GOP health bill: 23M more uninsured; sick risk higher costs

“Just the opposite occurs” under the GOP bill the House approved this month, said No. 2 Senate Democratic leader Richard Durbin of IL.

“The CBO was wrong when they analyzed Obamacare’s effect on cost and coverage”, Price said of the agency’s report on Obama’s law, “and they are wrong again”.

The waivers make pre-existing conditions protections very messy, if not impossible.

.

“We all understand that the House bill has to be essentially rewritten”, Sen.

So what happens if you’re one of the 50 million-plus people who live in a state that seeks out these waivers, and you become pregnant? That would drive down costs for healthy people but throw sicker people’s insurance status into further question. They’ve passed a bill that, for all intents and purposes, can not be scored by the normal CBO process. So cleaning up that mess will be a top priority.

“Obamacare has turned out to be the Unaffordable Care Act, and that’s not fair to millions of families, from SC to OR”.

“The AHCA is a first step, but not the solution; now the Senate is doing its own work to put forth its own ideas that could work for states like Nevada”, Heller said. Over half of those becoming uninsured, 14 million people, would come from the bill’s $834 billion in cuts to Medicaid, which provides health coverage to poor and disabled people, over 10 years.

As part of those changes, states would be able to change what benefits marketplace insurance plans must offer.

BRUCE: President Trump and Republicans have already declared victory. Additional funding would be provided by pooling state and federal funds from Medicaid and Medicare, as well as any available federal insurance subsidies.

In addition, federal budget deficits would fall by $119 billion between 2017 and 2026 under the revised plan, less than the $150 billion estimate in the original bill.

Medicaid remains the elephant in the room.

.

“This CBO score only confirms that this cruel repeal bill is nothing more than a tax cut for the wealthy paid for with the health and economic security of hard working families”, he said in a statement.

According to a December 2016 report from the Kaiser Family Foundation, 23% of non-elderly Utahns (391,000 people) have a declinable pre-existing condition, which prior to the ACA included anything from chronic back pain, asthma, depression, cancer, or pregnancy (pdf).

Republicans trying to roll back the 2010 health care law are making their case all about premiums, trying to find ways to give states and insurers flexibility to design plans that cost less.

The CBO and the JCT projected premiums for single policyholders under the AHCA (before any tax credits were applied) and compared those with the premiums projected under the PPACA for policies purchased in the nongroup market.

In March, the budget office said the House legislation would increase premiums by an average 15 percent to 20 percent over the next two years, but push premiums 10 percent lower than they’d otherwise be by 2026.

A 64-year-old at 175 percent of the poverty level who lives in a non-waiver state will pay eight times more in net premiums than under the current law. It is now headed to the Republican-held Senate where its future remains uncertain. John Thune (R-SD) have promised that they will rework the tax credits so the burden on older and lower-income people is less pronounced.

The budget office said average premiums in those states would go down because younger and healthier people would buy coverage and the policies would cover less.

Dropped benefits, but lowered premiums?

Democrats quickly highlighted what they see as the outcome of the Republican plan highlighted in the CBO score. Sen.

The AHCA would allow states to opt out of requiring such coverage.

But those tweaks come with their downsides.

As a outcome, the CBO and the JCT expect that the waivers in those states would have another effect: Community-rated premiums would increase over time, and people who are less healthy (including those with pre-existing or newly acquired medical conditions) would ultimately be unable to purchase comprehensive nongroup health insurance at premiums comparable with those under the PPACA.