GOP health-care push up in the air

By Juliet Eilperin, Kelsey Snell and Sean Sullivan

WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans headed for a cliffhanger vote early Friday on their scaled-back plan to overhaul the Affordable Care Act following assurances from House Republican leaders that they were willing to use the proposal as a basis for negotiating a broader rollback of the law.

After a two-hour standoff, House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., issued a measured statement expressing openness to a House-Senate conference that many rank-and-file Republican senators have demanded as a condition for backing the “skinny repeal” legislation that has little substantive appeal to them.

Ryan’s statement was followed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell unveiling the new proposal, a more narrow rewrite of the health law Democrats passed in 2010, followed by a marathon session of votes on health-care amendments that would last overnight and well into Friday morning.

“If moving forward requires a conference committee, that is something the House is willing to do,” said Ryan, who scheduled a pivotal meeting with his House caucus Friday to hash out the Senate’s demands. “The House remains committed to finding a solution and working with our Senate colleagues, but the burden remains on the Senate to demonstrate that it is capable of passing something that keeps our promise.”

Although Ryan eased some tensions, it remained to be seen whether it will be enough to win over a bloc of Senate Republicans who earlier had declared the proposal “terrible.”

“I would like to have the kind of assurances he didn’t provide,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told reporters.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., later indicated he had been sufficiently swayed to support the new plan.

Earlier, McCain, Graham and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., convened a news conference as part of an extraordinary spectacle that highlighted the extent to which Republicans are struggling to reconcile their desire to tear down President Barack Obama’s landmark 2010 law with their inability to unite behind a replacement.

Republicans have been promising for seven years to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) but never had a Republican in the White House to carry out their demands – until President Trump began urging lawmakers via speeches and tweets to send him something to sign.

Translating that pledge into a new law has proven to be embarrassingly difficult for Republicans. First, Ryan had to take an extra six weeks for the House to pass its version of the bill, in early May. Most Republicans agreed that bill was flawed – Trump later called it “mean” for how it would deny insurance to 23 million people – and hoped that the Senate would craft a better bill.

But McConnell’s closed-door negotiations ended in gridlock, leaving him to pull together this “skinny” repeal of the ACA, just to keep alive negotiations with the House to come up with a different plan later this summer.

It would eliminate enforcement of the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that Americans obtain coverage or pay a tax penalty, and suspend for eight years enforcing the mandate that firms employing 50 or more workers provide insurance.

Reading this on your iPhone or iPad? Check out our new Apple News app channel here and click the + at the top of the page to save to your Apple News favorites.

The measure also would eliminate funds for preventive health care provided under the 2010 law and prohibit Medicaid beneficiaries from being reimbursed for Planned Parenthood services for one year. Instead, the federal funding that would have gone to Planned Parenthood would go to community health centers. It would end a 2.3 percent tax on medical device manufacturers for three years.

And it would empower federal officials under an existing waiver program to give states wide latitude in how they allocate their Medicaid funds, potentially pooling that money with other programs such as one that helps lower-income Americans buy private insurance. It also would increase the cap on contribution to tax-exempt health-savings accounts for three years.

McCain, Graham and Johnson – who could collectively defeat the Senate plan – said their support for a skinny repeal must not be used to trigger a hasty House vote before members head home for their August recess.

McCain said Ryan’s statement did not go far enough to ensure that the legislation under consideration by Senate leaders would never pass the House.

Many conservatives in both chambers object to the measure, which would remove key insurance mandates and make a handful of other changes, because they say it wouldn’t go far enough in repealing the ACA.

For instance, the expansion of federal funding to use Medicaid to provide insurance to roughly 14 million Americans is left intact, a major victory for a half dozen Senate Republicans from states that accepted the additional funding. Governors, under the new Senate proposal, would be given more leeway in how they could spend Medicaid funding overall.

While the revamped health-care bill is more modest than earlier versions, it still would have a major effect on the individual insurance market. Eliminating the ACA’s individual mandate could transform the makeup of those buying coverage, causing the premiums for those remaining in the system to rise significantly.

Sara Rosenbaum, a health law and policy professor at George Washington University, said the bill would make “enormous” changes to both private and public insurance.

A preliminary Congressional Budget Office estimate has found that 16 million people would lose coverage and that premiums would rise 20 percent if Republicans enacted a handful of the policies included in the pared-down repeal bill.

Major insurers are warning that the proposal could destabilize the individual insurance market. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association criticized it on Wednesday, and on Thursday the industry’s largest trade group suggested it was unacceptable.

“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,” America’s Health Insurance Plans wrote in a letter to Senate leaders.

Senate Republicans, however, framed the bill as just a vehicle to keep alive their ACA repeal efforts.

“My sense is people aren’t so much focused on the substance as they are this being the lifeline to get to a conference and expanding the bill,” said Sen. Bob Corker,Tenn.

Before Ryan issued his statement, the prospect of an immediate up-or-down vote in the House raised alarms in the Senate. House Republican leaders instructed their members not to leave town for their month-long summer recess just yet.

Key House conservatives said they would not back a skinny repeal in its current form. Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, said that he wouldn’t vote for such a measure and that he didn’t think other conservatives would, either.

Speaking on the Senate floor Thursday, McConnell emphasized that the votes this week would not reverse the ACA even if they culminate in the pas

sage of a bill.

“One phase of that process will end when the Senate concludes voting this week, but it will not signal the end of our work. Not yet,” he said.

In an effort to muster enough votes for a narrow bill, GOP leaders suggested that even some proposals that have died in the Senate could resurface once senators enter negotiations with the House. And some members tried to add a few more provisions to the skinny bill, using their leverage to try to strengthen their negotiating positions in conference.

While McConnell has led the negotiations over health-care legislation for weeks, Trump has sought to drum up support by pressing wavering Republicans.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke called Sens. Dan Sullivan and Lisa Murkowski, both Alaska Republicans, separately Wednesday to warn them that the administration may change its position on several issues, according to people briefed on the conversations, given Murkowski’s vote against proceeding with health-care legislation this week.

Since Trump took office, Interior has indicated that it is open to constructing a road through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge while expanding energy exploration elsewhere in Alaska. But now these policy shifts may be in jeopardy.

Speaking to reporters Thursday, Sullivan said the Trump administration has previously been cooperative on Alaska issues with Murkowski, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

“From my perspective, the sooner we can get back to that kind of cooperation between the administration and the chairman of the ENR Committee, the better for Alaska and the better for the country,” he said. Sullivan said he is not telling Murkowski how to respond.

The Alaska Dispatch News first reported the calls; Interior officials did not respond to a request for comment.

As Republican senators prepared to plow ahead toward a final vote on the skinny repeal plan, the divides that have plagued their effort for months were still present Thursday, leaving open the possibility that new roadblocks could still emerge.

“I think there’s a lot of debate going on,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

sixteen − 2 =