Now that Republicans have the power to repeal the Affordable Care Act, they’re grappling with how to better align health care regulations with conservative values while not leaving too many people uninsured.

The political parties — and health policy analysts of different ideological views — disagree sharply over whether the plans Republicans put forward during the last Congress would have provided coverage that was adequate or available to enough people.

Enter your details to see how your coverage could be impacted.

I am years old, and my annual salary is $
I
have
significant preexisting conditions and am currently
insured as an individual
.

Note: Medicare is not included because there is less nonpartisan concensus about the effects of the Republican plans on recipients’ coverage.

Your results are based on being 50 to 65 and between 133% and 400% of the poverty line for individuals.

Below are four of the most prominent replacement plans put forward by Republican senators and congressmen in the 2015-2016 term. Though it is unlikely any would be passed in their current form — some haven’t even been formalized into bills — they provide the best available insight into the directions the Republican Party could take.

President-elect Trump has also announced that he will propose a health care plan that provides “insurance for everybody,” though he has yet to provide any details.

Under these plans, your coverage would likely get...

House GOP Leadership

Better Way for Health Care

Your only insurance options would likely include higher cost-sharing and narrower coverage than under the ACA, even if you could afford premiums above your subsidy. And if you had a break in coverage, your insurance could become much more expensive.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)

Patient CARE Act

Your only insurance options would likely include higher cost-sharing and narrower coverage than under the ACA, even if you could afford premiums above your subsidy. And if you had a break in coverage, you could be charged more or denied coverage.

Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.)

Empowering Patients First Act

Your only insurance options would likely include higher cost-sharing and narrower coverage than under the ACA, even if you could afford premiums above your subsidy. And if you had a break in coverage, your insurance could become much more expensive.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.)

Health Care Choice Act

It would be hard for you to get covered — your policy options would likely be narrow, you wouldn't get any assistance to afford premiums and you could be charged a lot or denied coverage because of your pre-existing condition.

Note: All plan details are as of December 2016.

Here’s a breakdown of how changes to significant components of the ACA could affect you. Read more about each change below or click on each component for more details.

House

Hatch

Price

Cruz

Generally, Republicans want to decrease the regulations the ACA imposed on both insurers and their customers, which they claim would bring a number of benefits: People would no longer be forced to get more coverage than they want. Insurance would operate more like a free market, keeping costs reasonable. And the government’s costs would fall, making tax cuts more fiscally responsible, among other things.

To get at why many people’s coverage would change under these plans, it’s important to understand how the health insurance market works today under the ACA.

The ACA was intended, among other things, to improve individuals’ access to the insurance market, which had been the most dysfunctional part of the private insurance system. The plans previously offered often didn’t pool risk the way employer plans did, so people with existing health conditions often faced unaffordable premiums or were denied coverage outright. And for those who could get covered, the benefits were often skimpy. “We did not see comprehensive non-group plans offered,” said Karen Pollitz of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. “It doesn’t pay to be the only insurer with maternity benefits.”

To address these issues, the ACA required insurance plans bought by individuals to offer a standard set of benefits. And by offering subsidies to lower-income Americans and banning discrimination based on pre-existing medical conditions, the law made coverage more affordable and accessible for many. At the same time, it meant that more aspects of care had to be covered, and the insurers couldn’t deny people coverage or charge them more. To balance out these costs, the ACA instituted the individual mandate — requiring most Americans to have health insurance or pay a penalty — to ensure healthy people would have coverage that could help costs for sicker Americans.

The Republican plans would seriously shake things up. Reversing one major tenet of the ACA, the Republican plans are “designed to separate the risks of healthy people from people who have health problems,” said Linda Blumberg of the Urban Institute. Pooling risk between these groups, she said, was an important piece of making insurance affordable for sicker people under the ACA.

To this end, the Republican plans tend to allow insurers to charge people more based on their pre-existing conditions under certain circumstances, and eliminate standards that required coverage to be comprehensive. They also eliminate the individual mandate and, effectively, the federally and state-run insurance marketplace.

These changes are so vast, in part, because Republican health care plans don’t have the same goal as the ACA. Republicans have said they want to provide “universal access” to health insurance, meaning every American would have the ability to get insurance. (What quality of coverage constitutes “insurance,” though, is something Republicans have not specified.) The ACA, on the other hand, wanted “universal coverage.”

Here’s how each plan would change the ACA in a bit more detail:

Individual mandate

The ACA: The ACA's individual mandate requires most Americans to have health insurance or pay a penalty. One of its purposes is to get healthy people to sign up for insurance, which is necessary to keep moderate insurers' costs and customers' premiums.

What Republicans said they want to do: Republicans generally want to repeal the mandate. A continuous-coverage requirement, which means someone can't be charged more for a pre-existing condition as long as they don't have a break in coverage, is one alternative. It assumes that, since people could be charged more if they tried to get insurance once they were sick, they would want to get insurance while healthy. However, it would allow people to choose less comprehensive plans while they're healthy and more comprehensive plans while they're sick, without penalty. As a result, it could make the most comprehensive plans could become financially unsusatainable.

House Leadership's plan: Your insurance options could have lower benefits and higher deductibles.

This plan would implement the continuous coverage requirement, making comprehensive plans financially unsustainable for insurance companies.

Hatch's plan: Your insurance options could have lower benefits and higher deductibles.

In addition to a continuous coverage requirement, the plan would create a low-benefit 'default' health plan where uninsured people would get coverage funded by the government. Comprehensive plans would still likely be unsustainable.

Price's plan: Your insurance options could have lower benefits and higher deductibles.

This plan would implement the continuous coverage requirement, making comprehensive plans financially unsustainable for insurance companies.

Cruz's plan: Many of your insurance options would likely have limited benefits and high deductibles, though the extent is controversial among analysts.

The mandate would be eliminated and there would be no mechanism to keep healthy people enrolled in insurance. Like before the ACA, the lack of healthy people would likely drive non-group coverage to be less comprehensive.

Essential health benefits package

The ACA: The ACA requires most insurance plans sold to individuals and small businesses to include 10 categories of essential benefits, ranging from coverage for hospital services and maternity care to mental health services and preventive care.

What Republicans said they want to do: Republicans generally favor eliminating such benefits requirement, allowing insurers to offer less comprehensive plans to customers.

House Leadership's plan: Your insurance options would likely be much less comprehensive.

The plan would eliminate the essential benefits standard for individual and small-group policies.

Hatch's plan: Your insurance options would likely be much less comprehensive.

The plan would eliminate the essential benefits standard for individual and small-group policies.

Price's plan: Your insurance options would likely be much less comprehensive.

The plan would eliminate the essential benefits standard for individual and small-group policies.

Cruz's plan: Your insurance options would likely become less comprehensive, though the extent is controversial among analysts.

The plan would eliminate the essential benefits standard for individual and small-group policies.

Pre-existing conditions

The ACA: The ACA bans insurance companies from charging someone more or denying them coverage because of their pre-existing medical conditions, such as cancer or asthma. As it stands, consumers' premiums can only vary based on their age and whether they use tobacco.

What Republicans said they want to do: Republicans say they want to keep this provision of the ACA. But many plans include a continuous-coverage requirement, under which individuals can be charged more for having a pre-existing condition if they have a break in health coverage — meaning, they don't maintain health insurance.

House Leadership's plan: You could be charged more than healthy people because of your pre-existing condition if you have a break in coverage.

This plan would establish a continuous-coverage requirement with an unspecified penalty.

Hatch's plan: You could be charged a lot more than healthy people or denied insurance because of your pre-existing condition if you have a break in coverage.

This plan would establish a continuous coverage requirement. If someone didn't have continuous coverage for the past 18 months, they could be charged any premium or denied coverage completely because of their pre-existing conditions.

Price's plan: You could be charged more than healthy people because of your pre-existing condition if you have a break in coverage.

This plan would establish a continuous-coverage requirement. If someone didn't have continuous coverage for the past 18 months, they could be charged up to 150% of the normal premium for two years because of their pre-existing conditions.

Cruz's plan: You could be charged a lot more than healthy people or denied insurance because of your pre-existing condition.

The plan doesn't include a continuous-coverage provision, which would allow insurers could charge more for pre-existing conditions under any circumstances.

Subsidies

The ACA: The ACA subsidizes many individuals' insurance in ACA marketplaces. The subsidies cover individuals' premiums above a certain amount based on their age and income, so their out-of-pocket costs don't change much when premiums increase. The ACA also offers financial assistance for deductibles and other cost-sharing expenses.

What Republicans said they want to do: Republicans want to eliminate this subsidy structure. Instead, many want to give people fixed tax credits based solely on their age, and eliminate cost-sharing assistance completely. Most people currently receiving subsidies would see a sharp decline, especially lower-income young people.

House Leadership's plan: Your subsidy would be small, likely lower than under the ACA.

Subsidies would be based on age and likely smaller, though amounts have not been specified.

Hatch's plan: Your subsidy would be between $0 and $391 per month depending on your exact income, likely lower than under the ACA.

Subsidies would be generally smaller but continue to be based on age and income.

Price's plan: Your subsidy would be $250 per month, likely lower than under the ACA.

Subsidies would be generally smaller and based on age.

Cruz's plan: You would no longer receive a subsidy to help you afford insurance.

The government would cease subsidizing individual's insurance.

Age band

The ACA: Under the ACA, insurers selling health plans to individuals or small businesses may charge older people no more than three times the rate for younger people.

What Republicans said they want to do: Republicans generally want to change the age band so older people could be charged more compared to young people. Experts say this could cause premiums to rise for older people and fall for younger people.

House Leadership's plan: Your premiums could decrease for a given level of coverage.

Insurers could charge older people up to five times more than younger people.

Hatch's plan: Your premiums could decrease for a given level of coverage.

Insurers could charge older people up to five times more than younger people.

Price's plan: Your premiums could decrease for a given level of coverage, a bit more than under House leadership's or Hatch's plan.

This regulation would be eliminated completely.

Cruz's plan: Your premiums could decrease for a given level of coverage, a bit more than under House leadership's or Hatch's plan.

This regulation would be eliminated completely.

Medicaid expansion(This will not affect your coverage)

The ACA: The ACA provides states funding to expand Medicaid, the joint federal-state insurance program for low-income Americans, so that people with somewhat higher incomes could qualify. After a 2012 Supreme Court decision gave states the option whether to participate in this expansion, 31 states plus the District of the Columbia have done so. Under the law, the federal government paid the full cost of newly eligible enrollees through last year, and the federal share for the expansion now phases down for a few years until it reaches 90 percent by 2020. As of 2015, an estimated 11 million people had joined Medicaid under the expansion.

What Republicans said they want to do: Medicaid’s expansion has been a central criticism among many in the GOP, though some Republican-led states are among the 31 that have participated. Republican plans would generally redefine the program by converting it from an entitlement program into block grants to states. Rather than Medicaid covering everyone who is eligible, as it has since its creation in the mid-1960s, a block grant would give each state a finite sum of money and free it from many federal requirements, such as the benefits that must be provided.

House Leadership's plan: States would have the option to receive Medicaid funding as a traditional or modified block grant.

Hatch's plan: Medicaid funds would be allocated using a modified block grant.

Price's plan: Under a separate proposal by Price, Medicaid would turn into a traditional block grant.

Cruz's plan: This plan is silent on the issue of Medicaid expansion, though Cruz has expressed interest in repealing it.

Insurance tax structure(This will not affect your coverage)

Currently: A tax exclusion makes it favorable for you to get a more generous health plan from your employer.

What Republicans said they want to do: Republican plans would reduce that exclusion, meaning it would be less favorable to receive a generous employer-sponsored health care plan.

House Leadership's plan: This plan would reduce the tax exclusion.

Hatch's plan: This plan would reduce the tax exclusion.

Price's plan: This plan would reduce the tax exclusion.

Cruz's plan: This plan would keep the tax exclusion.

The ACA repeal process is well underway: On Thursday, the Senate passed a budget reconciliation that directs committees to begin working on drafting a repeal bill, and allows some parts of the ACA to be repealed with a simple majority vote. The House passed the reconciliation on Friday.

It’ll likely be at least a few weeks before concrete replacement plans are introduced and the consequences for Americans’ insurance become clearer.

More stories

Manufacturing jobs are returning to some places. But these jobs are different.

The United States has lost millions of factory jobs, but in the last few years, some have come back. Can more return?