NHDP - Statement from the NH Democratic Party on Today's Circuit Court of Appeals Rulings

Manchester, NH – New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley issued the following statement reacting to today’s two different and conflicting rulings on the Affordable Care Act:
“Partisan, frivolous lawsuits are trying to stop the people of New Hampshire from getting affordable health care. 
"Republicans like Scott Brown, Bob Smith, Jim Rubens, Walt Havenstein, Andrew Hemingway and others are cheering because they want to stop affordable health care too, because they think it’s good for their campaigns. Well, it’s not good for the people of New Hampshire and it’s shameful that New Hampshire Republicans cheered a court decision that could make insurance coverage less affordable for 30,000 people in New Hampshire."
“Today’s misguided and flawed decision is being challenged and three other courts have ruled in favor of the Affordable Care Act - one earlier today."
30,920 Granite Staters, or 77%, Receive Financial Assistance Through the Federal-Run Health Insurance Marketplace [HHS report, April 2014]
Repeal of ACA's Financial Assistance Would Result in Average Monthly Cost Increase of $290 in New Hampshire. “But if subsidies were repealed, people would not lose coverage, instead seeing premiums jump from loss of the tax credit. [...] In New Hampshire, 40,262 people are paying an average monthly premium of $100 — and repeal would result in an average monthly loss of subsidies/cost increase of $290.” [Washington Post, June 19, 2014]
4th Circuit Court of Appeals Upholds Subsidies in Federal-Run Health Exchange: “Meanwhile, just an hour later, another three-judge panel on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., came to the opposite conclusion – upholding the federal subsidies.” [NPR, July 22, 2014]

Two Previous Court Rulings Sided In Favor Of The ACA On This Issue Specifically: "Today’s ruling goes against the two previous rulings on this issue so far, which both summarily dismissed the plaintiffs’ arguments. Both judges agreed that ‘there is no evidence in the legislative record that the House, the Senate, any relevant committee of either House, or any legislator ever entertained’ the idea of confining premium assistance to state exchanges.' Additionally, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is expected to soon reject an identical challenge." [The New Republic, 4/6/14]