Wednesday, July 15, 2026

2.6 Million Americans Lost Health Insurance in 2025 After ACA Subsidies Expired, Leading to Real Health Consequences


 July 15, 2026



Millions of Americans who buy their own health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplaces faced a stark choice this year: pay more than twice as much to keep the same plan or go without. Many did not keep their coverage.

Federal data released on June 26, 2026, shows that marketplace enrollment fell from 21.8 million people in February 2025 to 19.2 million in February 2026, a decline of about 2.6 million people, or 12%. That is the steepest single-year decline since the marketplaces opened in 2014. ACA marketplaces (or exchanges) are government-regulated platforms where individuals and small businesses can shop for and purchase compliant private health insurance.

As a health economist who studies how insurance coverage affects people’s health, I see the drop as more than a numbers story. The key question is: What happens to people’s health when coverage becomes too expensive to keep?

Why enrollment fell

The drop in enrollment numbers traces back largely to the expiration of the ACA’s enhanced premium tax credits, which lowered enrollees’ monthly payments when they were in effect from 2021 through 2025.

Those subsidies, enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic to make marketplace coverage more affordable, more than doubled marketplace enrollment between 2020 and 2024. But when they lapsed at the end of 2025, the average subsidized enrollee’s cost to keep the same plan jumped about 114%.

Many people switched to cheaper, higher-deductible plans, but average premium payments still rose 58% and deductibles climbed 37%, or more than US$1,000 per person.

By February 2026, only 83% of people who selected a marketplace plan had paid their premiums and kept their coverage, down from 91% the previous year.

Fraud or price hike?

The Trump administration gives another explanation. A June 2026 federal government brief argues that when subsidies made some plans free, it became easier for brokers to sign people up improperly, including some people who did not know they had been enrolled. The brief says the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency that oversees Medicare, Medicaid and the ACA marketplaces, canceled 250,000 unauthorized enrollments and identified 200,000 unauthorized plan switches in 2025.

Independent analysts, however, point to a simpler explanation: Coverage became much more expensive when the extra subsidies ended, and many people either dropped coverage or never paid their first premium.

Both factors probably contributed to the decline. The federal government removed some improper enrollments, but the price increase appears to have played a major role.

The pattern also differed sharply by state. In states using HealthCare.gov, the federal website for ACA enrollment, the numbers declined much more – 18.7%, on average – than in states that run their own exchanges, where the drop averaged out to 6.3%. State-run marketplaces may have had more tools to reach consumers, help them compare plans or provide extra financial assistance that enabled people to stay enrolled.

Health policy experts expect enrollment to decline further, perhaps to 16.5 million to 17.5 million by the end of 2026. Costs could rise again in 2027. Insurers selling ACA marketplace plans are asking for a typical premium increase of 14% for 2027. If regulators approve those increases, it would be the second year in a row that premiums rose by double digits.

Health insurance makes people healthier

Decades of research show what happens when people gain insurance coverage.

Much of that research comes from studies comparing states that expanded Medicaid under the ACA with states that did not. Perhaps unsurprisingly, people who gain coverage receive more preventive care, use more services, face less financial strain and report better overall health}.

The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment studied a 2008 lottery in Oregon that gave some low-income uninsured adults the chance to enroll in Medicaid. Researchers found that gaining coverage improved access to care reduced depression and nearly eliminated catastrophic medical bills. Some studies link coverage to survival: One analysis of the ACA’s Medicaid expansions estimated that gaining coverage reduced mortality among older low-income adults by about 9%.

My colleagues and I studied what happened after some states expanded Medicaid in 2014 while others did not. We found that expansion states saw more early-stage cancer diagnoses, meaning tumors were more likely to be caught while still treatable.

Losing coverage has a cost, too

There’s less evidence on what happens to people who lose health insurance, but the studies that do exist suggest that losing coverage makes care harder to get and harder to afford. After Tennessee dropped 170,000 adults from its Medicaid program in 2005 – one of the largest disenrollments in the program’s history – those who lost coverage were more likely to delay or skip care because of cost, and they reported worse health.

A similar pattern emerged after pandemic-era Medicaid protections ended in 2023. When states restarted eligibility checks that had been paused during the pandemic, millions lost Medicaid coverage. In a survey of people who were dropped from the program, 3 in 4 worried about their physical health and 6 in 10 about their mental health, with many citing cost as the barrier to finding new coverage.

Losing coverage does not merely undo the benefits of having had it before. The disruption can interrupt care and leave people saddled with medical bills they cannot afford. Much of the harm comes from a concept that health economists like me call churn – the cycling in and out of insurance that many lower-income Americans experience.

Even brief gaps can do lasting damage. Among adults enrolled in the Medicaid program, emergency department visits and hospitalizations for conditions that can often be managed with regular care, such as diabetes complications, heart failure and asthma, more than doubled in the first month after a coverage gap. That finding matters because many people who lose coverage do eventually regain it. But even a short gap can mean skipped medications, delayed appointments or untreated symptoms that become urgent and potentially more serious than they would otherwise have been.

The data released in June only tracks enrollment through February 2026, so it leaves some unanswered questions, such as how many people found other coverage and how many are uninsured.

For now, the numbers show a sharp reversal in marketplace coverage. The health effects will take longer to measure, but past research offers a clear warning: When coverage disappears, the consequences often appear later in doctors’ offices, emergency rooms and family budgets.The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.




Trial By Jury: a Good News Story


 July 15, 2026

I was going to write my usual depressing take on the economy and the AI bubble waiting to burst, but I was inspired by Paul Krugman’s account yesterday morning of his experience with potential jurors in New Jersey. I’m a step ahead of Paul on this one; I actually served on a jury. Although I’ve told friends about my experience, I’m pretty sure I never wrote it up anywhere.

This was about 25 years ago, when I was living in DC. Rather than trying to come up with an important person excuse for not serving on the jury, I agreed to do my time.

The facts of the case were interesting and not really in dispute. A young man had been convicted of a crime (we weren’t told what crime) and was serving the last six months of his sentence in a halfway house. The halfway house allowed people to sign out for two hours at a time. The guy had signed out, indicating he was going to have lunch at the food court at Union Station.

While he was there, he was arrested for shoplifting. He was taken into custody and held overnight, when his mother came and bailed him out in the morning. She indicated that the guy would be staying with her. After she got home, she called the halfway house, which had been informed of the arrest. They told her that her son was no longer their responsibility. The court told us the shoplifting charges were subsequently dropped.

His mother testified that he continued to live at home with her. The prosecution didn’t dispute this claim. He was then arrested doing something else (they didn’t tell us what), and they discovered that he had never completed his time at the halfway house. They then charged him with “escape,” based on the fact that he had not returned to the halfway house.

The guy testified in his own defense and essentially told the same story as his mother and what the prosecution had presented. The prosecutor’s most telling question was something to the effect of “you didn’t think you had completed your sentence, did you?” To which the guy said “no.”

The case concluded late afternoon, so the judge told us to come back and deliberate the next morning. I went home thinking there was no way on earth I was going to vote to convict this guy based on what we had heard.

His mother had told the court exactly where he was when she bailed him out, and there was no evidence whatsoever that he was staying anywhere other than with his mother. This means the police could have picked him up any time they wanted and have him serve out the rest of his sentence, wherever they considered appropriate.

How could this possibly be escape?

I had followed the judge’s orders and had not talked to anyone else on the jury about the case. As a result, I had no idea how anyone else viewed the case. However, I knew I was prepared to be an asshole holdout if need be. There was no way what this guy had done could be a crime.

The jury looked to be a pretty representative DC group. It was half Black and half white. There were three lawyers (it’s DC, lawyers can sit on juries), but most of the jury did not look to be professionals.

The foreperson took a quick poll, and to my great relief, it was 9 for acquittal, 3 for guilty. We all went around the room and quickly explained how we had reached our conclusions. Two of the guilty people felt that the guy, who seemed to have committed some serious crimes, should not go free just because the court had messed up by not rearresting him after he had been bailed out.

We explained to these people that the guy had served, or would be serving, whatever time he was supposed to for his other crimes. We were only being asked if he had committed a new crime. While we all agreed that abstractly the guy should have made some effort to get his situation clarified, we didn’t think failing to call the police, when they in principle knew where you were, was a crime.

When two of those voting guilty understood clearly what was at issue, they shifted their vote to not guilty. The last person was still unhappy for reasons I didn’t understand but said he would not be the lone holdout. We turned in our not-guilty verdict after about two hours of deliberation, counting our introductions and selection of a foreperson.

What was so encouraging to me was that twelve people sat and listened attentively to the trial. Admittedly, it was only about four or five hours, not days or weeks, but people took their responsibility seriously. The deliberations were serious. People discussed the facts of the case and what it would mean to say he had committed the crime of escape.

I walked away thinking that if my freedom was on the line, I would be happy to think that I had a jury that was as responsible in assessing my case as this one.

I know this is a sample of one, and DC may be very different from the rest of the country. This was also a quarter century ago, when we only knew Donald Trump as a failed businessman and reality TV show star, so maybe times have changed. But this was an uplifting experience that I thought I would share at a time when we all could use some positive stories.

This first appeared on Dean Baker’s Beat the Press blog.

Dean Baker is the senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC. 

Record-smashing heat wave surges from West to eastern US, Canada

AFP
July 14, 2026 

People battle the heat with misting stations during extreme heat along the National Mall in Washington, DC, on July 3, 2026 – Copyright AFP –

A record-smashing heat wave was spreading Tuesday from the Mountain West toward the eastern United States and Canada, placing more than 100 million people under heat alerts.

Hot and dry conditions also contributed to fierce wildfires in southwestern Ontario and northern Minnesota, with air quality expected to worsen over the Midwestern and Northeastern United States in the coming days.

The phenomenon known as a heat dome has already shattered all-time temperature records in western states, including 111F (44C) in Billings, Montana, where the previous record was 108F, and 109F in Salt Lake City, where the previous one was 107F.

Extreme heat and humidity persist in the Mountain West but are now spilling over to the densely populated East Coast, which also faced brutal temperatures earlier in the month, as well as Canada’s Ontario and, to a lesser extent, Montreal.

“Above average temperatures and dangerous levels of heat are forecast to enter the Northeast on Tuesday before the most intense heat occurs on Wednesday and expands into the Mid-Atlantic,” said the US National Weather Service.

US cities from Richmond, Virginia, to Boston, Massachusetts, are set to see temperatures soar from the upper 90s to near 100 degrees, with daily high records under threat.

In Ottawa, the federal capital of Canada, and Toronto, highs are expected to reach 100.4F on Tuesday, with temperatures feeling even hotter because of high humidity levels.

“Hot and humid air can also bring deteriorating air quality and can result in the Air Quality Health Index approaching the high-risk category,” Environment and Climate Change Canada said.

In Montreal, the sky turned yellow on Tuesday morning due to smoke from wildfires burning several hundred miles away in northern Quebec and northwestern Ontario.

Cooler temperatures are expected to follow by the end of the week, though the heat dome will persist in the US Mountain West for the rest of July.

Heat domes are large areas of high pressure, where sinking air suppresses development of precipitation and clouds, allowing heat to build up over days and weeks.



– New climate reality –



“We know that heat domes are, of course, a natural part of the climate system,” Marc Alessi, a climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a briefing.

“But the climate system now is fundamentally different due to fossil fuel-driven climate change,” he said. “Our atmosphere is much warmer. Our oceans are much warmer. They’re releasing a lot more heat into the atmosphere, and this heat dome is an example of you know what fossil fuel-driven climate change looks like.”

Scientists from the World Weather Attribution group released an analysis showing the hot and humid conditions in the earlier East Coast hot spell — which fell as America celebrated its 250th anniversary on July 4 — would have been “virtually impossible” without human-caused climate change.

Scientists say a brewing “super” El Nino in the equatorial Pacific could also be influencing the heat dome.

Record-warm sea surface temperatures in the central Pacific are shifting where tropical storms form and release energy, which in turn is distorting the jet stream over the western US and allowing hot air to get trapped in place.

US forecasters expect El Nino to peak between October and December at potentially record-breaking levels, with the strongest spike in temperature to follow in 2027.

Compounded with human-induced climate change, the last El Nino contributed to making 2023 the second-hottest year on record and 2024 the all-time high.