Skip to main content
Monthly Archives

October 2018

Protect Our Care Applauds Senate Democrats’ Efforts to Eliminate Extreme and Surprise Medical Bills

New Legislation Introduced by Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan Would Ease Out-of-Pocket Costs

Washington, DC – Today, Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) introduced legislation to combat high out-of-pocket health care costs for uninsured patients and for patients in the individual health insurance market. U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan (D-NH) also announced that she will introduce companion legislation to help eliminate a related problem: surprise medical bills, where patients receive massive, unexpected medical bills, often for receiving care that they didn’t realize was considered out-of-network.

Said Leslie Dach, chair of Protect Our Care, in response to the legislation:

“We hear about it all the time – egregious surprise medical bills and astronomical out-of-network charges that bankrupt families – and it’s unacceptable. Insurance companies and providers could fix this, but they won’t. Any lawmaker who says they are serious about reducing health care costs for Americans should get behind these commonsense bills.”

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND

Shaheen’s Reducing Costs for Out-of-Network Services Act of 2018 would cap the amount that hospitals and physicians could charge uninsured patients and out-of-network patients who have individual market coverage. These charge caps would also improve the ability of individual market health insurers to reduce premiums by lowering costs for in-network hospital and physician services. This legislation provides patients in the individual insurance market with similar protections to safeguards that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries have already benefitted from for years.

Hassan’s No More Surprise Medical Bills Act of 2018 would help eliminate surprise medical bills for people with employer-sponsored health plans. The bill will protect patients with medical emergencies from surprise billing by prohibiting hospitals and providers from charging more than the in-network amount. The bill also protects patients in non-emergency situations from surprise bills by requiring hospitals and providers to notify patients if services will be out-of-network and get their consent. Without proper notification and consent, a provider can only charge a patient the in-network amount.

Shaheen’s legislation protects patients who are uninsured or in the individual health insurance market, while Hassan’s legislation protects patients with employer-sponsored health plans.  

Mayor Pete Buttigieg, South Bend Leaders Stand Up to Say, “It’s Time to End the Republican War on Health Care”

Local Health Care Advocates Join Protect Our Care to Call for an End to GOP Attacks on Hoosiers’ Health Care

Mayor Pete Buttigieg speaks in front of Care Force One.

SOUTH BEND, INDIANA- This afternoon, Protect Our Care’s nationwide bus tour arrived in South Bend to call attention to the ongoing Republican war on health care care. Headlined by Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Mel Hall, the event highlighted the actions Republicans are taking to harm Hoosiers’ care and called on Attorney General Curtis Hill to work instead to protect our care.

“This isn’t about politics, this is about our lives, our livelihoods, and our well being,” said Mayor Pete Buttigieg. “This is our opportunity to raise our voices and say enough is enough when it comes to baseless attempts to take away the protection of our health care.”

Mayor Buttigieg’s comments were echoed by cancer survivor Laura Packard and Mel Hall.

“I’m alive because of the Affordable Care Act,” said Packard. “I’m a stage four cancer survivor and I’m on this tour to defend our attacks against the GOP. President Trump may have blocked me on Twitter, but he can’t stop me and the American people from fighting to protect our care.”

“This is not a regional issue, this is not a South Bend issue, this is a people issue,” said Hall. “We stand firmly with the folks who have a pre-existing condition. We stand firmly for health care. We can make a difference. This is the issue of our time.”

Mayor Buttigieg, Packard, and Hall, who praised Sen. Joe Donnelly for his consistent championing of Hoosiers’ health care, were joined by Jane Phillips, a former oncology nurse who saw firsthand what it was like for patients before the Affordable Care Act; Nicole MacLaughlin and Jennica Liberatore, who discussed their work with Northern Indiana Community Coalition for Health Care; and  Sheena Shah of Doctors for America, who spoke about her work in medicine and the importance of protecting those with pre-existing conditions.

At today’s event, South Bend residents, health care advocates, elected officials, and members of Protect Our Care detailed the numbers ways in which Republicans have attacked health care, and how these actions have cut coverage and increased costs for Hoosiers. Because of the Republican

  • Hoosiers will see their premiums rise by an average of 5.7 percent next year. It’s expected that 40 year old Hoosiers would face paying an extra $700 for marketplace coverage in 2019 because of sabotage of the ACA.
  • Indiana expanded Medicaid under the ACA and the roughly 400,000 Hoosiers who have gained coverage because of this program would find their care at risk if the law were repealed.
  • 147,000 Hoosiers who have obtained health insurance through the ACA marketplace could lose their coverage if a judge sides with President Trump and the GOP in their lawsuit; and protections for 2.7 million Hoosiers living with a pre-existing condition would be in jeopardy.
  • Hundreds of billions of dollars have been cut from Medicare.
  • Dozens of hospitals in rural areas have closed exacerbating the care and coverage gaps that exist for families in America’s rural communities.
  • Mike Braun supports a full repeal of the Affordable Care Act. Braun also supports the Trump Administration’s lawsuit that could cause as many as 2.7 million Hoosiers with a pre-existing condition to lose their care.

Tomorrow, “Care Force One” will head to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where Protect Our Care will be joined by Rep. Gwen Moore. For more information, please visit protectourcarebustour.com.

Hold The Phone: Rick Scott Flat-Out Lies During Senate Debate

Washington DC — At the Senate debate in Miami last night, Florida Governor Rick Scott joined his fellow Republicans and flat-out lied to voters about his record on health care. Scott’s shameful effort to re-write history continued as he explained his stance on universal health care coverage, stating that “we have to make sure that anybody can get health care insurance.” Let’s be clear, Rick Scott has no plans to protect millions of Floridians health care — his record speaks for itself.  

 

Here’s the truth:

 

Rick Scott helped design Republican repeal efforts that would have jeopardized access to care for up to 7.8 million Floridians.

  • HEADLINE:  “Florida’s Rick Scott Says He’s Helping Trump Craft Replacement Health Care Plan.” [McClatchy, 1/18/17]
  • Rick Scott Was An Advisor To The Trump Administration On Plans To Repeal The ACA.  “ Kicking off a series of meetings with incoming Trump administration officials, Gov. Rick Scott said Wednesday he hopes to help them devise a less costly alternative to Obamacare. Scott said he’s talking with Donald Trump every week or two while working closely with Rep. Tom Price, the president-elect’s choice to run the government agency that oversees Medicaid, Medicare and the landmark 2010 health-insurance law.” [McClatchy, 1/18/17]
  • Rick Scott Continued To Push For Repeal Even After It Failed In The Senate. “Gov. Rick Scott, whose political career is largely defined by opposition to the Affordable Care Act, still wants Republicans to repeal the federal health care law despite their apparent failure to do so. ‘Floridians simply cannot afford the high taxes and mandates of Obamacare. This law needs to be repealed,’ Scott spokeswoman Kerri Wyland said in an emailed statement.  […] Since November, Scott has written four op-eds stressing the urgency of repealing Obamacare. ‘There is absolutely no question that Obamacare must be repealed immediately so Americans can actually afford to purchase health insurance,’ Scott wrote.” [Orlando Sentinel, 7/18/17]

What would full repeal of the Affordable Care Act get eliminate?

    • Protections for 7,810,300 with pre-existing conditions, if they buy coverage on their own
    • Improvements to Medicare, including reduced costs for prescription drugs
    • Allowing kids to stay on their parents’ insurance until age 26
    • Ban on annual and lifetime limits
    • Ban on insurance discrimination against women
    • Limit on out-of-pocket costs
    • Medicaid expansion currently covering 15 million people
    • Rules to hold insurance companies accountable
    • Small business tax credits
    • Marketplace tax credits and coverage for up to 1.4 million Floridians.

For years Rick Scott and the Republican majority in the Florida legislature have refused to expand Medicaid to cover more than 700,000 Floridians.

2018: Rick Scott’s Administration Submitted A Request To Cut Amount Of Time Floridians Have To Apply For Medicaid Coverage From 90 Days To 30 Days. In April, Scott’s administration submitted a request to trim the amount of time Floridians have to sign up for Medicaid coverage from 90 days to 30 days. The state estimated this change would impact almost 39,000 Floridians, but providers warned it could exceed even more.

2015: In A Victory For Rick Scott, The Florida House Rejected Medicaid Expansion For the Third Time.  In June 2015, the Florida House rejected a plan 72-41 that would have covered as many as 650,000 residents. It was the third time that legislators had considered and spurned some version of health care expansion since passage of the Affordable Care Act. It represented a victory for Gov. Rick Scott who opposed the bill, which had already passed the state Senate on a 33-3 vote. The Florida Health Insurance Affordability Exchange would have used more than $18 billion over 10 years in federal funds to expand the pool of low-income Floridians eligible for health insurance and help them buy it from private providers.

  • 2013: Both Houses Rejected Rick Scott’s Plan To Expand Medicaid.  Governor Rick Scott’s plan to expand Medicaid coverage failed to make it out of a key state legislative committees.  The Senate Select Committee on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act voted 7-4 to reject the expansion, with all of the committee’s Republican members voting against the plan. A House legislative committee also rejected the expansion.

 

  • 2017: The State Senate Rejected Medicaid Expansion On A Voice Vote.  During Senate began debate on the budget in 2017, Senate Democratic Leader Oscar Braynon took to the floor and offered up an amendment to expand Medicaid. On a voice vote, the Senate voted to kill Braynon’s amendment.

 

Rick Scott says coverage for pre-existing conditions should be based on rewarding “people for caring for themselves”

Rick Scott On Care For People With Pre-existing Conditions:  “We’ve Got To Reward People For Caring For Themselves.”  “‘I believe that if you have a pre-existing condition, you need to still be able to get health care, so it’s very important to me,’ Scott told reporters in Tallahassee. ‘I think everybody ought to be able to get health care insurance. I do believe that you’ve got to start working to fix the law and that law caused our premiums to skyrocket. But I don’t believe in grand bargains, I believe in incrementally trying to make change. We’ve got a lot more competition … We’ve got to reward people for caring for themselves.’” [Tampa Bay Times, 6/13/18]

Rick Scott’s callous comments could leave millions of Floridians with conditions ranging from diabetes to cancer without a way to obtain affordable coverage.

7,810,300 Floridians Live With A Pre-Existing Condition.​ About one in two Floridians, 51 percent, lives with a pre-existing condition. [CAP, 4/5/17]

Before The Affordable Care Act, Insurance Companies Maintained Lists Of So-Called Deniable Medical Conditions. If someone had one or more ‘deniable’ conditions, they were automatically denied coverage. Common ‘deniable’ conditions included:

  • Pregnancy, alcohol or drug abuse with recent treatment, dementia, arthritis, cancer, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, hemophilia, hepatitis, diabetes, paralysis, severe obesity, sleep apnea, AIDS/HIV, kidney disease, multiple sclerosis, bipolar disorder, eating disorders, pending surgery or hospitalization, and muscular dystrophy. [Kaiser Family Foundation, December 2016]

 

Michiganders Stand Up to Say, “It’s Time to End the Republican War on Health Care”

Local Health Care Advocates Join Protect Our Care to Call for an End to GOP Attacks on Michiganders’ Health Care

Dr. Matt Longjohn speaks in front of Care Force One in Kalamazoo.

MICHIGAN – Today, Protect Our Care’s nationwide bus tour arrived in Michigan to call attention to Republicans’ ongoing war on health care care. Joined by Dr. Matt Longjohn, Sean McCann, former Rep. Mark Schauer, State Sen. Curtis Hertel Jr., State Rep. Sam Singh, and cancer survivor Laura Packard, events in Lansing and Kalamazoo highlighted the actions Republicans are taking to harm Michiganders’ care and called on Attorney General Bill Schuette to work instead to protect our care.

“I’m alive because of the Affordable Care Act,” said Packard. “I’m a stage four cancer survivor and I’m on this tour to defend our attacks against the GOP. President Trump may have blocked me on Twitter, but he can’t stop me and the American people from fighting to protect our care.”

Support for the ACA was echoed by Dr. Matt Longjohn and Sean McCann.

“The [Affordable Care Act] was good at protecting patients. It made sure that insurance companies weren’t selling junk on the marketplace. It made sure that there was coverage for essential health benefits and pre-existing conditions,” said Longjohn. “When the Republicans in the House in Washington, D.C. are assailing protections for pre-existing conditions and allowing insurance companies to sell junk, they’re putting corporate interests ahead of people’s interests.”

“One of things I’m most proud of that I had the opportunity to do was to press a button on my desk as a state representative and expand Medicaid in Michigan to over 600,000 citizens,” said McCann. “At the end of the day, the question that we have to ask in our hearts is…who do you trust? Who do you trust to expand our health care coverage and take care of our Michigan citizens? And who has constantly wanted to chip away, take that away, and repeal those benefits? It’s clear the Republican Party wants to do that.”

Longjohn, McCann, and Packard were joined by Christine Morse, a breast cancer survivor who spoke about the need for maintain protections for those with pre-existing conditions, and Erin Knott, Kalamazoo Vice Mayor and former state director of Enroll America, who spoke of the long fight to pass health care reform and the benefits Michiganders have seen since the ACA was signed into law.

Before heading to Kalamazoo, Care Force one was at the State Capitol in Lansing with former Representative Mark Schauer, State Sen. Curtis Hertel Jr., State Rep. Sam Singh, and local health care advocates including Amanda Itliong, who is battling ovarian cancer for the fourth time in ten years.

State Rep. Sam Singh speaks in front of Care Force One in Lansing.

“To me, it’s preposterous that we have to have this conversation in 2018,” said State Rep. Sam Singh. “Republicans don’t understand how important health care is… For us to see [Republicans] turning their back on our common citizens is beyond me.”

Amanda Itliong speaks in front of Care Force One in Lansing.

“In 2015, I was left for dead by medical science,” said Itliong. “I know personally that my family and friends would go bankrupt to do anything to help me, but i think that’s a really lousy thing to have to do for so many of us in Michigan, and that’s the fear that we live with that’s on top of so many other people’s chronic illness.

“Mike Bishop is my representative, but he doesn’t represent me or others with pre-existing conditions.”

The elected officials and Itliong were joined by health care expert Charles Gaba, who spoke of the gains made under the Affordable Care Act.

At today’s events, Michigan residents, health care advocates, elected officials, and members of Protect Our Care detailed the numbers ways in which Republicans have attacked health care, and how these actions have cut coverage and increased costs for Michiganders. Because of the Republican repeal-and-sabotage agenda:

  • Michiganders could see their premiums rise by as much as 11 percent next year. It’s expected that 40 year old Michiganders would face paying an extra $500 for marketplace coverage in 2019 because of sabotage of the ACA.
  • Michigan expanded Medicaid under the ACA and the more than 655,000 Michiganders who have gained coverage because of this program would find their care at risk if the law were repealed.
  • 284,000 Michiganders who have obtained health insurance through the ACA marketplace could lose their coverage if a judge sides with President Trump and the GOP in their lawsuit; and protections for 4.1 million Michiganders, including more than 300,000 in MI-08 living with a pre-existing condition would be in jeopardy.
  • Hundreds of billions of dollars have been cut from Medicare.
  • Dozens of hospitals in rural areas have closed, including Cheboygan Memorial Hospital (2012) in Michigan, exacerbating the care and coverage gaps that exist for families in America’s rural communities.
  • Representative Mike Bishop voted for a health care repeal bill that would cause 23 million people to lose coverage and gut protections for people with pre-existing condition and voted for a budget amendment that would cut Medicaid by $700 billion over ten years, $114 billion in a single year alone. Bishop also voted for a tax scam that doubled as a sneaky repeal of the Affordable Care Act  by kicking 13 million people off of their insurance and raising premiums by double digits for millions more.
  • Representative Fred Upton helped author and passed a health care repeal bill that would cause 23 million people to lose coverage and gut protections for people with pre-existing condition and voted for a budget amendment that would cut Medicaid by $700 billion over ten years, $114 billion in a single year alone. Upton also voted for a tax scam that doubled as a sneaky repeal of the Affordable Care Act  by kicking 13 million people off of their insurance and raising premiums by double digits for millions more.
  • Attorney General Bill Schuette opposed expanding Medicaid to over 650,000 Michiganders and has promised to work to repeal the Affordable Care Act as governor.  

Later today, “Care Force One” will head to South Bend, Indiana with Mayor Pete Buttigieg. For more information, please visit protectourcarebustour.com.

House Republicans Scramble To Rewrite History On Pre-existing Conditions

Brad Woodhouse, executive director of Protect Our Care, issued the following statement in response to Republicans desperate attempt to disown their war on health care:

“Republicans are getting clobbered because of their constant attacks on people with pre-existing conditions like cancer, heart disease and diabetes. But in order to survive the midterms, Republicans are trying to rewrite history as if their repeal and sabotage agenda never existed. These phony attempts prove that Republicans know the deficit they’ve created for themselves on health care is too steep to climb. Let’s not forget, these are the same people who tried to slash coverage for millions of Americans and gut all protections for pre-existing conditions. We all know Republicans are no defenders of health care and the American people aren’t going to let them flip the script.”

Republicans are scrambling to rewrite their history of opposing protections for pre-existing conditions now that they have been caught for their years of supporting health care repeal and sabotage. In addition to scrubbing their websites of mentions of repeal, House Republicans are trying to hide behind figleafs — a bill (H.R. 1121), a House resolution (H. Res. 1066), and another resolution (H.Res. 1089)— that they falsely claim are evidence that they are on the right side of this issue.

These pieces of legislation are nothing more than hollow promises that read well but in reality fail to protect people with pre-existing conditions from attacks by the Trump administration and their own earlier votes. Here’s what you need to know:

In reality, none of these actually protects people with pre-existing conditions. The language of Young’s resolution and of Sessions’ resolution, both intentionally vague, include no specifics on exactly which protections should be preserved. Though H.R. 1121 prevents insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, it does nothing to prevent insurance companies from charging people with pre-existing conditions more for coverage or reinstating annual and lifetime limits that insurers use to restrict the amount of coverage someone can use, and it does not preserve the Affordable Care Act’s essential health benefits, essentially allowing insurers to sell plans exempt from covering basic services like maternity care, hospitalization, and prescription drugs. Absent such protections, an insurance company could sell coverage to a cancer patient, but charge them more and drop their coverage once they reach their lifetime limit.

Two thirds of those who signed on to Rep. Young’s House resolution (H.Res. 1066) voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act last summer. Of the 28 members of the House who have signed on to the resolution expressing support for pre-existing condition protections, 19 voted for the Republican repeal bill last summer. Last year’s repeal bill, the AHCA, would have dramatically weakened protections for 130 million Americans with a pre-existing condition, allowing insurance companies to charge people more when they get sick, for instance up to $140,510 more for people battling metastatic cancer.

All but two co-sponsors of Rep. Sessions’ House resolution (H.Res. 1089) voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act last summer. Of the eighteen co-sponsors of Rep. Sessions’ resolution, sixteen voted for the Republican repeal bill last summer, which would have allowed insurance companies to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.

All but eight co-sponsors of the House bill (H.R. 1121) voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and weaken pre-existing condition protections last summer. Of the 75 cosponsors who voted on the AHCA last summer, 67 voted in favor of repealing the Affordable Care Act and weakening protections for 130 million Americans with a pre-existing condition. Their vote would have allowed insurance companies to charge people with pre-existing conditions more for coverage.

None of the co-sponsors of the bill or either resolution have shown they oppose the Republican lawsuit backed by the Trump Administration that would completely gut protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

Two thirds of those who signed on to Rep. Young’s House resolution (H.Res. 1066) voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act last summer. Of the 28 members of the House who have signed on to the resolution expressing support for pre-existing condition protections, 19 voted for the Republican repeal bill last summer. Last year’s repeal bill, the AHCA, would have dramatically weakened protections for 130 million Americans with a pre-existing condition, allowing insurance companies to charge people more when they get sick, for instance up to $140,510 more for people battling metastatic cancer.

All but two co-sponsors of Rep. Sessions’ House resolution (H.Res. 1089) voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act last summer. Of the eighteen co-sponsors of Rep. Sessions’ resolution, sixteen voted for the Republican repeal bill last summer, which would have allowed insurance companies to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.

All but eight co-sponsors of the House bill (H.R. 1121) voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and weaken pre-existing condition protections last summer. Of the 75 cosponsors who voted on the AHCA last summer, 67 voted in favor of repealing the Affordable Care Act and weakening protections for 130 million Americans with a pre-existing condition. Their vote would have allowed insurance companies to charge people with pre-existing conditions more for coverage.

None of the co-sponsors of the bill or either resolution have shown they oppose the Republican lawsuit backed by the Trump Administration that would completely gut protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

If House members really wanted to defend people with pre-existing conditions, here are two concrete actions they could take:

  • Support the House Democrats’ resolution that would allow the House to defend pre-existing condition protections in court. This summer, the Trump Administration refused to defend against a lawsuit brought by 20 conservative states aimed at overturning the Affordable Care Act and its protections for people with pre-existing conditions. In July, House Democrats introduced a resolution that would authorize the General Counsel of the House of Representatives to intervene in the lawsuit and defend protections for people with pre-existing conditions. Not a single Republican has offered support.
  • Join the House effort to overturn Trump administration’s junk plan rule that lets insurance companies discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. This summer, the Trump Administration finalized a rule that allows insurance companies to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Experts warn that this move will only increase the cost of comprehensive care, ultimately making it even harder for people with pre-existing conditions to get the care they need. House Democrats introduced legislation that would override Trump’s rule, but not a single Republican has signed on.

 

 

Hoosiers Stand Up to Say, “It’s Time to End the Republican War on Health Care”

Local Health Care Advocates Join Protect Our Care to Call for an End to GOP Attacks on Hoosiers’ Health Care

Tonya Prifogle, with her son, Colton, speaks at the Indiana State Capitol.

INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA – This afternoon, Protect Our Care’s nationwide bus tour arrived in Indianapolis to call attention to the Republicans’ ongoing war on health care. Headlined by State Rep. Ed DeLaney and cancer survivor Laura Packard, the event highlighted the actions Republicans are trying to harm Hoosiers’ care and called on Attorney General Curtis Hill to work instead to protect our care.

“I’m alive because of the Affordable Care Act,” said Packard. “I’m a stage four cancer survivor and I’m on this tour to defend our attacks against the GOP. President Trump may have blocked me on Twitter, but he can’t stop me and the American people from fighting to protect our care.”

Pakard’s remarks were echoed by Rep. DeLaney.

“About 2.7 million Hoosiers have a pre-existing condition, which means that virtually every family has a pre-existing condition that was not able to be insured before the Affordable Care Act,” said State Rep. DeLaney. “In a funny way, birth is a pre-existing condition. We’re all gonna get sick sooner or later, and the only issue is whether we get a single sickness or a chronic sickness, so we need to protect this.”

Packard and Rep. DeLaney were joined at the State Capitol by Indiana AFL-CIO President Brett Voorhees, who praised Sen. Joe Donnelly for his steadfast support for Hoosiers’ health care, and Tonya Prifogle and her son Colton, who was born with a rare genetic disorder, and cancer survivor Jessica Hoag, who spoke of the importance of maintaining protections for Hoosiers with pre-existing conditions.

At today’s event, Indianapolis residents, health care advocates, elected officials, and members of Protect Our Care detailed the numbers ways in which Republicans have attacked health care, and how these actions have cut coverage and increased costs for Hoosiers. Because of the Republican repeal-and-sabotage agenda:

  • Hoosiers will see their premiums rise by an average of 5.7 percent next year. It’s expected that 40 year old Hoosiers would face paying an extra $700 for marketplace coverage in 2019 because of sabotage of the ACA.
  • Indiana expanded Medicaid under the ACA and the roughly 400,000 Hoosiers who have gained coverage because of this program would find their care at risk if the law were repealed.
  • 147,000 Hoosiers who have obtained health insurance through the ACA marketplace could lose their coverage if a judge sides with President Trump and the GOP in their lawsuit; and protections for 2.7 million Hoosiers living with a pre-existing condition would be in jeopardy.
  • Hundreds of billions of dollars have been cut from Medicare.
  • Dozens of hospitals in rural areas have closed exacerbating the care and coverage gaps that exist for families in America’s rural communities.
  • Mike Braun supports a full repeal of the Affordable Care Act. Braun also supports the Trump administration’s lawsuit that could cause as many as 2.7 million Hoosiers with a pre-existing condition to lose their care.

The full event can be seen here. Tomorrow, “Care Force One” will head to Lansing, Michigan. For more information, please visit protectourcarebustour.com.

New Ad From Protect Our Care: “He Lies.”

With at Least 31 Lies Under Oath Documented and Numerous Editorial Boards, Columnists, Moderates and Acquaintances Calling Kavanaugh’s Fitness into Question, Protect Our Care Asks:

“If Brett Kavanaugh is Willing to Lie Under Oath, Wouldn’t He Lie About Our Health Care?”

New TV Ad Airs in Arizona, Alaska, Maine and DC

Washington, DC – As Mitch McConnell gears up to “plow” Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court “right through,” Kavanaugh’s fitness for the court has been called into on question on the basis of dozens of documented lies Kavanaugh told while under oath. In a new television ad airing in Arizona, Alaska, Maine and DC, Protect Our Care points out that Kavanaugh’s lies under oath happened in plain view — and portend danger ahead for our health care and other issues if he’s seated on the Court. Said Leslie Dach, chair of Protect Our Care:

“Brett Kavanaugh’s positions on health care, executive power, his partisanship, and his repeated lies under oath make him unfit to serve on our Supreme Court. If Brett Kavanaugh can’t be trusted to tell the truth under oath, why would any Senator believe his statements on health care or Roe v Wade? To maintain trust in the Senate and in the Supreme Court, Senators should vote no on Brett Kavanaugh.”

Watch Protect Our Care’s new ad here:

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND

If Brett Kavanaugh Will Lie About All This, He’ll Lie About Protecting Your Health Care

With every passing hour, Americans learn more about the lies Kavanaugh willingly told while under oath during his confirmation process. In the past, the same Republicans defending Kavanaugh’s lies had an entirely different view:

  • Eight years ago, Judge Kavanaugh himself disapproved of false statements, signing an opinion that stated “False exculpatory statements are evidence — often strong evidence — of guilt.”
  • In 1999, Lindsey Graham said in a speech, “I have argued to you that when you found that a judge was a perjurer, you couldn’t in good conscience send him back in a courtroom because everybody that came in that courtroom thereafter would have a real serious doubt.”
  • Just yesterday, Sen. Flake echoed this sentiment, telling reporters, “Any nominee who lies to the committee, that is disqualifying.”  

Well, the evidence that Kavanaugh has lied under oath is mounting — take a look below:

New York Times: Kavanaugh’s Responses Were “Misleading, Disputed Or Off Point.” “The combative nominee was compelled to answer questions he clearly found embarrassing or offensive. What emerges is the image of a skilled lawyer who, when pressed on difficult subjects, sometimes crafted responses that were misleading, disputed or off point.” [New York Times, 9/28/18]

Washington Post: Kavanaugh “Stretched Or Misrepresented The Truth.”  “Over the course of his testimony, though, Kavanaugh offered several answers to questions that stretched or misrepresented the truth.”  [Washington Post, 9/28/18]

Though Under Oath Kavanaugh Claimed That Ramirez Was The One Who Called Classmates To See If They Remembered What Happened, It Turns Out It Was Kavanaugh And His Team Who Were Communicating Behind The Scenes To Orchestrate Defense. “The texts between Berchem and Karen Yarasavage, both friends of Kavanaugh, suggest that the nominee was personally talking with former classmates about Ramirez’s story in advance of the New Yorker article that made her allegation public. In one message, Yarasavage said Kavanaugh asked her to go on the record in his defense. Two other messages show communication between Kavanaugh’s team and former classmates in advance of the story…The texts also demonstrate that Kavanaugh and Ramirez were more socially connected than previously understood and that Ramirez was uncomfortable around Kavanaugh when they saw each other at a wedding 10 years after they graduated. Berchem’s efforts also show that some potential witnesses have been unable to get important information to the FBI.” [NBC News, 10/1/18]

Though Kavanaugh Has Tried To Minimize His Drinking, New York Times Reporting Reveals He Was Involved In Bar Fight In 1985. “As an undergraduate student at Yale, Brett M. Kavanaugh was involved in an altercation at a local bar during which he was accused of throwing ice on another patron, according to a police report. The incident, which occurred in September 1985 during Mr. Kavanaugh’s junior year, resulted in Mr. Kavanaugh and four other men being questioned by the New Haven Police Department. Mr. Kavanaugh was not arrested, but the police report stated that a 21-year-old man accused Mr. Kavanaugh of throwing ice on him ‘for some unknown reason.’” [New York Times, 10/1/18]

The Huffington Post Compiled Eighteen Different Subjects Kavanaugh has Been Caught Lying About. Among other topics, Kavanaugh lied about not traveling in the same social circles as Dr. Blasey Ford (though he regularly spent time with her boyfriend), never attending a gathering like the one described by Blasey (though such a gathering is on his own calendar from 1982), and the Maryland drinking age (Kavanaugh said the drinking age was 18, even though it was legally raised to 21 in Maryland when Kavanaugh was 17 years old). The list goes on. [Huffington Post, 10/1/18]

So, how are editorial boards and columnists reacting?

Bangor Daily News Editorial: Kavanaugh Is Unfit For Supreme Court. “Further review is not necessary to conclude that Kavanaugh is unfit for the Supreme Court. His performance before the Judiciary Committee last week confirmed that. Generally, we, like Collins, believe presidents have broad leeway in their appointments and initially we felt that Kavanaugh met this broad standard. No more. Kavanaugh lied, under oath, about small things. He said he could legally drink during his senior year at Georgetown Prep, a Catholic all-boys school in Maryland. This is demonstrably false. He said he had no connection to Yale University, where he attended college and law school. Yet, his grandfather went there. His explanation for entries in his high school yearbook, which appear to be about drinking and denigrating women, stretched the bounds of credulity. If he’ll lie, under oath, about these things, he’ll lie about much bigger things.” [Bangor Daily News, 10/2/18]

Portland Press Herald Editorial: “Based On What He Demonstrated In His Own Testimony, Kavanaugh Lacks The Character And Judgment To Serve On The Supreme Court.” “But regardless of what questions the investigation can answer, we already know this: Based on what he demonstrated in his own testimony, Kavanaugh lacks the character and judgment to serve on the Supreme Court. In his widely watched appearance, Kavanaugh revealed that he has an explosive temper and resorts to bullying when he feels threatened. He was understandably under stress and fighting a high-stakes battle for his reputation, but his temperament was tested during the hearing, and he failed the test. Kavanaugh also showed himself to be impermissibly political for a job that is supposed to be above politics.” [Portland Press Herald, 9/28/18]

America Magazine: It Is Time For The Kavanaugh Nomination To Be Withdrawn. “But even if the credibility of the allegation has not been established beyond a reasonable doubt and even if further investigation is warranted to determine its validity or clear Judge Kavanaugh’s name, we recognize that this nomination is no longer in the best interests of the country. While we previously endorsed the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh on the basis of his legal credentials and his reputation as a committed textualist, it is now clear that the nomination should be withdrawn.” [America Magazine, 9/27/18]

St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial: Kavanaugh, Accuser Testify Convincingly Enough To Merit Delaying Confirmation. “Kavanaugh concedes only that he was ‘no angel’ during the period in question. People who knew him say he drank heavily and became aggressive when drunk. Should his reputation and entire judicial future ride on a rushed, partisan decision by a deeply divided Senate? Or would it serve everyone’s best interests, especially Kavanaugh’s and Blasey Ford’s, to slow down and investigate the allegations more thoroughly? Considering the extremely high stakes, the only reasonable option is to assign this case to the FBI and delay a confirmation action until clearer answers surface.” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 9/27/18]

Boston Globe Editorial: The Lies That Senators Must Tell Themselves To Support Brett Kavanaugh. “Now, some of those might seem like ticky-tack kind of misstatements. But the pattern starts to look overwhelming. As former FBI director James Comey put it on Twitter: ‘Small lies matter, even about yearbooks.’ The standard jury instruction, he noted, says: ‘If a witness is shown knowingly to have testified falsely about any material matter, you have a right to distrust such witness’ other testimony and you may reject all the testimony of that witness.’ Kavanaugh’s pattern of dishonesty certainly affects how to view Ford’s accusation that he attacked her when both were in high school. She was highly credible as a witness, passed a polygraph, and, unlike Kavanaugh, has no demonstrated pattern of bending the truth.” [Boston Globe, 9/28/18]

San Francisco Chronicle Editorial: The Kavanaugh Allegations Are Serious; Don’t Rush The Vote. “In light of these allegations, there is absolutely no reasonable argument for rushing through Kavanaugh’s confirmation. The U.S. Senate must allow for a complete investigation of these allegations, including witness testimony. Anything less would be a failure of the Senate’s duty to fully and fairly vet nominees for the highest court in the land.” [San Francisco Chronicle, 9/24/18]

Esquire’s Charles Pierce: “In Plain Terms, Kavanaugh Lies About Everything.”  “In plain terms, for all his spleen and outrage, Judge Kavanaugh lies about everything. In his earlier hearings, he lied about his judicial philosophy, and he lied about his days as a Republican operative, both in and out of the White House. On Monday, he lied to Martha McCallum of Fox News. On Thursday, he lied about his entire adolescence and his college days.” [Charles Pierce, Esquire, 9/28/18]

NY Mag’s Jon Chait: Kavanaugh Has “Told Lie After Lie After Lie.”  “The most probable account of his actions is that Kavanaugh (understandably) decided his youthful crimes should not prevent him from attaining the highest position in his career. He also calculated that any partial defense would come unraveled, and settled from the outset on a stance of total denial. This is why he has told lie after lie after lie. But now Kavanaugh is caught in those lies. He is worried that two Republicans senators might decide they’d rather vote for a justice who hasn’t flagrantly perjured himself. And this fear has legitimate basis.” [New York Magazine, 10/1/18]

Los Angeles Times Editorial: Kavanaugh Offered “Astonishingly Unjudicial Opening Statement.” “In an angry, emotional and at times astonishingly unjudicial opening statement, the appeals court judge lashed out against Democrats on the committee, accused them of unleashing Ford’s accusation when it seemed that their ideological objections to his candidacy wouldn’t succeed in keeping him off the court.” [Los Angeles Times, 9/28/18]

Boston Globe Editorial: “For This Editorial Board, Whether Kavanaugh Should Sit On The Supreme Court Hinges On His Ability To Tell The Truth.” “The FBI must conduct a fully-empowered investigation in what is being characterized as a supplemental background check. If they need more time and want to broaden their review, the White House should allow that….For this editorial board, whether Kavanaugh should sit on the Supreme Court hinges on his ability to tell the truth. That’s the least we can expect from a Supreme Court justice.” [Boston Globe, 9/30/18]

Benjamin Wittes, Editor In Chief Of Lawfare And Senior Fellow At Brookings Institution: Kavanaugh’s Performance “Was Wholly Inconsistent With The Conduct We Should Expect From A Member Of The Judiciary.” “But I cannot condone the partisanship—which was raw, undisguised, naked, and conspiratorial—from someone who asks for public faith as a dispassionate and impartial judicial actor. His performance was wholly inconsistent with the conduct we should expect from a member of the judiciary…What is important is the dissonance between the Kavanaugh of Thursday’s hearing and the judicial function. Can anyone seriously entertain the notion that a reasonable pro-choice woman would feel like her position could get a fair shake before a Justice Kavanaugh? Can anyone seriously entertain the notion that a reasonable Democrat, or a reasonable liberal of any kind, would after that performance consider him a fair arbiter in, say, a case about partisan gerrymandering, voter identification, or anything else with a strong partisan valence? Quite apart from the merits of Ford’s allegations against him, Kavanaugh’s display on Thursday—if I were a senator voting on confirmation—would preclude my support.” [The Atlantic, 10/2/18]

Daniel Larson, Senior Editor At The American Conservative: Kavanaugh’s Testimony Gave Committee Members And The Public “Ample Reason To Doubt His FItness For The Court.” “The hearing on Thursday was a spectacle and an embarrassment for the nominee. Judge Kavanaugh comported himself poorly throughout, and during his angry opening statement he gave the committee members and the public ample reason to doubt his fitness for the Court before he answered any questions. Kavanaugh’s anger and accusatory tone were bad enough for someone who aspires to sit on the highest court, but the real problem lies with the multiple lies he told during his testimony…His evasions and misrepresentations on these other points have only made his fervent denials of the very serious charge less believable, and in the process he has torched his reputation and rendered himself unworthy of the Supreme Court.” [The American Conservative, 9/30/18]

Some Are Citing Kavanaugh’s Own Opinion, Which Stated “False Exculpatory Statements Are Evidence — Often Strong Evidence — Of Guilt.” “How then to evaluate Kavanaugh’s lies? This is not just a question of the jury instructions and principles of evidence that Comey and Wittes cite. Even more damning in Kavanaugh’s case are that several lies—including about yearbook references to sexual conquest, whether real or not, and about high school and college alcohol consumption—don’t just go to the question of his overall truthfulness. Those lies relate directly, materially to the question whether he participated in sexual assault under the influence of alcohol. Unless some surprising exculpatory evidence for Kavanaugh emerges from the ongoing FBI investigation or other sources, he does not pass the standard for elevation to the Supreme Court…The two strongest pieces of evidence that now weigh against him are Ford’s testimony and his own. ‘False exculpatory statements are evidence – often strong evidence – of guilt,’ Judge Kavanaugh once acknowledged in a judicial opinion. Those words have rightfully come back to haunt him.” [Just Security, 10/2/18]

Ana Navarro: For The Good Of Us All, Brett Kavanaugh Should Step Aside. “I feel like a unicorn these days, because I did not oppose Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court at first, but I do oppose it now. Why? Entirely because of the character issues raised about him…I now believe Kavanaugh lacks the judicial temperament and character to serve on the Supreme Court. In the last hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he was screaming, crying, disrespectful and partisan. Except for the partisan part, if any woman behaved that way, people would blame it on hormones or call her hysterical. I am not one to criticize anyone for showing emotions.” [CNN, 10/1/18]

Lawfare Blog Editor  Susan Hennessy: Kavanaugh Was “Dishonest And Misleading” Throughout His Hearing. Susah Hennessy: The final element is that Kavanaugh seems to have been dishonest and misleading sort of throughout. Kavanaugh represented himself as someone who wasn’t a heavy drinker, as believing vulgar terms that he used actually had innocent meaning, as making only respectful references to female friends in his yearbook. You know, and these are representations that are really strongly contradicted by the written record, by statements of people who knew him at the time. And frankly, they’re explanations that sort of defy common sense.” [NPR, 9/30/18]

Seema Verma Continues to Spread Misinformation When Promoting Harmful Medicaid Work Requirements

Today, in defense of the Trump Administration’s indefensible work requirements that have kicked thousands of people off of their health care, Seema Verma, the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, continued to argue  that these requirements help Medicaid enrollees attain “skills they need” and “jobs that are available.”

Say what?

Here’s the truth: TAKING AWAY SOMEONE’S HEALTH CARE DOES NOT HELP THEM TO WORK

  • Evidence suggests that such work requirements hurt, rather than help enrollees’ ability to find work. A study of Michigan’s Medicaid “illustrates the functional barriers to work that Medicaid beneficiaries face, and many of them result from physical and mental health challenges. This suggests to us that taking away their health coverage means that they are less likely to find work – not more so…a stable source of health coverage such as Medicaid is likely to assist people with their chronic mental and physical health conditions so that they they are better able to seek employment.” In both Ohio and Michigan, having access to health care made it easier for the unemployed to find work: “majorities said that gaining health coverage has helped them look for work or remain employed. Losing coverage — and, with it, access to mental health treatment, medication to manage chronic conditions, or other important care — could have the perverse result of impeding future employment.

 

  • In Michigan, Medicaid Work Requirements Hurt, Rather Than Help Enrollees’ Ability To Find Work: “The Michigan study illustrates the functional barriers to work that Medicaid beneficiaries face, and many of them result from physical and mental health challenges. This suggests to us that taking away their health coverage means that they are less likely to find work – not more so…a stable source of health coverage such as Medicaid is likely to assist people with their chronic mental and physical health conditions so that they they are better able to seek employment.” [Georgetown University Health Policy Institute, 12/15/17]

 

  • In Ohio, Health Coverage Made It Easier For The Unemployed To Look For Work: “In studies of adults who gained coverage in Ohio and Michigan under the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion, majorities said that gaining health coverage has helped them look for work or remain employed. Losing coverage — and, with it, access to mental health treatment, medication to manage chronic conditions, or other important care — could have the perverse result of impeding future employment. [CBPP, 1/11/2018]

 

WORK REQUIREMENTS ADD ADMINISTRATIVE HURDLES, MAKING IT HARDER FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE ELIGIBLE FOR CARE TO GET IT

  • Early results in Arkansas confirm that Medicaid work requirements are fundamentally bureaucratic hurdles, threatening access to health coverage for thousands across the state. “The early results suggest that the incentives may not work the way officials had hoped. Arkansas officials, trying to minimize coverage losses, effectively exempted two-thirds of the eligible people from having to report work hours. Of the remaining third — about 20,000 people — 16,000 didn’t report qualifying activities to the state. Only 1,200 people, about 2 percent of those eligible for the requirement, told the state they had done enough of the required activities in August, according to state figures.” [New York Times, 9/24/18]

 

  • Requiring People On Medicaid To Prove They Are Working Adds An Administrative Burden That Is Hardest On Low-Income Americans. “[Administrative hurdles] may be especially daunting for the poor, who tend to have less stable work schedules and less access to resources that can simplify compliance: reliable transportation, a bank account, internet access.  There is also a lot of research about the Medicaid program, specifically, that shows that sign-ups fall when states make their program more complicated.” [New York Times, 1/18/18]

 

  • Documentation Requirements Increase The Chances That People Will Lose Care, Simply Because They Have Trouble Navigating The Process. “There is a real risk of eligible people losing coverage due to their inability to navigate these processes, miscommunication, or other breakdowns in the administrative process. People with disabilities may have challenges navigating the system to obtain an exemption for which they qualify and end up losing coverage.” [Kaiser Family Foundation, 1/16/18]

 

Mayor John Cranley, Ohioans with Pre-Existing Conditions Gather to Demand that Republicans #ProtectOurCare

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/Lpa17zXMKB2wP6O0uRmTs2s0Q3v7dxB7vDLaCdnuOQL8VgURs-e96sdiQKJADP-WBVusQ6ur35dVcYR_5WmOX5tF8yGoQ4lptQJ4zwfKcus6QkeVF0SCVpzSu9orZUVDhm-5FW_F

“Care Force One” Stops in Cincinnati on National Bus Tour

(Cincinnati, Ohio) – Today, Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley joined health care providers and Ohioans with pre-existing conditions at City Hall in Cincinnati to speak out against the devastating repercussions of health care repeal.

The event was part of Protect Our Care’s nationwide bus tour calling attention to Republicans’ attempts to sabotage health care, including a lawsuit that would gut protections for Ohioans with pre-existing conditions.

The 4,830,900 Ohioans living with a pre-existing condition would be in jeopardy if a judge sides with President Trump and the GOP in their lawsuit.

Mayor John Cranley kicked off the event, saying, “We all have somebody in our families with a pre-existing condition. This isn’t a partisan issue; it’s an American issue.”

Mayor Cranley was joined by Dr. William Sawyer, as well as Steph Barnard and Laura Packard, who have pre-existing conditions and talked about the protections provided to them under the Affordable Care Act.

“When the Health insurance companies, under the old rules, could deny care payment,” said Dr. William Sawyer of Doctors for America. “The young people of America are going to be the victims of this system if you don’t get involved and say, ‘we want access to affordable care.’”

Steph Barnard, an Ohioan with a pre-existing condition, said, “For our friends and family members with pre-existing conditions, the ACA is literally a matter of life and death. We all stand to lose a lot if protections like these are repealed. That’s why we’re fighting here today.”

“I am still here today thanks to the Affordable Care Act,” cancer survivor and health care advocate Laura Packard said. “But I need to keep my health care, as do 130 million with pre-existing conditions. That’s why we’re here – to hold our elected officials accountable for their votes to take away our care.”

“The stakes have never been higher for Ohioans’ health care,” said TJ Helmstetter of Protect Our Care. “Since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act, 664,000 Ohioans have gained health insurance. This is all in jeopardy due to Republicans’ repeal and sabotage agenda, including their ludicrous lawsuit and Rep. David Joyce’s mission to repeal health care. Mainers want this Republican war on health care to end, plain and simple. That’s why we’re here today.”

You can watch the event here. The bus now travels to Indianapolis. More details about upcoming stops can be found here.

West Virginians Stand Up to Say, “It’s Time to End the Republican War on Health Care”

Local Health Care Advocates Join Protect Our Care to Call for an End to GOP Attacks on West Virginians’ Health Care

Talley Sergent speaks in front of Care Force One in Charleston.

WEST VIRGINIA – Today, Protect Our Care’s nationwide bus tour arrived in West Virginia to call attention to the Republicans ongoing war on health care care. Joined by Delegates Scott Brewer, Linda Longstreth, and Barbara Fleischauer; Talley Sergent; Reverend Janice Hill; and cancer survivor Laura Packard, events in Charleston, Morgantown, and Parkersburg highlighted the actions Republicans are taking to harm West Virginians’ care and called on Attorney General Patrick Morrisey to work instead to protect our care.

“I’m alive because of the Affordable Care Act,” said Packard. “I’m a stage four cancer survivor and I’m on this tour to defend our attacks against the GOP. President Trump may have blocked me on Twitter, but he can’t stop me and the American people from fighting to protect our care.”

Similar themes were echoed by Delegate Brewer and Sergent, who highlighted Attorney General Morrisey’s lawsuit and Representative Alex Mooney’s vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act, each of which would take away West Virginians’ care.

“The impact of this lawsuit and the actions of Congress are real,” said Sergent, who spoke of the more than 700,000 West Virginians who could lose their care if the lawsuit signed onto by Attorney General Patrick Morrisey were to be successful. “Lives are on the line.”

“Too often we’ve watched as Washington politicians have voted to take health care away from millions,” said Delegate Brewer. “Now is the time for D.C. politicians to hear our voices. Let them hear that we’re not gonna take this anymore.”

Delegate Brewer and Sergent were joined by Doris Selko of West Virginians for Affordable Health Care, who spoke of the difficulties West Virginians had in obtaining care before the Affordable Care Act was signed into law, and Gary Zuckett of West Virginia Citizen Action Group, who praised Senator Joe Manchin for his consistent leadership on the issue of health care.

Before heading to the State Capitol, Care Force one was in Morgantown with Delegates Linda Longstreth and Barbara Fleischauer and local health care advocates.

Delegate Barbara Fleischauer speaks in front of Care Force One in Morgantown.

“We have 168,000 people on the Affordable Care Act, most of them in the southern part of the state,” said Delegate Longstreth. “Why do we have to argue about people being able to have health care for themselves and their families?”

“We have 1.2 million people in West Virginians. 738,000 of them live with a pre-existing condition,” added Delegate Fleischauer. “25,000 West Virginians have gotten care for their addiction through Medicaid. We don’t want to kick these people into the cold.”

Delegates Longstreth and Fleischauer were joined in Morgantown by Kelly Allen, a former health care navigator who spoke about being diagnosed with a pre-existing condition while attending West Virginia University, and the hard-working West Virginians she has seen gain insurance under the ACA.

Earlier in the day, another group of local health care advocates made their voices known in Parkersburg.

Reverend Janice Hill speaks in front of Care Force One in Parkersburg.

“I’m a pastor, I care desperately for the people of my congregation and the people of West Virginia,” said Reverend Janice Hill. “How can anyone in heaven’s name think it’s okay to deny health care to people who need it? West Virginia is especially susceptible to not having health care – how can both of our senators not be for it?”

Her sentiments were echoed by medical provider Simon Hargus, who noted that access to health care was necessary to tackle the opioid crisis; nurse Kim Cramer, who emphasized the importance of protections for West Virginians with pre-existing conditions; and Julie Schleier, who was diagnosed with a rare autoimmune disease which costs $11,000 per month to treat.

At today’s events, West Virginia residents, health care advocates, elected officials and members of Protect Our Care detailed the numbers ways in which Republicans have attacked health care, and how these actions have cut coverage and increased costs for West Virginians. Because of the Republican repeal-and-sabotage agenda:

  • West Virginians will see their premiums rise by an average of 14.85 percent next year. It’s expected that 40 year old West Virginians would face paying an extra $1,390 for marketplace coverage in 2019 because of sabotage of the ACA.
  • West Virginia expanded Medicaid under the ACA and the more than 225,000 West Virginians who have gained coverage because of this program would find their care at risk if the law were repealed.
  • 29,674 West Virginians who have obtained health insurance through the ACA marketplace could lose their coverage if a judge sides with West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, President Trump and the GOP in their lawsuit; and protections for 738,000 West Virginians, including more than 257,000 in WV-02 living with a pre-existing condition would be in jeopardy.
  • Hundreds of billions of dollars have been cut from Medicare.
  • Dozens of hospitals in rural areas have closed.
  • Attorney General Patrick Morrisey is a staunch opponent of the Affordable Care Act who has vowed to try to repeal the law.  Although he claims to support protections for people with pre-existing conditions, Morrisey was one of the first state attorneys general to join lawsuit that would roll back that coverage and eliminate the protections for pre-existing conditions that exist in the ACA. Morrisey’s participation in the suit puts the health of the 737,900 West Virginians living with a pre-existing condition at risk and would take us back to the days when insurers routinely denied coverage or charged unaffordable premiums to people with pre-existing conditions, including cancer, asthma and hypertension.
  • Representatives Alex Mooney and David McKinley voted for and passed a health care repeal bill that would cause 23 million people to lose coverage and gut protections for people with pre-existing condition; voted for a budget amendment that would cut Medicaid by $700 billion over ten years, $114 billion in a single year alone. Mooney and McKinley also voted for a tax scam that doubled as a sneaky repeal of the Affordable Care Act  by kicking 13 million people off of their insurance and raising premiums by double digits for millions more.

Tomorrow, “Care Force One” will head to Cincinnati, Ohio, where Protect Our Care will be joined by Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley. For more information, please visit protectourcarebustour.com.