General News You Want to Talk About

CBO: Senate GOP health-care bill would leave 22 million more people uninsured by 2026

June 26, 2017

Senate Republicans’ bill to erase major parts of the Affordable Care Act would cause an estimated 22 million more Americans to be uninsured by the end of the coming decade — only about a million fewer than similar legislation recently passed by the House, according to the Congressional Budget Office

[. . . ]

According to the 49-page report, the immediate increase in the ranks of the uninsured would be slightly larger than under the House version, with an estimated 15 million fewer Americans likely to have coverage in 2018, compared to 14 million in the House bill.

The Senate’s bill also would reduce federal spending on subsidies for people who buy individual health insurance policies, significantly more than the House’s version, cutting spending for tax credits by $408 billion by 2026.

[. . . ]

Democrats immediately seized on the estimates to criticize Republicans for planning a vote on a bill that would force millions to lose insurance coverage and drive up premiums for seniors.

[. .. ]

. . . The Senate added a provision Monday that would let health plans freeze out customers for six months if they let their coverage lapse.

In different ways, both [the House and the Senate bills] would replace federal subsidies that help the vast majority of consumers buying coverage through ACA marketplaces, instead creating smaller tax credits that would provide greater assistance to younger adults while making insurance more expensive for people from middle age into their 60s.

After two years, both [the House and the Senate bills] also would end subsidies that now help about 7 million lower-income people with ACA health plans afford deductibles and copays.  And both would repeal an array of taxes that have helped to pay for the ACA’s benefits, including levies on health insurers and on wealthy Americans’ investment income.

[. . . ]

The bill would, for instance, leave in place the ACA’s expansion of Medicaid through 2020. After that, it would begin a three-year phaseout of the federal money that under the ACA has paid almost the entire cost of adding 11 million Americans to the program’s rolls in 31 states.

That means the extra funding wouldn’t disappear until the mid-2020s.

Over the weekend, the senior Democrat on the Senate subcommittee that oversees the CBO said in a tweet that he had asked the budget office to estimate the Senate bill’s effect on insurance coverage over a longer time horizon. “GOP is hiding the worst Medicaid cuts in years 11, 12, 13 and hoping CBO stays quiet,” wrote Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.

Washington Post wrote:

GOP health-care debate turns to stark question: help vulnerable Americans, or help the rich?

June 29, 2017

The Republican debate over how to overhaul the Affordable Care Act turned sharply Thursday to a divisive and ideological question: How much money should the Senate health-care bill spend on protecting vulnerable Americans, and how much on providing tax relief to the wealthy?

[. . . ]

[There was] a new Congressional Budget Office estimate Thursday finding that the Republican plan to change how Medicaid payments are calculated starting in 2025 would lead to significantly deeper reductions in its second decade than at the end of the first decade.

By 2036, the new analysis says, the government would spend 35 percent less on Medicaid than under the current law, compared with a 26 percent decrease in the first decade.

[. . . ]


The updated Medicaid estimate from the CBO, which shows how spending would shrink over the next 20 years, underscored the extent to which McConnell’s plan would squeeze the longstanding public insurance program.


The current draft already cuts $772 billion over 10 years from Medicaid, which covers poor Americans as well as the elderly, children and pregnant women.

With senators leaving town Thursday for a 10-day break over the July 4th holiday, Republicans are not likely to announce any new deal or unveil full legislation until after their return next month. That would give time for the CBO to analyze the new proposals and for senators to hear from constituents, setting up a few more days of haggling when they return July 10 and a vote possible the week after that.

** URGENT!! TIME SENSITIVE **
** HOUSE WILL VOTE ON THURSDAY 6/29 **
** CALL YOUR REPS: HOUSE TO VOTE ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION BILLS **


Following in the Senate’s footsteps, the House is now bypassing legislative procedure norms to push partisan bills through Congress faster. The bill was recently introduced on 6/22 with no time for amendments.

‘The House will vote THIS THURSDAY on two bills aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration, putting one of President Donald Trump’s signature issues in the spotlight before Congress adjourns for its Fourth of July recess.


#1. H.R. 3003 - NO SANCTUARY FOR CRIMINALS ACT, which would withhold federal law enforcement grants from cities & states that have declared themselves sanctuaries for unauthorized immigrants by not assisting the federal government in enforcing immigration law. As an example, ICE detainers would now be legally honored versus the current policy of only honoring a judicial warrant. Sanctuary jurisdictions would be exposed to lawsuits filed by the victims of crimes committed by unauthorized immigrants after the jurisdiction released them from custody.


#2. H.R. 3004 - KATE’S LAW, which has been a part of Trump’s immigration policy platform since his campaign. Kate’s Law would allow for enhancement of criminal sentences for unauthorized immigrants who repeatedly re-enter the U.S. Punishments would be progressively harsher for unauthorized immigrants who have been convicted of misdemeanors or felonies, based on the severity of their offense.


How to Find Your House Rep

1. Go to one of these links:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/
or
https://www.contactingcongress.org/

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members

2. Reisistbot app: Use your texting service and type the number '50409' Type 'Resist' in the text line. The app will ask you a series of questions to determine your members of Congress. It will then prompt you for your message, which will be faxed. Very easy and user friendly!

**



SCRIPT:
Hi, my name is xxx, a constituent in zip code xxx.

I’m urging House member xxx to vote NO on the 2 immigration House bills, HR 3003 No Sanctuary for Criminals Act and HR 3004 Kate’s Law.

These are related to Trump administrations’ crackdown on illegal immigration.


HR 3003 is taking aim at Sanctuary cities themselves, overriding their local detention policies and barring them from receiving Homeland Security and Justice Dept. grants, if they don’t comply.


HR3004 makes it more difficult for defendants to challenge wrongful prior removals and makes no exceptions for asylum seekers.

The US is a nation of immigrants and studies show immigrants are far less likely to commit crimes than those born in the US.

Together these bills would increase prison population as well as the fear level within our communities. Please urge the Congress member xxx to vote NO and much gratitude for the support!

Washington Post wrote:

GOP health-care debate turns to stark question: help vulnerable Americans, or help the rich?

June 29, 2017

The Republican debate over how to overhaul the Affordable Care Act turned sharply Thursday to a divisive and ideological question: How much money should the Senate health-care bill spend on protecting vulnerable Americans, and how much on providing tax relief to the wealthy?

[. . . ]

[There was] a new Congressional Budget Office estimate Thursday finding that the Republican plan to change how Medicaid payments are calculated starting in 2025 would lead to significantly deeper reductions in its second decade than at the end of the first decade.

By 2036, the new analysis says, the government would spend 35 percent less on Medicaid than under the current law, compared with a 26 percent decrease in the first decade.

[. . . ]


The updated Medicaid estimate from the CBO, which shows how spending would shrink over the next 20 years, underscored the extent to which McConnell’s plan would squeeze the longstanding public insurance program.


The current draft already cuts $772 billion over 10 years from Medicaid, which covers poor Americans as well as the elderly, children and pregnant women.

With senators leaving town Thursday for a 10-day break over the July 4th holiday, Republicans are not likely to announce any new deal or unveil full legislation until after their return next month. That would give time for the CBO to analyze the new proposals and for senators to hear from constituents, setting up a few more days of haggling when they return July 10 and a vote possible the week after that.

VOX wrote:
I shared my toddler's hospital bill on Twitter. First came supporters -- then death threats

July 7, 2017




. . . My son, Ethan, was born with heterotaxy syndrome, a rare condition that can cause any of the internal organs to be malformed, misplaced, multiplied, or missing altogether. Ethan’s insides are a math all their own: two left lungs, five spleens, and nine congenital heart defects. It was his heart that had brought him to the operating room to have his chest opened four times in his short life, and the bill I was holding was for the latest of these surgeries.

I snapped a picture of the bill and opened Twitter on my phone, absentmindedly imagining that someone might be interested in knowing why we medical mamas care so much about laws that ensure our access to affordable health care, why Obamacare has been a lifeline to our children, banning lifetime limits and ensuring that no one would deny them coverage simply because they’d been born with preexisting conditions like heterotaxy. Maybe someone would listen when I explained how terrified I was now that these protections were under siege due to the Trumpcare bill that stood before the Senate.

The tweets came easily; I’ve always been an external processor. I told our story the same way I always do, softening the hard edges of Ethan’s struggle with photos of the tender-hearted little boy who’s fought so hard to make it this far. I wrote about his medical team, about the surgeries and procedures and medications that he will rely on for the rest of his life, and also I wrote about his love for sticks and fireflies and his mama. I begged the people in power to look him in his big brown eyes and tell him to his face that his life was too expensive to be worth saving.

[. . . ]

At first, the comments were almost entirely supportive. . . the vast majority of people were either in shock at just how high the lines on the bill had added up or else they were staunchly on our side. People were ready to fight for a kid they’d never met, and they were sharing their stories with me in the hopes that I’d fight for their children too.

But as more and more people saw the original tweet, the tide seemed to shift . . . The attacks became increasingly personal and increasingly violent. Strangers were telling me it would have been cheaper to make a new kid, as if anyone in the history of the world could ever replace this bright light of mine, the boy who loves animals and can’t keep himself from kissing babies and always wants to sleep with one arm wrapped around my neck.

[. . .  ]

And then a message from another family of a medically fragile child showed up in my inbox. It wasn’t the first, by any means, but this one was special. It was a mother who had never gotten a proper diagnosis for her son, but after reading our story and doing some research, she’d connected the dots; her son has heterotaxy. She finally had a name for the specter that stalked him, and with that, she could find a community and support as she advocated for her child.

. . . My focus narrowed back to what was important: my son, and the kids like him all across the country, the ones quietly living out their stories every single day with no fanfare and no media attention.

And now the whole world has heard. Now they know that heterotaxy can mean hospitals and surgeries and a lifelong fight, but if another mama somewhere down the road stumbles out of that appointment, broken-hearted and bleary-eyed, maybe she’ll remember the time she saw a little boy named Ethan blowing raspberries on her TV. Maybe she’ll Google heterotaxy and, sandwiched between the black-and-white statistics, she’ll find a boy who sleeps with a stuffed moose (and 15 other animals) and who, thanks to one rather well-known hospital bill, hikes through the woods on sturdy legs, a whole heart instead of the half he was born with beating bravely beneath the scar running the length of this chest.

And the other mamas? The ones who aren’t like me, who haven’t become the “other people,” the ones who bad things happen to? I hope they heard me when I said I want to fight for something better for all of us, for those of us whose children rely on the protections afforded by the current laws and for those of us who are struggling under the system as it stands now.

Some of those people will have heard our story and imagined themselves in our place, maybe for the first time. They will have realized that tragedy does not discriminate, that anyone could be just one diagnosis or one accident away from medical bankruptcy, and that I’m speaking out because I care about my kids but I care about yours too. Maybe this will be the thing that finally gets us to join hands across the political divide and aim our passion away from strangers on the internet and toward the people who are responsible for the laws that affect us all.

And that’s priceless.

CNN wrote:
Children will pay cruel price for GOP health bill

By Paul Viviano

June 30, 2017

Editor's Note:  Paul Viviano is the president and chief executive officer of the Children's Hospital Los Angeles. The views expressed in this commentary are his own.

Generosity, kindness and compassion are principles we ought to embrace, both as Americans and as human beings . . .

But, today -- at least in our political world -- compassion seems to be something people must earn. Nothing demonstrates this more vividly than the "Better Care Reconciliation Act" or BCRA. If Senators pass the Republican alternative to the Affordable Care Act, the most vulnerable among us -- our children -- will not receive "better care." In many cases, they will receive no care at all; in some cases, they could die.

Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, a doctor from Louisiana, said the Senate version of the health bill needs to pass "the Jimmy Kimmel test"-- that no family should be denied medical care, emergency or otherwise, because they can't afford it. The bill does not do that, at least not entirely.

. . . Now is the time to start from scratch with Republicans and Democrats coming together to find a solution that protects our nation's youth and does not threaten Medicaid coverage for the more than 30 million children and their families currently enrolled.

If you have forgotten why Jimmy Kimmel's story touched so many lives, here is a refresher. Earlier this year, the late-night talk show host came to Children's Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA) when his newborn son needed emergency open-heart surgery. A few days after the successful procedure, Kimmel shared his heartfelt story in front of a national audience, sounding less like a comedian in a monologue and more like a relieved, exhausted and grateful parent.

He ended with a direct appeal to those considering overhauling the nation's health care laws: "If your baby is going to die and it doesn't have to, it shouldn't matter how much money you make," Kimmel said.

Congress needs to remember that children represent nearly half of all Medicaid beneficiaries -- and will be one of the groups hardest hit by the BCRA. Challenge your colleagues to do better: Don't accept a 142-page bill that only references children eight times. (Six of the references are merely legal definitions). Put children first.

The only direct consideration for children in the bill is a focus on blind and disabled youth. While this is a population deserving of coverage, it neglects more than 95% of children in Medicaid and in the states-administered Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides low-cost health coverage to children in families that earn too much for Medicaid and who also face a loss or reduction of coverage.

That's 19 out of 20 needy children now being put at risk as a result of the proposed law.

Every day at CHLA, we witness how access to clinically excellent, compassionate care for all children results in recovery and successful management of the most complicated health conditions that children endure. Having health care coverage makes a huge, tangible difference.

In contrast, BCRA was drafted by only a few members of the US Senate, in a surprisingly closed-door manner, with little or no input from stakeholders closest to the beneficiaries of the nation's current health care system -- doctors, nurses, hospital leaders, insurance carriers, the pharmaceutical industry and, most importantly, patients and families.

According to Mathematica Policy Research, a non-partisan, academic think tank, uninsured children are 70% less likely to get routine or emergency care. They also are less likely to get treatment for chronic conditions such as diabetes and asthma. Hospitalized, uninsured children are at greater risk of dying than children with insurance. And children with limited access to treatment also miss more days of school -- impacting their path to productive adulthood -- and affecting the future of the American economy.

Children like Cristian Mendoza, survived leukemia, in part, because he was covered by Medi-Cal, California's version of Medicaid. Mendoza now worries about the uncertainty of what kind of coverage might be available to him when he transitions to adult care and pursues his career dream to fight childhood cancer.

"I want to become a pediatric oncologist, and that's something that's very expensive to do," says Cristian, who wonders if he would be able to afford private insurance if he is ineligible for Medi-Cal.

"As a cancer survivor, I have faced and may continue to face longer-term effects on my health, but the idea of not having access to the specialist that I require like my oncologist and cardiologist is very worrisome to not only myself, but also to my friends who are also cancer survivors."

And, yes, conservatives would argue the BCRA shrinks an expensive government entitlement (Medicaid), but it also provides substantial tax breaks to America's wealthiest citizens with little consideration to the devastating effects this could have on children's health.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the long-term burden of these cuts falls disproportionately on the poorest and least healthy members of our society, who will face higher deductibles and a lower chance of coverage. This includes children with medically complex diseases like diabetes, cystic fibrosis, heart disease and cancer.

How is this generous, kind or compassionate?

At CHLA, we believe Medicaid funding for children's health care must be maintained, not cut, capped or block-granted.

[. . . ]

We should not and cannot force millions of families to choose between obtaining health care when they are sick or putting food on the table. We urge the Senate to reject this bill and unite to develop a plan that does not imperil child health. Those who vote yes put more than 30 million children at risk for poorer health outcomes and diminish their ability to live full and prosperous lives. There is no better investment of time or money than making sure any plan voted on keeps kids covered.

We can't keep health care from being complicated, but we can certainly stop it from being heartless. Let's show just how much generosity, kindness and compassion America has by preserving Medicaid coverage for children.

That's the true Jimmy Kimmel test.

Washington Post wrote:
The new GOP health-care plan is still an abomination

By Paul Waldman (Opinion)

July 13, 2017

The big picture is that this bill is an absolute nightmare that would cause a spectacular amount of human suffering — and yes, even deaths — if it were to pass. It would mean fewer people with coverage, more people having trouble affording coverage, less protection and less security.


Let’s go through the major provisions in the bill:

--The bill would utterly eviscerate Medicaid, which is relied on by tens of millions of poor, elderly and disabled Americans. It would roll back the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid and cut hundreds of billions of dollars from the program. It would also transform the program into a block grant, for the first time allowing states to kick enrollees off their coverage and cut back benefits.

--The bill allows insurers to sell bare-bones plans that go by the name “insurance” but cover very little, as long as they also offer a plan that meets the “essential health benefits” requirement of the ACA. This in effect sets up two pools, one containing young and healthy people, and one containing people who are older or who have more serious health needs. The insurance industry, along with many analysts, predict that this could produce a death spiral of skyrocketing costs for those with preexisting conditions.

--The bill retains the ACA’s 3.9 percent tax on investment income and 0.9 percent payroll tax for wealthier Americans.

--It eliminates the ACA’s cost-sharing subsidies after two years, but creates a fund with $182 billion (over 10 years) for states to use to help patients with out-of-pocket costs and those with high medical expenses.

--It allows people with tax-preferred Health Savings Accounts to use their HSAs to pay premiums, which they are currently not allowed to do. Note that HSAs overwhelmingly benefit wealthier people, because they’re the ones with spare money they can put into them to gain the tax benefits.

--Though it slashes the Medicaid through which many opioid addicts now receive treatment, it sets aside $45 billion to combat opioid addiction.

--It has a new provision allowing people to use tax credits to buy catastrophic plans with extremely high deductibles that cover no routine care.

--It replaces the ACA’s subsidies with stingier tax credits based on what high-deductible plans cost and allows insurers to charge older people more than they can now.

--As before, it eliminates the individual and employer mandates, bars tax credits from being used for any insurance plan that covers abortion, and prohibits women on Medicaid from getting any treatment at Planned Parenthood facilities.

If your Republican senator votes for this plan, he or she is supporting gutting Medicaid, taking away health coverage from at least 20 million Americans and potentially the end of real protections for those with preexisting conditions, higher deductibles, less help for those with modest incomes, potentially the return of lifetime limits on coverage (outlawed by the ACA), which turn a health-care challenge into a financial calamity, and an attack on women’s health choices.

In short, this bill is an abomination. No one should be able to get away with saying, “Well, it’s a little better than it was before.” All that does is obscure how spectacularly cruel it is.

The New York Times wrote:
Senate Republicans Unveil New Health Bill but Divisions Remain

July 13, 2017

. . . The bill would allow insurers, under certain conditions, to offer health plans that did not comply with standards in the Affordable Care Act. Under that law, insurers sell regulated health plans through a public insurance exchange in each state.

But health care experts worried that such a change would send healthy consumers to low-cost, basic health plans, leaving sick and older consumers to buy more comprehensive health policies at much higher prices. To compensate, Republican leaders added billions of dollars to try to offset rising premiums.

[. . . ]

But the revised bill is broadly similar to the earlier measure that Senate leaders hoped to vote on before the Fourth of July recess, though the new version includes some additional provisions meant to entice reluctant Republican senators with varying policy concerns.

“It appears that little has changed at the core of the bill,” the Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer of New York, said on the Senate floor. “The Republican Trumpcare bill still slashes Medicaid. The cuts are every bit as draconian as they were in the previous version — a devastating blow to rural hospitals, to Americans in nursing homes, to those struggling with opioid addiction and so many more.”

Like the previous bill, it would end the requirement that most Americans have health coverage, and it would make deep cuts to Medicaid, capping payments to states and rolling back its expansion under the Affordable Care Act. Though some Republican senators expressed concern about how the previous bill would affect Medicaid, Senate leaders stuck with the same approach in the new version.

[. . . ]

Mr. McConnell has said he intends to take up the revised bill next week, although it is unclear if he would try to move ahead if he did not know for sure whether he had the votes to begin debate — or to ultimately pass the bill.

The New York Times wrote:
Health Care Overhaul Collapses as Two Republican Senators Defect

July 17, 2017

WASHINGTON — Two more Republican senators declared on Monday night that they would oppose the Senate Republican bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act, killing, for now, a seven-year-old promise to overturn President Barack Obama’s signature domestic achievement.

The announcement by the senators, Mike Lee of Utah and Jerry Moran of Kansas, left their leaders at least two votes short of the number needed to begin debate on their bill to dismantle the health law. Two other Republican senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Susan Collins of Maine, had already said they would not support a procedural step to begin debate.

[ . . . ]

Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, conceded Monday night that “the effort to repeal and immediately replace the failure of Obamacare will not be successful.” He outlined plans to vote now on a measure to repeal the Affordable Care Act, with it taking effect later. That has almost no chance to pass, however, since it could leave millions without insurance and leave insurance markets in turmoil.

But President Trump was not ready to give up. He immediately took to Twitter to say: “Republicans should just REPEAL failing ObamaCare now & work on a new Healthcare Plan that will start from a clean slate. Dems will join in!”

[. . . ]

Already, Mr. McConnell was trying to sell legislation that was being assailed from many directions. On Friday, the health insurance lobby, which had been largely silent during the fight, came off the sidelines to blast as “unworkable” a key provision allowing the sale of low-cost, stripped-down health plans, saying it would increase premiums and undermine protections for people with pre-existing medical conditions.

[. . . ]

The pressure on Mr. Moran at home showed no sign of relenting. The Kansas Hospital Association said last week that the revised Senate bill “comes up short, particularly for our most vulnerable patients.”

Think Progress wrote:

Republican senator confronted by his daughters' pediatrician over health care bill

July 6, 2017

Last month, as the Senate GOP was crafting its health care bill in secret, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS) faced angry constituents at a town hall when he said he would vote for an Obamacare replacement, even if there were no public hearings.

On Thursday, he told constituents in his rural Kansas home county the same thing. But Moran — one of just three Republican senators holding a town hall this recess — received a better reception this time because of his decision to come out against the Republican health care bill last week, after the vote was delayed.

[. . . ]

One constituent who spoke out was Bob Cox, Moran’s daughters’ pediatrician, who joked that he knew the senator’s daughters before he met Moran.

“The federal government is charged with the protection of its citizens from external threat,” Cox said. “The U.S. military provides this service, and it’s funded appropriately. We as a culture have not accepted the responsibility to protect citizens from internal threat, disease and injury.”

Los Angeles Times wrote:
McConnell's latest Obamacare repeal plan also collapsing amid more Republican defections

July 18, 2017

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's latest bid to salvage the GOP campaign to roll back the Affordable Care Act collapsed Tuesday as centrist Republicans balked at legislation to repeal the healthcare law now and develop an alternative later.

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski became the third GOP lawmaker to reject McConnell's new strategy, making it impossible for Senate Republicans to bring up the plan.


Earlier Tuesday, Maine Sen. Susan Collins and West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, said they would not back the "repeal and delay" approach.


“I cannot vote to repeal Obamacare without a replacement plan that addresses my concerns and the needs of West Virginians,” Capito said in a statement.


McConnell on Monday night floated the plan to vote for legislation repealing most of Obamacare now with a plan to develop an alternative over the next two years.

The Washington Post wrote:
Senate Repulbicans' effort to 'repeal and replace' Obamacare all but collapses

July 18, 2018

Republicans last voted on repeal in 2015. Every current GOP senator who was then in the Senate voted for it, except Collins. But it was a meaningless protest vote; Obama was president, and he quickly vetoed it. With Trump in the White House, a vote to repeal the law without replacing it could have far-reaching consequences.

Abolishing Obamacare’s central pillars — such as the mandate that taxpayers buy coverage; federal subsidies for many consumers’ premiums; and Medicaid coverage for roughly 11 million Americans — without replacing them could wreak havoc in the insurance market. In January, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that premiums in the individual insurance market would rise by as much as 25 percent next year and would roughly double by 2026.

The CBO said repeal would cause the number of uninsured people to rise by 18 million next year and by 32 million by 2026.

[. . . ]

While the path forward remained uncertain, consumers and health industry players continued to reach out to lawmakers. On Monday, two members of the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network journeyed from West Virginia, and one of them spoke with a Capito aide about an 18-month-old girl who had developed cancer while her mother was working part-time at a bank. After the woman lost her job, both she and the little girl went on Medicaid, allowing the child to receive treatment.

“A lot of times people assume anyone on Medicaid is too lazy to work,” the child’s grandmother Lora Wilkerson told the aide, handing her a photo of the girl — bald, with a teddy bear in her arms.


“Can you please ask Ms. Capito to look at this picture when she casts her vote?” Wilkerson said.


The aide, according to Capito’s spokeswoman, made sure the senator saw it.

The New York Times wrote:
'Let Obamacare Fail,' Trump Says as G.O.P. Health Bill Collapses

July 18, 2017

Mr. Trump declared that his plan was now to “let Obamacare fail,” and suggested that Democrats would then seek out Republicans to work together on a bill to bury the Affordable Care Act. If he is determined to make good on that pledge, he has plenty of levers to pull, from declining to reimburse insurance companies for reducing low-income customers’ out-of-pocket costs to failing to enforce the mandate that most Americans have health coverage.

“It’ll be a lot easier,” Mr. Trump said at the White House, adding: “We’re not going to own it. I’m not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it. We’ll let Obamacare fail, and then the Democrats are going to come to us.”

[. . . ]

Mr. Trump has considerable leverage to gum up the works of the Affordable Care Act. He could throw insurance markets into a tailspin at any time by cutting off the subsidy payments to insurers, as he has threatened to do. He could further destabilize the markets by not enforcing the mandate that most Americans have health insurance.

And he could cancel advertising and other efforts to encourage enrollment under the Affordable Care Act when the annual sign-up period begins in November. A barrage of negative statements from the administration could project an official view that the health law is collapsing, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The lack of certainty over the subsidy payments, which go toward reducing out-of-pocket costs for low-income people, has been a major concern for insurers. The companies say premiums will be significantly higher without the funding, and some companies that have submitted rates to sell insurance in the market next year could decide to pull out.

Business Insider wrote:
The CBO just delivered a devastating score for the GOP's Plan B on healthcare

July 19, 2017

According to the CBO, the bill — the Obamacare Repeal Reconciliation Act (ORRA) [McConnell's "repeal now and replace later" bill] — would leave 17 million more Americans without healthcare insurance in 2018 compared to the current system. That would ramp up to 27 million more uninsured by 2020 and 32 million more uninsured by 2026.


The numbers were similar to the projections the last time Republicans advanced the legislation in 2015.

Under the ORRA, repeal would not kick in until 2020 but would then go into effect immediately, rather than phasing out Obamacare's provisions. The CBO score does not take into account any replacement that may be passed during that two-year period.

According to the CBO, the impact on premiums would be similarly devastating.


"Average premiums in the non-group market (for individual policies purchased through the marketplaces or directly from insurers) would increase by roughly 25% — relative to projections under current law — in 2018," said the report. "The increase would reach about 50% in 2020, and premiums would about double [to 100%] by 2026."

The bill would also decrease the federal deficit by $473 billion by 2026, while cutting Medicaid spending by $842 billion in that same timeframe.

CNN wrote:
Republican senators poised to vote today on health care. What you need to know

July 25, 2017

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has the Senate set to vote Tuesday on the first major test for the GOP effort to repeal and replace Obamacare. It's a vote on the motion to proceed to debate and amendments on the House-passed health care bill (i.e. the AHCA.)

McConnell needs 50 out of the 52 Senate Republicans to support him

NY Times wrote:
Health Care Vote: Senate Rejects Repeal Without Replace

June 26, 2017

• The Senate on Wednesday afternoon rejected a proposal to repeal major parts of the Affordable Care Act without providing a replacement. Follow the live vote tracker to see how each senator voted.

• President Trump lashed out Wednesday morning at Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, one of two Republicans who voted on Tuesday against beginning debate on repealing the health law.

• Blue Cross Blue Shield warns senators against repealing the mandate that almost everyone have insurance without something to take its place.

The Senate on Wednesday rejected a measure that would have repealed major parts of the Affordable Care Act but would not have provided a replacement, signaling that the “clean repeal” bill that conservatives have embraced cannot get through Congress.

The vote, 45-55, underscored the bind that Republican leaders have found themselves in. Seven Republicans voted against the measure — Senators Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Susan Collins of Maine, Dean Heller of Nevada, John McCain of Arizona, Rob Portman of Ohio, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — showing that repealing the health law without an immediate replacement lacks crucial support among Republicans.

But a more comprehensive measure that would have repealed major parts of the law with a ready replacement also came up short on Tuesday night.

The Washington Post wrote:
GOP momentum grows for more modest plan to overhaul Obamacare

July 26, 2017

Senate Democrats announced late Wednesday afternoon that a preliminary CBO estimate found that 16 million people would lose coverage if Republicans enacted a handful of the policies floated for the pared-down repeal bill. The analysis was based on the assumption that the GOP wants to repeal the individual and employer mandates, end a 2.3 percent tax on medical device manufacturers, ban funding for Planned Parenthood and repeal prevention health funds.

In a sign of how the prospect of a spike in the uninsured rate continues to worry governors, a bipartisan group of 10 of them — including Republicans Brian Sandoval of Nevada and John Kasich of Ohio — urged Senate leaders late Wednesday to work together with governors in developing a new plan and to reject a skinny repeal, which they said “is expected to accelerate health plans leaving the individual market, increase premiums, and result in fewer Americans having access to insurance.”

[. . . ]

Meanwhile, the ongoing uncertainty on Capitol Hill sent jitters through the insurance industry.

Joseph R. Swedish, the chief executive of Anthem — the nation’s second-largest health insurer — said on a conference call to review second-quarter earnings that the company is reassessing its participation in ACA marketplaces for next year. Anthem has decided to largely withdraw from the markets in three of the 14 states it participates in, and he said it may stop participating elsewhere unless the markets seem stable.

He cited, in particular, the question of whether Congress and the Trump administration will continue “cost-sharing subsidies” that the ACA provides insurers to help lower-income customers — about 7 million this year — afford deductibles and other out-of-pocket expenses.

[. . . ]

The Blue Cross Blue Shield Association warned that even the skinny repeal Republicans now envision could undermine the individual insurance market because it would eliminate the requirement that Americans buy insurance or pay a tax penalty. The measure, which remains subject to negotiation, also would probably eliminate the ACA’s requirement that employers with 50 workers or more provide health coverage, and a medical device tax that generates $19.6 billion in federal revenue over a decade.

[. . . ]

A CBO estimate in December projected that repealing the ACA’s individual mandate would leave 15 million Americans uninsured most years and prompt premiums to rise by 20 percent.

The Washington Post wrote:
Senate GOP leaders work to round up votes for more modest health-care overhaul

July 27, 2017

In an email to Republican senators, McConnell said the proposal — dubbed “skinny repeal” — would eliminate the law’s requirement that Americans obtain coverage or pay a tax penalty, and suspend the mandate that firms employing 50 or more workers provide insurance for at least five years. It also would eliminate funds for preventive health care provided under the 2010 law and transfer the funds Planned Parenthood would receive for one year to community health centers. Finally, the measure would provides states more flexibility in how they administer their Medicaid programs under the law’s 1332 waiver program.

While the revamped health measure is more modest than earlier versions of the bill, it would still have a major impact on the individual insurance market. Eliminating the ACA’s individual mandate could change the makeup of those buying insurance, and cause the premiums of those remaining in the system to rise significantly.

[. . . ]

Still, there was deep uncertainty over whether such a measure would be subject to further negotiation or simply face an up-or-down vote in the House.

[. . . ]

President Trump exhorted Republicans on Twitter on Wednesday morning to fall in line and back some sort of proposal to scale back the law known as Obamacare.

[. .  . ]

Senate Democrats announced late Wednesday afternoon that a preliminary CBO estimate found that 16 million people would lose coverage and that premiums would rise 20 percent if Republicans enacted a handful of the policies floated for the pared-down repeal bill. The analysis was based on the assumption that the GOP wants to repeal the individual and employer mandates, end a 2.3 percent tax on medical device manufacturers, ban funding for Planned Parenthood and repeal funds for preventive health care.

In a sign of how the prospect of a spike in the uninsured rate continues to worry governors, a bipartisan group of 10 of them — including Republicans Brian Sandoval of Nevada and John Kasich of Ohio — urged Senate leaders late Wednesday to work together with governors in developing a new plan and to reject a skinny repeal, which they said “is expected to accelerate health plans leaving the individual market, increase premiums, and result in fewer Americans having access to insurance.”

New York Times wrote:
Senate Health Care Vote: Disarray Over narrow Repeal Measure

July 27, 2017

Senators Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John McCain of Arizona, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin declared Thursday evening that they would not vote for a slimmed-down partial repeal of the Affordable Care Act without ironclad guarantees that the House will negotiate a comprehensive measure.

The senators were unsparing in their criticism of the so-called skinny repeal, saying it would crater the health insurance market and send premiums skyward.

“The skinny bill as policy is a disaster,” Mr. Graham said. “The skinny bill as a replacement for Obamacare is a fraud.”

[. . . ]

Insurers come off sidelines with warning

The health insurance lobby, America’s Health Insurance Plans, came off the sidelines on Thursday to warn Senate leaders against repealing the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that most Americans have insurance without approving some mechanism to pressure people to maintain their coverage.

“We would oppose an approach that eliminates the individual coverage requirement, does not offer continuous coverage solutions, and does not include measures to immediately stabilize the individual market,” the group wrote.

. . . On Wednesday, the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, a narrower insurance lobby, weighed in with a similar warning.

[. . . ]

The American Medical Association piles on.

The American Medical Association, by far the largest physicians’ advocacy group, has stood firmly against each of the bills to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Now the A.M.A. has come out against the “skinny repeal.”

“There has been considerable speculation regarding a so-called ‘skinny package’ that would primarily eliminate penalties related to the individual and employer mandates and provide tax cuts to device manufactures and the health insurance industry. Eliminating the mandate to obtain coverage only exacerbates the affordability problem that critics say they want to address. Instead, it leads to adverse selection that would increase premiums and destabilize the individual market.

“We again urge the Senate to engage in a bipartisan process – through regular order – to address the shortcomings of the Affordable Care Act and achieve the goal of providing access to quality, affordable health care coverage to more Americans.”

Oh, and so does AARP.

Protesters make their voices known.

Across the Capitol on Thursday, supporters of the Affordable Care Act tried to reach out to senators, sometimes through mass protests, sometimes through their stories.

 [. . . ]

“The message was: we are not backing down,” Nora Franco, campaign organizer at Planned Parenthood, said in the Capitol. She added, “Now is not the time to throw in the towel. Now is the time to literally be harassing your senators.”