The 2018 midterm elections mean big changes are coming to Washington. When the 116th Congress convenes in January, it will be a divided one: Republicans will continue to control the Senate, but Democrats will have a majority in the House of Representatives for the first time in eight years.

With split-party control, any legislation will require bipartisan support in order to pass. The need for such consensus greatly decreases the likelihood that radical, disruptive bills will reach the President’s desk in the coming years, and effectively eliminates the acute threats to Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that have dominated congressional conversations since 2017.

While most people newly eligible for Medicare are automatically enrolled in the program because they are receiving Social Security benefits at age 65, a growing number are not—and can face significant challenges in knowing how and when to do so. A recent article in The New York Times, “Why You Shouldn’t Wait to Sign Up for Medicare Part B,” highlights these complexities through the experience of Mr. Zeppenfeldt-Cestero, whose mistake in delaying Part B triggered punitive financial penalties and harmful coverage gaps.

The article also focuses the BENES Act (S.1909/H.R. 2575), in particular that it would help prevent enrollment mistakes by modernizing and simplifying the Part B enrollment process, and by sending notices to people who are approaching age 65 that clearly explain Part B enrollment.

While Medicare Advantage (MA) plans are required to cover the same health services as Original Medicare, they are not required to offer the same level of provider access and can impose coverage restrictions—like prior authorization—that require enrollees to take additional steps before accessing prescribed care. If a service is covered “with prior authorization,” enrollees must get approval from the plan prior to receiving the service. If approval is not granted or sought, the plan generally will not cover it.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently announced a year-long extension, through September 30, 2019, of a critical relief pathway for current and former Marketplace enrollees who mistakenly delayed Medicare enrollment. The agency also agreed to develop a more permanent solution for people who are affected.

Under this policy, people who are eligible for Medicare and have Marketplace coverage can apply to enroll in Medicare Part B without penalty. Those who have already transitioned to Medicare can request that any Part B late enrollment penalties they may have received be reduced or eliminated.

The Department of Homeland Security recently released a proposed “public charge” rule that could greatly harm families and prevent people with Medicare from accessing the services and supports they need. The proposal would dramatically expand the government’s “public charge” test, which considers whether immigrants are likely to use public benefits when deciding whether or not to grant entry to the United States or permanent resident status.

Today, the Medicare Rights Center and a diverse coalition of 80 state and national organizations representing health plans, consumers, and advocates urged the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to retain a policy that helps some Medicare beneficiaries correct problems with their Part B enrollment resulting from confusion or misinformation with Medicare and the Affordable Care Act Marketplaces. Under this relief, Medicare-eligible individuals with Marketplace coverage can apply to enroll in Part B without penalty, and those who have already transitioned to Medicare can request that any Part B late enrollment penalties be reduced or eliminated.

This week, the Medicare Rights Center submitted comments in response to a proposal from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that would, in part, make major changes to the Durable Medical Equipment, Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Supplies (DMEPOS) Competitive Bidding Program.

Through the DMEPOS bidding program, medical equipment suppliers compete for Medicare’s business based on quality and price, by submitting bids to serve beneficiaries in a specified geographical region. In the proposed rule, CMS is seeking to effectively suspend this program when current contracts expire at the end of 2018, and until new contracts are awarded under the outlined new payment methodology. CMS does not provide a time frame for when new contracts would begin.

This week, Kaiser Health News (KHN) and National Public Radio (NPR) published and broadcast the story of 44 year-old Drew Calver, a high school teacher in Austin, Texas who faced an outrageous hospital bill.

In the wake of a life-threatening heart attack, Mr. Calver was rushed to a nearby emergency room, where he was admitted to the hospital and underwent surgery. The heart attack was a shock for Calver, an avid swimmer and triathlete. Adding to his surprise was the bill he faced afterwards: the hospital charged $164,941 for the surgery and four days in the hospital. His insurer paid the hospital $55,840. The hospital then billed Mr. Calver for the unpaid balance of $108,951.31.

Last week, the Medicare Rights Center submitted comments to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on Medicaid waiver proposals from Kentucky and Mississippi. Both states are seeking the agency’s permission to require low-income, “able-bodied” adult residents to work, volunteer, or train for a job in order to maintain their Medicaid coverage.

In both sets of comments, we express our concerns that the proposed changes would undermine access to health care for low-income people who are not yet eligible for Medicare, including older adults and people with functional limitations or chronic conditions. Such individuals may not be administratively classified as “disabled”—and therefore exempt from the work requirements—but they may nevertheless face significant health challenges that drive unemployment or underemployment.

According to a recent study featured in the New York Times, bankruptcy among older Americans is on the rise. The rate of people age 65 and older filing for bankruptcy is three times what it was in 1991, and this group now accounts for 12% of all filers, a far greater share than in 1991 (2%).

Driving the surge, the study suggests, is a three-decade shift of financial risk from government and employers to individuals. This pattern—which includes people waiting longer for full Social Security benefits, employers replacing pensions with defined contribution savings plans, and soaring out-of-pocket health care costs—has transferred many of the health and economic challenges associated with aging onto older adults.