As explained here in today's Washington Post, the nation's largest health insurer, United Healthcare, says that it will retain some of the Affordable Care Act's important benefits even if the Supreme Court holds that the Act is unconstitutional.
Here's an excerpt from the Post article:
The nation’s largest health insurer will keep in place several key consumer provisions mandated by the 201 health-care law regardless of whether the statute survives Supreme Court review. Officials at UnitedHealthcare will announce Monday that whatever the outcome of the court decision — expected this month — the company will continue to provide customers preventive health-care services without co-payments or other out-of-pocket charges, allow parents to keep adult children up to age 26 on their plans, and maintain the more streamlined appeals process required by the law. UnitedHealthcare would also continue to observe the law’s prohibitions on putting lifetime limits on insurance payouts and rescinding coverage after a member becomes ill, except in cases where a member intentionally lied on an insurance application.
Could it be that the ACA has nudged United Health to change its policies (at least for the time being)? Is it just good business for United Healthcare to maintain provisions already in effect that are popular with its insureds? United Healthcare's announcement makes me think that, despite the ACA's supposed lack of popularity, many parts of the law that are in effect are in fact quite popular. (We know that the provision mandating that children under age 26 must be offered insurance on their parents' plans has proved very popular. (Go here as well.)) Presumably, United Health is not interested in foisting on its insureds benefits that they dislike.
Now let's see whether some of United Healthcare's competitors follow suit.