2017: Patti Adair Repeatedly Advocated For A Full Repeal Of The Affordable Care Act, Calling The Legislation “2700 Pages Of A Million Unintended Consequences”

2017: Adair Advocated For A Full Repeal Of The Affordable Care Act, Calling The Legislation “2700 Pages Of A Million Unintended Consequences”

American Journal News: “Adair Previously Called For Eliminating Obamacare Entirely.” “Adair previously called for eliminating Obamacare entirely. She wrote in a 2017 X post, ‘#repeal Obamacare. Now. Now. Now.’ The spending cuts in OBBB go far beyond health care. The law also slashes $186 billion from SNAP, the program that helps more than 42 million Americans buy groceries.” [American Journal News, 5/12/26]

Headline: “Republican Patti Adair Endorsed Cutting Medicaid, Repealing Obamacare.” [American Journal News, 5/12/26]

March 2017: Adair Tweeted: “#Repeal Obamacare. Now. Now. Now.” “#repeal obamacare. Now. Now. Now.” [Patti Jean Adair, Twitter, 3/2/17]

Image: see original report, p. 10

[Patti Jean Adair, Twitter, 3/2/17]

January 2017: Adair Tweeted: #Fullrepeal Of Obamacare. 2700 Pages Of A Million Unintended Consequences.” “#FullRepeal of Obamacare. 2700 pages of a million unintended consequences. Working Americans part time and paying too much for insurance.” [Patti Jean Adair, Twitter, 1/6/17]

Image: see original report, p. 10

[Patti Jean Adair, Twitter, 1/6/17]

2017: Adair Said Repealing The Affordable Care Act Had To Be A Priority For Congress And Criticized House Republican Reform Efforts For Not Going Far Enough

January 2017: Adair Said “Removing Obamacare Has To Be A Priority” For Congress. “Removing Obamacare has to be priority. Part-time jobs do not provide our American family's security.” [Patti Jean Adair, Twitter, 1/3/17]

Image: see original report, p. 11

[Patti Jean Adair, Twitter, 1/3/17]

Adair Tweeted: “#Fullrepeal This Is Still Obamacare.” In Response To House Republican’s Proposed Affordable Care Act Replacement Bill. Adair quote-tweeted a video from Fox Business captioned “House Budget Committee approves ObamaCare replacement bill” with “#Fullrepeal This is still Obamacare.” [Patti Jean Adair, Twitter, 3/16/17]

Image: see original report, p. 12

[Patti Jean Adair, Twitter, 3/16/17]

2025: Repealing The ACA Threatened The Coverage Of More Than 28,000 Individuals In OR-05 On Marketplace Plans

2025: More Than 28,000 Individuals In OR-05 Were Enrolled In ACA Marketplace Plans. [KFF, 10/3/25]

[KFF, 10/3/25]

Repealing The Affordable Care Act Would End Coverage Protections For 701,000 Oregon Residents With Pre-Existing Conditions

2014: The Affordable Care Act Barred Insurance Companies From Denying Coverage Or Charging Higher Premiums To People With Pre-Existing Conditions

NPR: Before The Affordable Care Act, It Was Legal For Health Insurers To Deny Coverage To People With Pre-Existing Conditions. “A ‘preexisting condition’ refers to any health issue someone has before they sign up for a health insurance policy — from high blood pressure to pregnancy to allergies. Before the Affordable Care Act, it was perfectly legal for health insurers to deny coverage to people with such conditions. An estimate from the Kaiser Family Foundation suggests that about 54 million people have conditions that — without legal protections — could prompt health insurers to deny them policies. Polls show this is one of the most popular provisions of the law, across the political spectrum.” [NPR, 10/27/20]

January 2014: ACA Regulations Preventing Insurance Companies From Refusing To Cover Costs Related To Pre-Existing Conditions Went Into Effect. “Insurers pursue multiple strategies to reduce the cost of covering enrollees with pre-existing conditions, or medical conditions and health problems that existed before the individual enrolled in a health plan. One strategy, the pre-existing condition exclusion, allows insurers to refuse to cover any costs associated with care for a pre-existing condition permanently or over a period of time. Beginning January 1, 2014, insurers in the individual and group markets will be prohibited from imposing pre-existing condition exclusions under the Affordable Care Act. This new fact sheet provides an overview of how pre-existing condition exclusions are regulated under current law, and how the ACA will change those regulations in 2014, enabling consumers to access necessary benefits and services beginning from their first day of coverage.” [KFF, 10/8/12]

2014: The Affordable Care Act Barred Insurers From Charging People With Pre-Existing Conditions Higher Premiums. “Beginning in 2014, the ACA barred insurers in the individual market from charging people higher premiums because of their health status or health conditions. Insurers can only adjust an individual’s premium by specific factors: age (within limits), geographic area, and tobacco use (also within limits). Before the ACA, people in the individual market frequently paid much higher premiums if they had pre-existing conditions. Often, a ‘standard’ premium rate would be established for a particular insurance product, and people could be charged a higher premium (‘rated up’) if they had health conditions or get a reduced premium (‘rated down’) if they were healthy.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 10/5/20]

2019: 701,000 Oregon Residents Had Declinable Pre-Existing Conditions If The Affordable Care Act Were Repealed

2019: KFF Estimated 701,000 Non-Elderly Oregon Residents, Or 28% Of The Non-Elderly Population, Had Declinable Pre-Existing Conditions. [KFF, 10/4/19]

• KFF Used Data From The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) To Approximate The Underwriting Processes Carried Out By Insurers And Calculate A Conservative Estimate Of The Number Of People Who Would Have Been Denied Coverage. “We used data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to estimate that 27% of nonelderly adults had a declinable health condition in 2018, the same percentage that we found in our earlier analysis for 2015. The NHIS has a number of questions about whether the respondent has ever been diagnosed with a number of the health conditions that would have been declinable in the pre-ACA non-group market. While we cannot duplicate the underwriting processes carried out by insurers, we feel that our approach is reasonable and may be conservative because the NHIS does not contain information about all of the conditions (e.g., AIDS/HIV) used by insurers and does not provide information on prescriptions that insurers also used to decline applicants for coverage.” [KFF, 10/4/19]

2020: Center For American Progress: If The ACA Were Repealed, 372,000 People In Oregon Would Lose Their Health Coverage, Raising The State’s Uninsured Rate Among The Non-Elderly From 9.1 Percent To 20.3 Percent. “A ruling that invalidates the ACA or eliminates core features of the law would have a devastating effect on American families. Select your state from the drop-down list below to see some of the harms that would result from ACA repeal. […] 372,000 people in Oregon would lose coverage, raising the state's uninsured rate among the nonelderly population from 9.1 percent to 20.3 percent.” [Center for American Progress, 3/2/20]

Repealing The ACA Would Likely Lead To Higher Premiums For All Consumers, Especially Impacting Older Americans And Americans Under 26

USA Today: ACA Repeal Would Likely Mean “All Consumers Would Take A Huge Financial Hit” Since “Insurers Would Probably Recoup Their Losses By Charging Higher Premiums.” “Republicans may not agree with President Obama's State of the Union call to drop the idea of repealing the Affordable Care Act, but health experts say the law has taken such hold that it may be impossible to get rid of it. The consequences of repeal, health care officials and industry analysts say, go beyond the fact that 9 million people would suddenly lose their insurance or that anyone with a pre-existing condition would either lose insurance or pay much higher premiums. All consumers would take a huge financial hit, because health care costs would continue to rise, and insurers would probably recoup their losses by charging higher premiums.” [USA Today, 2/1/14]

AARP: If The Affordable Care Act Were Fully Repealed, The Health Care Market Would Return To When “Insurance Companies Routinely Charged Older People Much Higher Amounts Than Younger People For The Same Coverage.” “Prior to enactment of the ACA, many older adults ages 50–64 who were not old enough to be eligible for Medicare but who did not have coverage through an employer had difficulty obtaining health insurance coverage on their own in the individual market. If coverage was available, older adults were often charged much higher premiums due to their age or a preexisting condition, making it unaffordable and out of reach. […] Consequently, insurance companies routinely charged older people much higher amounts than younger people for the same coverage in the individual health insurance market.” [AARP, 1/2017]

• The ACA Prevented Insurers From Charging Older Customers More Than Three Times What They Charge Younger Adults. “Raises premiums for older people. The Affordable Care Act limited insurers from charging older customers more than three times what they charge younger adults. The House bill would raise that to five times. This may enable younger consumers to find cheaper coverage, but older policyholders would face higher rates.” [Huffington Post, 3/6/17]

Repealing The ACA Would End The Guarantee That People Under 26 Can Stay On Their Parents’ Health Insurance, Which Cut The Uninsured Rate For Young Adults In Half After The ACA’s Implementation. “Repealing the ACA could have devastating consequences for young adults. Prior to the ACA, young adults were uninsured at a higher rate than any other age group. However, thanks to the ACA’s various coverage provisions, the young adult uninsured rate has been cut in half since 2010. One of the law’s most popular components allows young people to stay on a parent’s health plan until they are 26. This dependent coverage provision has helped millions of young people gain access to health insurance during a volatile age range when many are pursuing higher education; beginning their careers; or working in part-time or contract jobs that do not offer benefits. It has also helped young adults secure more comprehensive coverage than many were previously able to access through student health plans available prior to the ACA. The law made important strides in boosting the quality of these policies by requiring that they cover preexisting conditions; banning annual and lifetime limits; and providing preventive care at no out-of-pocket cost.” [Center for American Progress, 10/1/20]