¶ Overview
- Stauber voted for a bill that would kick 17 million Americans off their health insurance, including nearly 12 million Americans off of Medicaid. As a result of his vote, more than 22,000 Minnesotans in the 8th congressional district could lose their health insurance.
- Stauber was a staunch opponent of the Affordable Care Act and called it a “disaster” even though 150,000 Minnesotans relied on the law to obtain health insurance. He also opposed extending enhanced ACA premium subsidies that helped Minnesotans afford health insurance. As a result, Minnesotans who relied on the ACA for health insurance faced higher premium costs in 2026.
¶ Stauber Voted To Take Health Insurance From 17 Million Americans, Including Thousands Of Minnesotans Who Relied On Medicaid
¶ stauber voted for House Republicans’ budget bill, which would kick millions of people off medicaid and snap to give tax breaks to billionaires
¶ July 2025: Stauber Voted For The Final Version Of The Republican Reconciliation Bill
July 2025: Stauber Voted For The Senate FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Extended $4 Trillion In Expiring Tax Cuts, Added New Tax Breaks, Appropriated $448 Million In Defense, Border, And Immigration Enforcement Funding, Increased The SALT Deduction To $40,000, And Cut Medicaid And Other Social Programs To Offset The Costs. In July 2025, Stauber voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the bill that would permanently extend nearly $4 trillion in expiring individual and business tax cuts, create several new tax breaks and fund border and immigration enforcement and air traffic control upgrades. It would cut Medicaid and other safety net programs to partly offset the cost. Among other provisions, it would raise the statutory debt ceiling by $5 trillion and appropriate more than $448 billion in mandatory funding for Trump administration priorities and other needs, including $153 billion for defense, $89 billion for immigration enforcement, and $89.5 billion for border control and security. It also would increase the state and local tax deduction cap to $40,000 annually for five years for households making up to $500,000 a year until 2030, when it would permanently revert to $10,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 218 to 214. [House Vote 190, 7/3/25; Congressional Quarterly, 7/3/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- HEADLINE: "At Least 17 Million Americans Would Lose Insurance Under Trump Plan" [Washington Post, 7/1/25]
- The Congressional Budget Office Estimated That 11.8 Million People Would Become Uninsured As A Result Of The Medicaid Cuts In Republicans’ Reconciliation Bill. According to the Washington Post, "The bill, which narrowly passed the Senate on Tuesday and now heads back to the House, would effectively accomplish what Republicans have long failed to do: unwind many of the key components of the ACA, President Barack Obama’s signature domestic achievement, which dramatically increased the number of Americans with access to health insurance. To start, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the Senate version of the bill would result in 11.8 million more uninsured in 2034, mostly because of Medicaid cuts, compared with 10.9 million if the House version became law." [Washington Post, 7/1/25]
¶ May 2025: Stauber Voted For House Republicans’ Budget Bill
May 2025: Stauber Voted For The FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Included $3.8 Trillion In Tax Cuts Offset By $1.5 Trillion In Spending Reductions To Programs Like Medicaid And The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. In May 2025, Stauber voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would provide for approximately $3.8 trillion in net tax cuts and $321 billion in military, border enforcement and judiciary spending, offset by $1.5 trillion in spending reductions, as instructed in the fiscal 2025 budget resolution (H Con Res 14). It would raise the statutory debt limit by $4 trillion and provide for increased spending on defense and border security, spending cuts on social safety net programs, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. It also includes a mix of tax breaks for businesses and individuals; tax increases on universities and foundations; and a phase-down of clean energy tax credits. […] It would reduce federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by requiring states to shoulder more of the cost, expand work requirements for SNAP, extend programs authorized under the 2018 farm bill, and prohibit the U.S. Department of Agriculture from increasing the cost of the Thrifty Food Program. As amended, it would cap state and local tax deductions at $40,000 for households with incomes below $500,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 215 to 214. [House Vote 145, 5/22/25; Congressional Quarterly, 5/22/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- The House GOP Budget Bill Was Estimated To Increase The Uninsured Population By 8.6 Million By 2034. According to CNN, “The Medicaid and Affordable Care Act provisions in the package could result in 8.6 million more people being uninsured in 2034, according to an early CBO estimate released by Democratic lawmakers. That number is expected to grow with the latest changes.” [CNN, 5/28/25]
- The House GOP Budget Bill Codified A Trump Administration Proposal That Restricted Access To The Affordable Care Act. According to CNN, “The bill also calls for codifying a Trump administration proposal that would make changes to the Affordable Care Act enrollment process, including shortening the open enrollment period and eliminating the ability of low-income Americans to sign up year-round.” [CNN, 5/28/25]
- The House GOP Budget Bill Made The 2017 Income Tax Breaks Permanent And Added An Estimated $3.8 Trillion To The National Debt Over 10 Years. According to CNN, “The package includes several controversial measures that would deeply cut into two of the nation’s key safety net programs – Medicaid and food stamps – while making permanent essentially all of the trillions of dollars of individual income tax breaks contained in the GOP’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. What’s more, it would fulfill Trump’s campaign promises to cut taxes on tips and overtime, albeit temporarily. The magnitude of the measures is evident in the estimates of the cost they would incur or the savings they would produce. […] The tax changes in the package would add $3.8 trillion to the nation’s debt over a decade, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis released before last-minute changes were made to the bill.” [CNN, 5/28/25]
¶ February 2025: Stauber Voted To Pass The House Republican Reconciliation Budget Framework
February 2025: Stauber Voted For The FY 2025 Budget Framework That Included $2 Trillion In Cuts, Raised The Statutory Debt Limit By $4 Trillion, And Required House Committees To Recommend Legislation That Would Implement Trump’s Agenda. In February 2025, Stauber voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the concurrent resolution that would recommend a budget for fiscal 2025 and budget levels through fiscal 2034. The resolution would assume minimum savings of $1.5 trillion over 10 years and 2.6 percent economic growth over the same period. It also would require the statutory debt limit to be raised by $4 trillion. It also would authorize the House Ways and Means Committee to increase deficits by $4.5 trillion over 10 years to extend the 2017 tax cuts and implement new tax cuts proposed by the White House. It also would provide instructions for the budget reconciliation process through which separate legislation could be considered and passed in the Senate via a simple majority vote. The measure would deliver instructions to 11 House committees to report legislation that would implement President Donald Trump’s agenda, such as expanding tax cuts and bolstering border security and immigration enforcement. The committees would be required to report their legislative recommendations to the House Budget Committee by March 27, 2025. It also would set a $2 trillion target for the spending cuts to be submitted to the House Budget Committee. The resolution also would stipulate that if the committees don't reach that target, the Ways and Means’ reconciliation instructions to increase the deficit by a maximum of $4.5 trillion would be decreased by the amount the other committees come in below the target. Similarly, it would stipulate that Ways and Means could increase the deficit above the $4.5 trillion level by the amount of savings the committees achieve above the $2 trillion target.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the resolution by a vote of 217 to 215. [House Vote 50, 2/25/25; Congressional Quarterly, 2/25/25; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 14]
- HEADLINE: "House Republican Budget Takes Away Health Care, Food Aid To Pay For Expanded Tax Cuts For Wealthy" [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/21/25]
- New York Times Reported The $880 Billion In Cuts Required By The Republican Budget Proposal Would Have To Come From Medicaid, Medicare, Or CHIP. According to the New York Times, "The budget resolution itself is silent on whether Congress cuts Medicaid, which provides health coverage to 72 million poor and disabled Americans. But it instructs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over the program, to cut spending by $880 billion over the next decade. If the committee can’t save at least that much, the entire effort could be imperiled because of the special process Congress is using to avoid a Senate filibuster. Ten other committees have their own instructions to follow, though none have been assigned with cutting nearly as much. It’s not so simple as finding the cuts elsewhere. The special process, known as budget reconciliation, means Republicans will have to find all $880 billion from within the Energy and Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction. That leaves them with fewer options than one might think. […] If Republicans want to avoid major cuts to Medicaid, the largest pot of available money is in the other big government health insurance program: Medicare. […] Even if the committee cuts everything that’s not health care to $0, it will still be more than $600 billion short. The committee could also save around $200 billion by eliminating the Children’s Health Insurance Program, but that option has not been raised by the budget committee or anyone in House leadership. […] Even if all of these cuts, revenues and rule cancellations from outside health care can pass muster, the committee will still be left with hundreds of billions of dollars to cut to hit its goal. Mathematically, the budget committee’s instructions mean the committee would need to make major cuts to either Medicare, Medicaid or both." [New York Times, 2/25/25]
¶ stauber was “proud” to pass trump’s historic cuts to medicaid
With Respect To The Big Beautiful Bill, Stauber Claimed He Was “Proud To Have Helped Deliver This Historic Legislation.” According to a press release from Rep. Pete Stauber, "Today, Congressman Pete Stauber (MN-08) voted to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that delivers President Trump and the American people’s full agenda. It will now go to President Trump’s desk to be signed into law. Stauber made the following statement after the vote: ‘In November, the American people elected President Trump and gave him the majorities in both the House and Senate with a clear mandate: to restore safety and unleash prosperity across our nation. Today, the House took a significant step in enacting the American people’s agenda, and I am proud to have helped deliver this historic legislation to the President’s desk. President Trump’s One Big, Beautiful Bill will put America’s families and workers first by delivering the largest tax cuts in our nation’s history, unleashing American energy dominance, permanently securing our borders, modernizing air traffic control, and strengthening our military. I look forward to seeing the One Big, Beautiful Bill deliver a new Golden Age for the American people.’" [Press Release – Rep. Pete Stauber, 7/3/25]
¶ An Estimated 151,600 Minnesotans In The eighth Congressional District Relied On Medicaid Or CHIP For Health Insurance
2023: 151,600 Minnesotans In The 8th Congressional District Were Enrolled In Medicaid Or CHIP. According to the Center for American Progress,
[Center for American Progress, 3/11/25]
June 2025: The Estimated Number Of People Losing Medicaid Or ACA Coverage In Minnesota’s Eighth Congressional District As A Result Of Republican Cuts Was 22,238 People.
[U.S. Joint Economic Committee Minority, June 2025]
¶ stauber VOTED TO cut funding to Minnesota hospitals
Stauber Claimed The One Big Beautiful Bill Supported Rural Health Care By Providing $50 Billion For Rural Hospitals. According to a post on Rep. Pete Stauber’s Twitter, "The One Big Beautiful Bill act provides $50 billion for rural hospitals over the next five years. This means that Minnesota will see AT LEAST $100 million a year to support providers and ensure our rural residents receive the best care possible. This important legislation supports rural health care and ensures rural Minnesota takes a backseat to nobody."
[Twitter, @RepPeteStauber, 7/10/25]
- The Big Beautiful Bill’s $50 Billion In Rural Hospital Relief Funding Would Not Come Close To The Gap Created By Medicaid Cuts, With 300 Rural Hospital At “Immediate Risk” Of Closure. According to the Center For American Progress, “The OBBBA includes $50 billion in relief funding for rural hospitals over a five-year period to help reduce the disastrous impacts of the bill’s roughly $1 trillion in Medicaid cuts. As of May 2025, there were approximately 2,086 rural hospitals receiving $12.2 billion a year in net revenue from Medicaid. At the median, rural hospitals’ revenue from Medicaid is $3.9 million a year. Rural hospitals have some of the lowest operating margins in the nation, especially compared with urban hospitals, meaning that any reductions in revenue could lead to closures. The average operating margin for rural hospitals was 3.1 percent in 2023, with 44 percent of rural hospitals operating with negative margins. As a result, more than 300 rural hospitals are currently at ‘immediate risk’ of closure, especially now that the OBBBA is projected to cut Medicaid spending by $1.02 trillion. The relief fund designed to blunt the negative impacts caused by the bill would not come close to filling that gap. If every rural hospital in the country received an even share of the $50 billion in relief support, it would amount to only $4.5 million every year for five years. At the close of those five years, that funding would disappear altogether.” [Center For American Progress, 7/3/25]
- Cuts From Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill Were Predicted By The Minnesota Hospital Association To Cost Minnesota $2.4 Billion In Health Care Funding In The First Year Alone. According to MPR News, "The law includes nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid spending cuts over 10 years and changes Medicaid’s eligibility requirements while eliminating some subsidies and tax credits for health insurance premiums under plans offered through the Affordable Care Act. The Minnesota Hospital Association estimates that the state could lose $2.4 billion in federal health care funding in the first year alone, fiscal year 2028." [MPR News, 11/18/25]
- HEADLINE: “Minnesota Applies For $1B In Rural Health Care Funds, But It Won’t Offset Massive Medicaid Cuts” [MPR News, 11/18/25]
- HEADLINE: “Minnesota Hospitals Brace For Potential Cuts After Senate Passes Trump's ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’” [CBS News, 7/1/25]
¶ Stauber Opposed The Affordable Care Act, Which Expanded Health Insurance To Millions
¶ 2017: Stauber Claimed The Affordable Care Act Was A “Disaster”
Stauber: “We All Know Obama Care Was A Disaster.” According to a post on the Cook County News-Herald, "On the topic of health care, he said, ‘We all know Obama Care was a disaster and Congress needs to work together to fix it. I favor state control over health care. You should be able to pick your own doctor and health care should be between you and your doctor. Republicans and Democrats need to work on a health care plan that will work for all Americans. The healthcare issue is too big, too complicated and too important to care about which side wins. Congress needs to work together to get it right.’" [Cook County News-Herald, 8/12/17 via archive.org]
¶ 2025: More Than 151,512 Minnesotans Enrolled In ACA Marketplace Health Insurance Plans
2025: There Were 151,512 Minnesotans Enrolled In The Affordable Care Act Marketplace.
[KFF, Viewed 1/15/26]
¶ The Affordable Care Act Allowed States To Expand Medicaid, Which Has Dramatically Lowered The Uninsured Rate Among Low-Income Workers
The Affordable Care Act Allowed States To Expand Medicaid And States That Did Had Dramatically Lowered The Number Of People Without Health Insurance. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "The Affordable Care Act (ACA) permits states to expand Medicaid coverage to adults with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level (about $20,780 annually for an individual or $35,630 for a family of three). States that have adopted the expansion have dramatically lowered their uninsured rates. Extensive research finds that the people who gained coverage have grown healthier and more financially secure, while long-standing racial inequities in health outcomes, coverage, and access to care have shrunk." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 6/14/24]
- The Uninsured Rate Among Low-Income Workers Fell From 38 Percent In 2013 To 17 Percent In 2022, Which Coincided With The Implementation Of Medicaid Expansion. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "Millions of workers have gained coverage through Medicaid expansion, including people working in industries that provide critical goods and services such as health care, transportation, grocery stores, food manufacturers, and child care. Many have no access to health coverage through their jobs. In expansion states, the uninsured rate among low-income workers fell from 38 percent in 2013 to 17 percent in 2022; this sharp decline coincided with a large increase in the share of low-income workers enrolled in Medicaid.[16] In non-expansion states, the uninsured rate among low-income workers fell much less, from 46 percent to 31 percent. (See Figure 3.)" [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 6/14/24]
¶ 2025: Stauber Opposed Extending Affordable Care Act Premium Subsidies
Stauber Characterized The ACA Enhanced Premium Subsidies As Handouts To Insurance Companies. According to the Duluth News Tribune, "In a telephone town hall shortly after he cast his vote Wednesday, Stauber, a Republican from Hermantown, characterized the subsidies as handouts to insurance companies. ‘We're not going to allow Big Insurance and Big Pharma to control our health insurance any longer,’ Stauber said. ‘They've been ripping the American people off. We've paid through the nose.’" [Duluth News Tribune, 12/17/25]
- HEADLINE: “1.4 Million Fewer People Enrolled In ACA Plans As Premiums Spike, Tax Credits Expire” [ABC News, 1/14/26]
- HEADLINE: “Health Subsidies Expire, Launching Millions Of Americans Into 2026 With Steep Insurance Hikes” [PBS News, 1/1/26]
¶ Stauber Voted Three Times Against Extending ACA Premium Tax Credits For Three Years
1/8/26: Stauber Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credits For Three Years. In January 2026, Stauber voted against, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill, as amended, that would extend for three years, through the end of calendar year 2028, the enhanced tax credits to subsidize premiums for health insurance purchased on the Affordable Health Care Act health insurance markets. It would allow taxpayers whose household income exceeds 400 percent of the federal poverty line to receive tax credits for three more years. The measure would retroactively take effect Jan. 1, 2026.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 230 to 196. [House Vote 11, 1/8/26; Congressional Quarterly, 1/8/26; Congressional Actions. H.R. 1834]
- 17 Republicans Voted For Passage Of The “Clean” Extension, Following A Procedural Vote The Day Before That Had Support From Nine Republicans. According to Politico, “Seventeen Republicans joined Democrats in passing legislation Thursday that would revive enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies for three years, rebuffing opposition from GOP leadership. The 230-196 vote follows a procedural vote Wednesday to advance the bill, where nine Republicans joined Democrats in favor of moving forward.” [Politico, 1/8/26]
- Speaker Johnson Called The Bill “Really Bad Policy.” According to Politico, “Johnson’s office, in a last-ditch effort Thursday morning to undermine the effort, blasted out a memo accusing ‘Democrats [of] want[ing] to expand a COVID subsidy system already flagged for massive fraud and abuse, with absolutely zero reforms.’ After the vote Thursday evening, Johnson said in an interview of the Republicans who defected, ‘I think it’s a really bad policy, and I wish they hadn’t, but everybody had a vote.’” [Politico, 1/8/26]
1/8/26: Stauber Effectively Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credits. In January 2026, Stauber voted against, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “adoption of the rule (H Res 780) providing for consideration of the bill (HR 1834). It would consider as adopted the McGovern, D-Mass., substitute amendment that would extend, through 2028, the enhanced tax credits to subsidize premiums for health insurance purchased on the Affordable Health Care Act health insurance markets. The rule would direct the clerk to transmit to the Senate a message that the House has passed HR 1834 no later than one calendar day after passage.” The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 224 to 202. [House Vote 10, 1/8/26; Congressional Quarterly, 1/8/26; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 780; Congressional Actions. H.R. 1834]
1/7/26: Stauber Effectively Voted Against Extending The Affordable Care Act Tax Credit. In January 2026, Stauber voted against, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to discharge from the House Rules Committee the rule (H Res 780) providing for consideration of the anticipated ACA tax credit extension vehicle (HR 1834).” The vote was on the motion to discharge the rule. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 221 to 205. [House Vote 4, 1/7/26; Congressional Quarterly, 1/7/26; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 780; Congressional Actions. H.R. 1834]
¶ Stauber Did Not Sign Discharge Petitions Aimed At Extending Premium ACA Tax Credits
Stauber Was Not One Of The Republican Signers On A Discharge Petition Led By House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.
[Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, Discharge Petition No. 10, 11/12/25]
- House Minority Leader Jeffries’ Discharge Petition Sought To Extend ACA Premium Tax Credits For Three Years. According to Politico, "House Democrats could move as soon as tomorrow to force a vote on extending the expired Obamacare subsidies for three years, Meredith Mast Hill reports. This measure follows last month’s major setback for Speaker Mike Johnson, when four House Republicans broke from the party to support a discharge petition backed by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to hold a vote." [Politico, 1/6/26]
Stauber Was Not One Of The Republican Signers On A Discharge Petition Led By Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick.
[Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, Discharge Petition No. 12, 12/10/25]
- December 2025: Fitzpatrick Filed A Discharge Petition Aimed At Extending ACA Premium Tax Credits For Two Years. According to a press release from Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, "Today, Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-1) released the following statement after filing a discharge petition to bring his Bipartisan Health Insurance Affordability Act directly to the House floor for a vote, ensuring Congress takes action to prevent devastating health insurance premium increases when current protections expire at the end of the year: ‘Congress cannot sit idle while American families face a preventable crisis. Our job is to protect the people we serve, and that responsibility demands immediate action. […] Key Provisions of the Bipartisan Health Insurance Affordability Act The legislation advances five reforms designed to protect affordability, strengthen accountability, and ensure taxpayer value: Prevents premium spikes: Extends enhanced premium tax credits through 2027, to protect families from abrupt monthly cost increases. Restores Consumer Control: Stops unauthorized plan and subsidy changes by requiring consent and prompt notification before any modifications take effect. Shines Light on Middlemen: Ends hidden spread pricing, severs PBM profits from drug prices, and requires full rebate pass-through to ensure savings reach patients. Gives Families New Tools to Manage Costs: Expands access to Health Savings Accounts and simplifies premium payments to reduce disruptions in coverage. Smart Stewardship of Taxpayer Dollars: Modernizes eligibility and introduces a reasonable minimum contribution to protect long-term affordability and responsible stewardship of federal dollars." [Press Release – Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, 12/10/25]
Stauber Was Not One Of The Republican Signers On A Discharge Petition Led By Rep. Josh Gottheimer.
[Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, Discharge Petition No. 13, 12/10/25]
- December 2025: Gottheimer Filed A Discharge Petition Aimed At Extending ACA Premium Tax Credits For Two Years. According to a press release from Rep. Josh Gottheimer, "Today, December 11, 2025, U.S. Congressman Josh Gottheimer (NJ-5) released the following statement: ‘In less than three weeks, unless Congress acts now, Affordable Care Act tax credits will expire, and health insurance premiums will shoot up 175% — or $20,000 a year — for families in Jersey. This week, Congresswoman Jen Kiggans and I, with 36 of our Democratic and Republican colleagues, introduced new bipartisan legislation that includes a two-year extension of health insurance premium tax cuts for American families. It’s a commonsense proposal that will keep costs down and prevent families’ premiums from skyrocketing in January. But, the Speaker of the House is refusing to bring our legislation to the floor for a vote. So, our bipartisan group just launched a discharge petition to force an immediate vote in the House. We must get this done now. We must find common ground and lower health insurance premiums. Time is running out for families.’" [Press Release – Rep. Josh Gottheimer, 12/11/25]
¶ Stauber voted for a bill that would weaken protections for people with pre-existing conditions and failed to address premium spikes
HEADLINE: “Stauber Backs GOP Health Bill Without ACA Subsidy Fix” [The Timberjay, 12/23/25]
Stauber Voted In Favor Of A Health Care Bill That Did Not Extend Affordable Care Act Enhanced Premium Subsidies. According to the Duluth News Tribune, "U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber voted in favor of the Republicans' health care bill Wednesday that does not extend enhanced subsidies for millions of Americans who buy health insurance through the Affordable Care Act." [Duluth News Tribune, 12/17/25]
¶ December 2025: Stauber Voted For The Lower Health Care Premiums For All Americans Act
2025: Stauber Voted For The Lower Health Care Premiums For All Americans Act That Allowed The ACA Tax Credits To Expire. In December 2025, Stauber voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would expand the ability of small businesses to establish association health plans and bars states from preventing small businesses from obtaining stop-loss insurance for self-funded health insurance plans. It would codify and expand rules governing employer-funded health reimbursement arrangements and would allow employees in such arrangements to pay Affordable Care Act health insurance premiums through salary reductions. It would provide funding for ACA policy cost sharing reduction payments that reduce deductibles and copayments. It would prohibit plans from providing abortion-related care. It also would require pharmacy benefit managers to provide transparency regarding prescription drug costs and the drug rebates they receive.” The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 216 to 211. [House Vote 349, 12/17/25; Congressional Quarterly, 12/17/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 6703]
¶ The Lower Health Care Premiums For All Americans Act Did Nothing To Address The Expiration Of ACA Enhanced Premium Tax Credits And Would Weaken Protections For People With Pre-Existing Conditions
The December 2025 Republican Health Care Bill Failed To Prevent Imminent Premium Spikes For More Than 20 Million People Who Relied On ACA Marketplace Plans. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "The health bill House Republicans are preparing to bring to the floor this week not only fails to prevent imminent premium spikes for more than 20 million people in marketplace plans, but would raise costs even higher for many marketplace enrollees and weaken pre-existing condition protections for individuals and small businesses." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/16/25]
- HEADLINE: "House Republicans Pass Health Care Plan Without Re-Upping Insurance Subsidies" [Politico, 12/17/25]
- HEADLINE: "House Passes GOP Health Bill Without Subsidies" [Axios, 12/17/25]
- HEADLINE: "House Passes GOP Health Care Bill Without Obamacare Subsidy Extension" [The Hill, 12/17/25]
- HEADLINE: "House Passes GOP Health Care Bill Without ACA Extension" [CBS News, 12/17/25]
The December 2025 Republican Health Care Bill Would Expand Association Health Plans, Which Would Result In Higher Underlying Premiums For Individuals And Small Businesses That Remained In ACA-Regulated Markets. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "It would expand association health plans (AHPs), a type of health plan that trade associations, professional groups, and other organizations may offer their members, to cover self-employed individuals and small businesses as if they were large employers. By allowing more people to enroll in coverage not subject to ACA standards and consumer protections, this would segment insurance risk pools: individuals who are younger and healthier, or small businesses with younger or healthier employees, could get plans with lower premiums because they would be priced separately from ACA-compliant coverage and wouldn’t have to meet ACA standards such as having to cover a set of essential health benefits. As a result, individuals and small businesses remaining in ACA-regulated markets would see higher underlying premiums." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/16/25]
The December 2025 Republican Health Care Bill Would Likely Lead To Higher Premiums For Older And Sicker Small Groups And Self-Employed People, Thereby Undermining Protections For People With Pre-Existing Conditions. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "In addition, the bill would undermine protections for people with pre-existing conditions. While it would bar AHPs from rejecting individuals or charging them more based on certain health factors, it would give them greater ability to base a small group’s or self-employed person’s costs on their health risk compared to individual or small-group coverage. This would likely lead to higher premiums for older and sicker small groups and self-employed individuals, making such arrangements more attractive to healthier individuals and groups." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 12/16/25]
¶ Minnesotans faced higher premium costs as a result of ACA enhanced premium tax credits expiring
HEADLINE: "ACA Marketplace Health Insurance Premiums To Rise 21.5% On Average In Minnesota, Expert Says" [ABC 5, 11/4/25]
Minneapolis Star Tribune Reported People Across Minnesota Could See Average Prices Increases Of $3,400 As A Result Of ACA Premium Tax Credits Expiring. According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, "While the Blue Earth County example might be an extreme case, health care advocates worry that if enhanced tax credits aren’t renewed, people across Minnesota will see price increases averaging about $3,400. Nearly 20,000 will lose all subsidies, and some likely will go without insurance. They could get sicker from delaying treatments or create stress on hospital budgets by seeking free or discounted care. ‘If you don’t have coverage, it doesn’t mean that you’re not going to get sick,’ said Lynn Blewett, a health policy professor at the University of Minnesota." [Minneapolis Star Tribune, 11/21/25]
70,000 Of The 89,000 Minnesotans Who Relied On ACA Tax Credits Were Expected To See Less Help If The Enhanced Tax Credits Expired. According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, "Roughly 89,000 people across Minnesota receive ACA tax credits. About 70,000 will see less help next year if Congress doesn’t extend the enhancements, MNsure says, while 19,000 people will receive no financial help whatsoever." [Minneapolis Star Tribune, 11/21/25]
HEADLINE: "With Federal Subsidy Set To Expire, Some Minnesotans Face Eye-Popping Health Premium Increases" [MPR News, 11/7/25]
2026: The Number Of Minnesotans Who Signed Up For ACA Marketplace Plans Dropped Eight Percent Compared To 2025. According to MinnPost, "When the enrollment period opened Nov. 1, MNsure officials warned that enrollees’ monthly premiums would soar 57% due to the expiration of a federal subsidy, among other cost factors. Enrollment closed Jan. 15, and, according to MNsure, 139,251 Minnesotans signed up, an 8% drop compared with 2025. Given the eye-popping increase in monthly premiums, this 8% dip seems modest. But the decline does not account for tens of thousands Minnesotans who signed up for a less encompassing plan. Plus, it is too early to know how many people will lose coverage for not making premium payments. ‘What I suspect and fear is that as we get further into the year, the number of Minnesotans who do not have coverage will climb,’ said Libby Caulum, CEO for MNsure." [MinnPost, 2/18/26]
- MinnPost: “The Decline Does Not Account For Tens Of Thousands Minnesotans Who Signed Up For A Less Encompassing Plan.” According to MinnPost, "When the enrollment period opened Nov. 1, MNsure officials warned that enrollees’ monthly premiums would soar 57% due to the expiration of a federal subsidy, among other cost factors. Enrollment closed Jan. 15, and, according to MNsure, 139,251 Minnesotans signed up, an 8% drop compared with 2025. Given the eye-popping increase in monthly premiums, this 8% dip seems modest. But the decline does not account for tens of thousands Minnesotans who signed up for a less encompassing plan. Plus, it is too early to know how many people will lose coverage for not making premium payments. ‘What I suspect and fear is that as we get further into the year, the number of Minnesotans who do not have coverage will climb,’ said Libby Caulum, CEO for MNsure." [MinnPost, 2/18/26]
¶ Stauber’s Inaction Created A Dramatic “Subsidy Cliff”
The Expiration Of Enhanced ACA Premium Tax Credits Created A “Subsidy Cliff” Whereby If Households Earned Even $1 More Than A Specific Income Threshold They Could Lose All Eligibility For Assistance. According to CNBC, "For the first time in years, many Americans enrolled in a health insurance plan via the Affordable Care Act marketplace will need to keep a careful accounting of their annual income — or risk a hefty federal tax bill. Enhanced ACA subsidies lapsed at the end of 2025, leaving millions of households on the hook for higher insurance premiums. The lapse also reintroduced the so-called subsidy cliff, whereby households that earn even $1 more than a specific income threshold will lose all eligibility for subsidies, also known as premium tax credits. That income cutoff, which varies by family size, is $62,600 for a single person, $84,600 for a two-person household and $128,600 for a family of four in 2026, for example." [CNBC, 1/6/26]
- More Than Two Million Americans Had Incomes Near A “Subsidy Cliff.” According to CNBC, "More than 2 million people enrolled in an ACA marketplace plan have an income near the subsidy cliff. ACA enrollees also tend to have relatively volatile incomes, making it hard to predict their annual earnings, experts said." [CNBC, 1/6/26]
Households That Went Over The Income Limit Would Have To Pay Back Any Federal Assistance They Received For Premiums, Which Could Cost Thousands Of Dollars, When They Filed Their Taxes. According to CNBC, "Households over the limit would have to pay back any federal subsidies they received for premiums — potentially worth thousands of dollars — when they file taxes next year for 2026." [CNBC, 1/6/26]
Republicans’ Big Beautiful Bill Exacerbated The Problem By Stripping Away Guardrails Capping The Amount Of Excess Subsidies Households Are Required To Repay. According to CNBC, "The potential financial impact is exacerbated by a multitrillion-dollar legislative package known as the ‘big beautiful bill’ that Republicans passed over the summer, which stripped away guardrails capping the amount of excess subsidies households must repay, experts said." [CNBC, 1/6/26]
¶ 22 Million Americans Relied On ACA Premium Tax Credits To Afford Health Insurance
Approximately 22 Million Americans Relied On ACA Premium Tax Credits To Afford Health Insurance. According to CNBC, "About 22 million Americans received premium subsidies, also known as premium tax credits, in 2025. Households can opt to receive the tax credit in one of two ways: As a lump sum during tax season or as an advanced payment. Under the latter option, by far the most popular, the federal government issues the tax credit directly to a consumer’s insurer, which then lowers the consumer’s out-of-pocket premium. Consumers receive those advanced ACA subsidies based on an estimated annual income they provide when signing up for insurance. They must reconcile those subsidies during tax season and repay any excess tax credits to the IRS." [CNBC, 1/6/26]