Congressional Democrats and Health Care Subsidies
There’s currently a standoff among Congressional Democrats who are insisting on the continuation of certain health care subsidies from the Biden era—essentially holding the government’s budget hostage. They are promoting these subsidies as crucial for maintaining American health care, but their approach seems pretty unreasonable and, frankly, disconnected from reality.
Here are some key points about these expiring subsidies:
- The subsidies are leftover from the COVID-19 response.
The Biden administration leveraged the pandemic to boost existing Obamacare subsidies, first through the American Rescue Plan Act in 2021 and then again via the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022. The latest extension is about to expire at the year’s end, which is notable considering the official emergency was declared over two and a half years ago. Other COVID relief measures—like unemployment benefits and food assistance—have already come to an end. Pushes to make these subsidies permanent indicate that the Left wasn’t just aiming for COVID relief, but rather sought to expand Obamacare significantly.
- Enrollment in subsidies has doubled since the COVID subsidy implementation.
Before the enhanced subsidies were introduced, enrollment numbers were relatively stable. However, after the COVID subsidies took effect, participation skyrocketed—from 13.7 million in 2019 to an estimated 26.7 million in early 2025. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that making these subsidies permanent could lead to a significant drop in employer-based coverage, costing taxpayers an additional $380 billion over the next decade, and pushing more individuals into the Obamacare exchanges with an average subsidy of $5,370.
- COVID subsidies have led to increased fraud.
The lack of requirements for coverage contributions opened the door to more fraudulent claims. Many people found themselves enrolled in subsidized plans without their knowledge, and research suggests that around 6.4 million were improperly classified as having income levels that qualified them for subsidized coverage, costing taxpayers over $27 billion for 2025 alone.
- Not all subsidies will vanish if COVID-era ones expire.
Under the original Obamacare framework, subsidies were limited to those earning between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level, with additional support for those earning between 100% and 250%. With the extension of COVID subsidies, these limits were lifted. If things revert to the original guidelines, taxpayers would still cover 80 to 90% of premiums for low-income individuals. For example, a person earning between 100% and 133% of the poverty level would still enjoy a federal subsidy, only needing to contribute a small amount monthly.
- These subsidies overlook the real issues with Obamacare.
Even though Obamacare was meant to reduce premiums, they’ve continued to rise. At the same time, deductibles have increased, networks have shrunk, and choices have diminished. For instance, the average premium for individual coverage was $244 per month in 2013, but by 2022, that number had leaped to $568. Furthermore, the average deductibles for bronze-level plans saw a 40% increase between 2014 and 2024, with many plans imposing more restrictive networks. In fact, 34 states have fewer insurers now than before the introduction of Obamacare.
Rather than extending the current COVID-era subsidies and ignoring the deeper issues with Obamacare, Congress ought to turn its focus toward genuinely addressing what’s wrong—starting with a re-evaluation of subsidies and reforming insurance market regulations to enhance transparency, accountability, and stability for everyone involved.
