House Bipartisan Quartet Unveils “Statement of Principles” to Extend Obamacare Subsidies Amid Government Shutdown

Reps. Bacon, Hurd, Suozzi, and Gottheimer propose a two-year extension of enhanced ACA tax credits with an income cap and fraud safeguards, offering a possible breakthrough in the 33-day funding impasse.

WASHINGTON | In the first significant health-care policy move since the federal government shutdown entered its 33rd day, a bipartisan group of U.S. House members released a set of guiding principles Monday aimed at extending the enhanced subsidy regime under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). 

The framework, authored by Republican Reps. Don Bacon (Nebraska) and Jeff Hurd (Colorado) alongside Democratic Reps. Tom Suozzi (New York) and Josh Gottheimer (New Jersey), proposes a two-year extension of the enhanced premium tax credits (PTCs) under the ACA, paired with a phased income cap on eligibility ranging between $200,000 and $400,000 for individuals. 

In addition to the duration and income‐cap provisions, the group’s statement sets forth a number of reform “guardrails” designed to address concerns from both sides of the aisle. These include:

• Requirements that marketplace administrators verify eligibility and eliminate so-called “ghost beneficiaries.” 
• A “preponderance of evidence” standard for assessing misconduct by brokers and agents in the ACA marketplaces. 
• Enhanced transparency for enrollees, meaning people who receive premium tax credits would be more clearly notified of the subsidy amounts they receive from the federal government. 

The timing of the release is significant. The government shutdown has frozen much of the Congressional agenda, and health-care elements—including the expiring subsidies—have been a key point of contention in funding negotiations. Democrats have insisted that any resolution to reopen the government must include an extension of the enhanced ACA tax credits, while Republican leadership has resisted tying health-care policy to immediate funding bills. 

As Rep. Bacon said in a Monday interview: “I’m all for breaking the logjam. A lot of Republicans don’t want to see these premiums go up either.” 

While the proposal may signal thawing paralysis, it faces significant challenges. Notably, the plan has not received full backing from the larger House Problem Solvers Caucus, of which all four lawmakers are members. Some caucus participants have expressed caution or withheld support, citing unanswered questions and ideological resistance. 

Moreover, conservative critics of the ACA worry that even a temporary extension of the enhanced credits will entrench structural issues they believe should be addressed in a full-scale reform. Others on the left argue that a mere two-year extension with an income cap falls short of ensuring long-term stability for millions of lower- and middle-income Americans.

In short: this bipartisan framework may serve as a potential bargaining chip in the broader shutdown‐funding talks, possibly to be attached to full‐year appropriations bills currently under discussion in the House and Senate. But the path to enactment remains uncertain. As enrollment for 2026 begins and premium costs for some enrollees threaten to surge, pressure is rising for Congress to act. 

What to watch next:

• Whether the Senate picks up or modifies the House framework.
• If the proposal is included in must-pass funding legislation.
• How insurers and exchanges respond to the possibility of a subsidy “sunset” in two years.
• The reaction of moderate and conservative members in both parties, especially ahead of 2026 enrollment and mid-term elections.
• Whether additional health-care reform ideas (such as abortions, Medicaid eligibility, state waivers) emerge tied to the subsidy debate.

======

-- By James W. Thomas and Michele Robinson

© Copyright 2025 JWT Communications. All rights reserved. This article cannot be republished, rebroadcast, rewritten, or distributed in any form without written permission.