper for people to buy insurance while also expanding the number of people who qualified for help. Coverage was suddenly within reach for many more Americans — in fact, four out of five enrollees qualified for a plan that cost as little as $10 per month. Trump's new tax bill allows those subsidies to expire at the end of this year. A recent analysis by the nonpartisan health care group KFF gives a snapshot of what that could mean for consumers. It found that out-of-pocket premiums will go up on average by 75% — and people in at least a dozen states could see those fees double or more. Retaining marketplace insurance will cost a typical family of four living on $65,000 per year an additional $2,400, according to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
While the overall burden on families is rising, insurers themselves are also going to charge more for their plans. Just how much more is starting to come into view as marketplace providers begin to publish their proposed rates, which they file to state regulators each summer. KFF found that among the insurers reporting to states, expiration of the enhanced tax credits is attributed to an average 4% increase in premiums next year.
That would primarily raise costs for the people who buy marketplace coverage, but don't qualify for subsidies, Sommers explains. The insurers' reasoning? Without subsidies, they say fewer healthy people will sign up for plans, leaving them to cover a larger proportion of sicker people (who ostensibly use more health care).
The likely expiration of the enhanced benefits isn't the only way that the Trump administration is undermining Obamacare accessibility. The president is also making it harder to know about and sign up for a marketplace plan. Within weeks of taking office, he slashed the budget for navigators, the ACA experts who help the public wrestle with their insurance options, by 90%. Meanwhile, he has shortened the window during which people can sign up for coverage and is expected to repeat a trick from his last term, when he decimated the budget for advertising the open enrollment period. Those aren't just nice-to-haves.
Sommers led a recent study published in the National Bureau of Economic Research that found affordability is not enough — people need to be able to easily sign up for a plan, too. He found that the same subsidy offered under the Biden administration resulted in a 30% greater decrease in the uninsured population compared to the Trump regime. The difference? A federal push to help people understand when they are eligible and guide them through the process of finding coverage.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Bernie Sanders urges US Republicans to oppose military funding for Israel
Bernie Sanders urges US Republicans to oppose military funding for Israel

Middle East Eye

time4 hours ago

  • Middle East Eye

Bernie Sanders urges US Republicans to oppose military funding for Israel

US Senator Bernie Sanders said that '60 percent of Americans oppose Netanyahu's barbaric war against the Palestinian people', and called on Republicans to oppose funding for Israel's war on Gaza. 'We're making progress in moving Democrats to vote against funding this war. Now it's time to move Republicans. Does the average Republican want to spend billions starving children? I don't think so," he said in a post on X.

Trump's Tariff War Creates De Facto Counter-Axis Driven By Common Cause
Trump's Tariff War Creates De Facto Counter-Axis Driven By Common Cause

Arabian Post

time4 hours ago

  • Arabian Post

Trump's Tariff War Creates De Facto Counter-Axis Driven By Common Cause

By K Raveendran Donald Trump's aggressive tariff regime, launched under the guise of bolstering American strength and reclaiming lost economic ground, has triggered a worldwide response that may ultimately defeat the very goal it seeks to achieve. Framed as a nationalist project to assert America's economic primacy, the tariff war has turned out to be a catalyst for an accelerating global shift away from unipolar US dominance toward a truly multipolar world order. What was once largely speculative—the idea of a global economic architecture not centred on Washington—is now becoming tangible as Trump's trade brinkmanship compels other nations to rethink, regroup, and realign. The essential flaw in Trump's strategy lies in its assumption that the rest of the world would blink first, caving in to American demands under the weight of economic pressure. But the world hasn't blinked. Instead, countries are finding common cause in resisting what they perceive as economic coercion masquerading as negotiation. The result is a fluid yet increasingly coherent realignment of powers—chief among them China, Russia, and India—that is beginning to operate as a de facto counter-axis to the United States. Driven by shared grievances and the common objective of shielding their strategic autonomy, these nations are cooperating more closely in trade, investment, and energy. The irony is that Trump's pursuit of economic supremacy is hastening the erosion of the very system that enabled US dominance for decades. Beijing, long a prime target of Trump's tariffs, has responded with both retaliation and redirection. Rather than capitulating to Washington's demands, China has expanded its outreach to other major economies, particularly in Asia and Africa, while deepening its engagement with Russia and India. The Belt and Road Initiative, initially conceived as a means of global infrastructure connectivity, is now also a tool for economic realignment. As Trump builds tariff walls, China builds roads, ports, and financial networks that bypass the United States. Moscow, for its part, has welcomed this pivot. Isolated by US and European sanctions, Russia sees opportunity in closer ties with China and India, both of which have shown increasing willingness to defy Western pressure. India, though traditionally more aligned with the West and an enthusiastic participant in global liberal markets, has found itself inching toward the emerging non-Western axis. Trump's tariffs on Indian goods, coupled with his administration's threats of secondary sanctions on countries trading with Russia or buying Iranian oil, have forced New Delhi to draw red lines. India's stance on Russian oil, for instance, has been unambiguous: it is a matter of national interest and energy security. Any effort by Washington to curtail these purchases is seen not just as economic interference but as a direct challenge to sovereign decision-making. In retaliation, India has dangled the cancellation of key defence deals, including the proposed purchase of the F-35 fighter jets—a symbolic snub that indicates a broader reassessment of strategic alignment. What makes this realignment especially potent is the breadth of its scope. It is not merely a matter of retaliatory tariffs or diplomatic rhetoric; it includes infrastructure cooperation, technological integration, and long-term investment planning. China and India, despite historic differences, have increased dialogue in recent months on trade facilitation and regional connectivity. Russia's role as a common energy partner and military supplier to both nations gives it leverage in the triangle. And with US credibility as a dependable trade partner being questioned, many smaller nations are also hedging their bets, diversifying their economic relations away from a US-centric model. Even traditional US allies in Europe are uneasy. Germany and France have voiced concerns about the destabilizing effects of Trump's tariffs on global trade norms. The EU is pursuing its own trade treaties with countries like Japan and Vietnam, carving out autonomous space in global commerce that doesn't necessarily involve Washington. At the heart of this geopolitical churn is a growing skepticism toward the idea that the United States can or should dictate the terms of global trade. The Trump administration's belief that economic might translates automatically into negotiating power has ignored the subtle but critical fact that globalisation has made nations more interconnected and interdependent. Trying to weaponise trade may yield short-term leverage, but it also creates lasting rifts and compels partners to seek alternatives. The economic structures of the 21st century no longer afford any single nation the luxury of acting as an economic autocrat without consequences. Furthermore, the economic impact within the United States is more complex and less flattering than the populist rhetoric suggests. While certain domestic industries may benefit from tariff protections, others are suffering from rising input costs and retaliatory measures. American farmers have been hit particularly hard by Chinese tariffs on agricultural imports, prompting the Trump administration to introduce multi-billion dollar bailout packages that, in effect, cancel out the supposed gains of the trade war. Manufacturing, far from being resurgent, is experiencing uncertainty and disruption due to volatility in global supply chains. The idea that tariff wars are 'easy to win' has proven to be one of the most misguided statements of Trump's presidency. Even American multinationals, once eager advocates of 'America First' policies, are quietly relocating parts of their supply chains to countries not caught in the tariff crossfire. This shift not only diminishes the US's leverage but also accelerates the decentralization of economic power. No longer is the American market an irresistible magnet for global commerce; it is increasingly seen as a zone of instability and risk. For many countries, the trade war has been a wake-up call—an impetus to invest in regional blocs, alternative trade corridors, and new financial instruments insulated from US influence. In the broader scheme, what Trump has unwittingly triggered is a reimagination of how global power is structured. The post-Cold War illusion of US-led globalisation is being replaced by a more pluralistic, competitive, and fragmented order. Emerging powers are no longer content to play by rules written in Washington. They are building parallel systems: China's digital yuan aims to reduce dependency on the dollar; India and Russia have revived rupee-rouble trade mechanisms; and regional trade agreements like RCEP are functioning without US participation. What's being born is a new kind of globalization—less hierarchical, more balanced, and far less dependent on any single country. (IPA Service)

India will buy Russian oil despite Trump's threats of penalties
India will buy Russian oil despite Trump's threats of penalties

Gulf Today

time10 hours ago

  • Gulf Today

India will buy Russian oil despite Trump's threats of penalties

India will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties, two Indian government sources said, not wishing to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter. 'These are long-term oil contracts,' one of the sources said. 'It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight.' Trump last month indicated in a Truth Social post that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. On Friday, Trump told reporters that he had heard that India would no longer be buying oil from Russia. The New York Times on Saturday quoted two unnamed senior Indian officials as saying there had been no change in Indian government policy, with one official saying the government had 'not given any direction to oil companies' to cut back imports from Russia. Reuters reported this week that Indian state refiners stopped buying Russian oil in the past week after discounts narrowed in July. 'On our energy sourcing requirements... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances,' India's foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters during a regular briefing on Friday. Jaiswal added that India has a 'steady and time-tested partnership' with Russia, and that New Delhi's relations with various countries stand on their own merit and should not be seen from the prism of a third country. The White House in Washington did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Indian refiners are pulling back from Russian crude as discounts shrink to their lowest since 2022, when Western sanctions were first imposed on Moscow, due to lower Russian exports and steady demand, sources said earlier this week. The country's state refiners — Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum Corp, Bharat Petroleum Corp and Mangalore Refinery Petrochemical Ltd - have not sought Russian crude in the past week or so, four sources familiar with the refiners' purchase plans told Reuters. On July 14, Trump threatened 100% tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil unless Moscow reaches a major peace deal with Ukraine. Russia is the top supplier to India, responsible for about 35% of India's overall supplies. Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, accounting for about 35% of India's overall supplies, followed by Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. India, the world's third-largest oil importer and consumer, received about 1.75 million barrels per day of Russian oil in January-June this year, up 1% from a year ago, according to data provided to Reuters by sources. Nayara Energy, a major buyer of Russian oil, was recently sanctioned by the European Union as the refinery is majority-owned by Russian entities, including oil major Rosneft. Last month, Reuters reported that Nayara's chief executive had resigned after the imposition of EU sanctions and company veteran Sergey Denisov had been appointed as CEO. Three vessels laden with oil products from Nayara Energy have yet to discharge their cargoes, hindered by the new EU sanctions on the Russia-backed refiner, Reuters reported late last month. Reuters

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store