Urging the United States Congress to modify the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to allow cost-sharing payments and premium tax credits to be made available to the Texas political subdivision health care benefit pools on the same basis as those for health plans participating in the new federal exchange.
The bill highlights the potential for the Texas health benefits pools to provide high-quality care at lower costs than the national average. However, the provisions of the ACA introduce significant financial pressures on these pools. The new federal law offers incentives for employers with fewer than 50 employees to drop their health care coverage, leading to concerns that the pools may face financial instability. By modifying the ACA to include Texas health benefits pools in the same manner as federally authorized exchanges, it is argued that both the federal government and the employees would see savings, thereby maintaining access to affordable health care coverage for thousands of families.
HCR60 is a concurrent resolution that urges the United States Congress to modify the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) to allow cost-sharing payments and premium tax credits to be made available to Texas political subdivision health care benefit pools. Since 1989, Texas has authorized the creation of public entity benefit pools, enabling municipalities and counties to combine resources to provide affordable employee benefits, particularly in health care. The two major pools currently in place, namely the TML Intergovernmental Employee Benefits Pool and the Texas Association of Counties Health and Employee Benefits Pool, offer health care coverage to numerous employees, many of whom work for smaller entities with fewer than 50 employees.
One point of contention surrounding HCR60 revolves around the implications of amending the ACA as suggested. Critics of the ACA have long debated the effectiveness of federal health care reforms, and providing special consideration for Texas' benefit pools may raise concerns about equity and consistency across states. Moreover, the suggestion that the modification should result in lower costs for the federal government poses questions about the broader fiscal impacts of such a change, particularly in how funds are allocated and utilized across different states and health care systems.