The Affordable Care Act is unaffordable and morally unacceptable. Americans deserve better.

When the Affordable Care Act (or Obamacare) was passed in 2010 with just one Republican vote in the House and zero Republican votes in the Senate, it was marketed as a path toward affordability and stability. Instead, it locked millions of Americans into a system where premiums climb relentlessly, deductibles reach levels that most families cannot pay, and coverage often becomes little more than an illusion.

Now, with the government reopened, Congress must decide what to do about the unruly, collapsing subsidy structure baked into this very unaffordable care act, which has been propped up by emergency infusions of taxpayer money and increasingly unworkable administrative patches. Any vote that expands or extends Obamacare subsidies becomes a vote for Obamacare itself, an admission of responsibility for its unsustainability and moral compromise.

Key Takeaways:

• The Affordable Care Act has relied from the beginning on federal taxpayer subsidies which helped to provide the "illusion" of affordability.

• It has also used those subsidies to skirt pro-life protections (like the Hyde Amendment) which restrict federal dollars from paying for abortion.

• Pro-life and fiscally conservative lawmakers should refrain from propping up Obamacare; otherwise, taxpayer dollars will continue to be used for subsidies to fund abortions and controversial transgender procedures.

Reality Check:

A Monument to Unaffordability

The 'Unaffordable Care Act' has created a healthcare system that only survives through taxpayer subsidies. Those subsidies mask the true cost of the law, but they do not change its underlying trajectory. If Obamacare were functioning, it would not require annual rescue missions from Congress. The fact that these rescues have become routine speaks volumes.

Premiums continue rising not because insurers are greedy or because consumers are unhealthy, but because the structure of Obamacare restricts competition and forces insurers to operate inside a maze of federal mandates. Deductibles frequently reach five figures, leaving families technically “insured” but functionally on their own until they have spent more money than they keep in savings. In some states, one or two insurers dominate the market and private innovation has been replaced by government choreography.

Subsidies Risk Funding Abortion and Gender Ideology

The debate over subsidies cannot ignore one of the most troubling features of Obamacare: the way its complex tax-credit structure circumvents traditional pro-life protections.

For years, pro-abortion lawmakers have relied on this loophole to funnel federal dollars toward insurance plans that include abortion coverage. Because the subsidies are delivered through tax credits outside the standard guardrails, they fall beyond the reach of long-established restrictions designed to prevent taxpayer-funded abortion.

This was an intentional design choice built into Obamacare from the beginning.

The same problem now exists with gender ideology. Under the Act’s mandated “essential health benefits,” federal regulators have repeatedly pressured insurers to cover gender-transition interventions, cross-sex hormones, and irreversible procedures. Without firm, explicit restrictions, Obamacare subsidies can underwrite these interventions as well, with American taxpayers forced to subsidize practices many believe to be medically unsound and morally unacceptable.

Unless clearly and permanently fenced off, Obamacare subsidies are a direct line of federal dollars into the abortion industry and into the rapidly expanding world of gender-transition medicine.

No negotiation is responsible if it ignores this reality. Moral clarity is not optional; it is foundational.

Commentary:

A bipartisan subsidy expansion would allow pro-abortion politicians to argue that Obamacare is no longer a strictly Democratic creation but a shared accomplishment.

If abortion and gender-transition procedures continue receiving indirect federal support through subsidized insurance plans, Democrats will say Republicans approved that outcome.

The party of limited government cannot become the emergency maintenance crew for a law they have spent 14 years arguing must be repealed. They cannot fix Obamacare without becoming responsible for Obamacare.

The idea that lawmakers are either left with expanding Obamacare or leaving Americans without help is false. An affordable healthcare system will be competitive, accessible, transparent, and morally grounded — because taxpayer dollars are not weaponized to support abortion and gender ideology.

Replacing Obamacare is a fiscal necessity and a moral obligation.

The Bottom Line:

Obamacare has failed to deliver affordability, sustainability, or moral integrity. It has become a system that burdens families, subsidizes controversial procedures, restricts innovation, and demands constant federal intervention.

The country is watching to see whether self-professing pro-life lawmakers will stand by their principles or surrender them in the name of political ease.

Bio: Mark Wiltz is Director of Government Affairs for Live Action.