How the Right to Re-Enroll Act of 2026 Could Change ACA Special Enrollment Rules

Last updated: November 7, 2026

NewsWK — Lawmakers in Washington have introduced new federal healthcare legislation. The measure aims to give insurance policyholders more control when doctor networks shrink. Representative Andrea Salinas introduced the Right to Re-Enroll Act of 2026 in the United States House of Representatives. Meanwhile, Republican Representative Ryan Mackenzie joined as an original sponsor. Together, they designed the bipartisan proposal to help consumers navigate mid-year plan alterations.

What is HR 10959 and how would it alter insurance coverage?

Federal lawmakers introduced bipartisan legislation that would grant health insurance policyholders new choices when hospital networks change. Specifically, Representative Andrea Salinas introduced HR 10959 to give customers a new ACA special enrollment period. This special window opens whenever insurers and healthcare providers end their contract mid-year.

Currently, patients often discover mid-year that their primary hospital or specialist left their network. Consequently, insurance plans may refuse to cover visits with those specific providers. Under current rules, patients usually must wait until open enrollment to change plans. However, this bill creates an emergency exit for policyholders. If passed, exchange plans must open a 60-day window for affected enrollees. Therefore, consumers can switch to a new qualified health plan that keeps their doctors.

How would the Right to Re-Enroll Act of 2026 impact health insurance policyholders?

Patients across the nation often face sudden out-of-pocket cost spikes when insurers drop doctor networks mid-year. If enacted, this legislation allows consumers to leave their plan immediately without waiting for annual open enrollment. However, switching coverage mid-year presents financial tradeoffs for family budgets.

This bill addresses that disruption directly.

Under the proposed rules, insurance companies must follow specific guidelines:

• Insurers must notify affected enrollees within seven days after a provider contract ends.
• Insurers must protect patients who saw the provider within the previous 90 days. Specifically, these patients keep their previous cost-sharing terms during the transition.
• Policyholders gain a 60-day window to pick a different plan on the federal or state exchange.
• Insurers must clearly inform consumers that moving to a new plan resets deductibles to zero.

What should consumers know about the health insurance network changes bill?

This health insurance network changes bill requires insurance plans to issue written notices within seven days of any contract termination. Next, affected consumers would receive sixty days to select a new plan. However, switching coverage resets accumulated deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums back to zero.

While the bill offers flexibility, it also carries potential financial consequences for families. For instance, resetting deductibles means patients must start paying out-of-pocket costs all over again. Still, advocates argue that choosing a new plan beats paying out-of-network rates for critical care. In addition, the bill protects patients who were actively receiving care. Specifically, anyone who visited the dropped provider during the prior 90 days keeps their original copays and deductibles. This rule applies to ongoing treatment. Thus, vulnerable patients receive crucial short-term stability during medical treatments.

What is the legislative context behind Andrea Salinas HR 10959?

Representative Andrea Salinas introduced HR 10959 on November 5, 2026, alongside Republican Representative Ryan Mackenzie in the House. Subsequently, House leaders referred the measure to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

The legislation, also known as the Right to Re Enroll Act of 2026, targets future coverage. Specifically, it applies to plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2027. Because the bill requires bipartisan approval, its path through Congress will depend on committee evaluations. Supporters emphasize consumer protection and market transparency. Meanwhile, conservative analysts often urge caution regarding expanded federal insurance mandates under the Affordable Care Act. Added administrative requirements can raise overhead costs for private insurers. Eventually, higher administrative costs can lead to elevated premium rates for all consumers. Therefore, lawmakers must weigh consumer choices against market costs. Currently, HR 10959 remains under committee review awaiting further legislative action.

Related: Study Examines Women on Parole Mental Health and Reentry Crises Across the US

Related: House Resolution 1499 Clears Way for Critical Votes on Mining, Higher Education, and Maritime Rules