Physicians
e-Newsletter
Intelligence Unit Special Reports Special Events Subscribe Sponsored Departments Follow Us

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn RSS

Repeal of PPACA Would Be 'Devastating,' Sebelius Says

Cheryl Clark, for HealthLeaders Media, July 11, 2012

The vote scheduled for Wednesday in the U.S. House of Representatives to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would have "devastating" consequences for Medicare beneficiaries, if it were to pass, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Tuesday.

During a routine press briefing to tout the latest statistics on how seniors have benefited from the law, Sebelius took an unusual detour to criticize the effort to undo the legislation.

So far, health plan premiums have been reduced and seniors whose healthcare spending falls into the donut hole are now getting 50% discounts on drugs, she said. And 16.1 million people have received at least one preventive service at no cost during the first six months of the year.

"And yet despite this progress, the House of Representatives is preparing to hold another vote—their 31st  vote—on repealing the Affordable Care Act. For millions of seniors and people with disabilities who have seen the impact of these benefits in their own lives, the consequences of repeal would be devastating. To assure our country's seniors continue to get this security and protection they deserve, we need to keep moving forward," she said.

Comments are moderated. Please be patient.

3 comments on "Repeal of PPACA Would Be 'Devastating,' Sebelius Says"


mike hensgen (7/12/2012 at 5:57 AM)
"Devastating" mainly to Sibelius's own job security...wholeheartedly agree with Adrian's below comments re the biased nature of this piece

mike hensgen (7/12/2012 at 5:54 AM)
only for her job prospects...

Adrian Scipione (7/11/2012 at 10:18 AM)
This article is totally missing any perspective from the other end. Many of the benefits that Ms. Sebelius touts as having been received by seniors actually go away in future years. These services are being funded by a one time appropriation by Executive Order. Why such a one sided report?