Skip to main content
Category

Uncategorized

protectourcare
In Uncategorized

THOSE WHO KNOW HEALTH CARE THE BEST SAY THE LATEST EFFORT TO REPEAL HEALTH CARE IS THE WORST

Response to Graham-Cassidy, the latest Senate partisan health care repeal bill, has been swift and harsh. Physicians, patient groups, hospitals, consumer groups and senior groups have all come out against it. The American Medical Association said, “We believe the Graham-Cassidy Amendment would result in millions of Americans losing their health insurance coverage, destabilize health insurance markets, and decrease access to affordable coverage and care”; AARP said the bill “would result in an age tax for older Americans who would see their health care costs increase under this bill”; and the Children’s Hospital Association said, “This bill would have devastating consequences for children and families.”

Response to Graham-Cassidy, the latest Senate health care repeal bill, has been swift and harsh. Physicians, patient groups, hospitals, consumer groups and senior groups have all come out against the Senate repeal bill. The American Medical Association said “we believe the Graham-Cassidy Amendment would result in millions of Americans losing their health insurance coverage, destabilize health insurance markets, and decrease access to affordable coverage and care”; AARP said the “bill would result in an age tax for older Americans who would see their health care costs increase under this bill”; and the Children’s Hospital Association said “This bill would have devastating consequences for children and families.”

PHYSICIANS AND NURSES

American Medical Association: “We Believe The Graham-Cassidy Amendment Would Result In Millions Of Americans Losing Their Health Insurance Coverage, Destabilize Health Insurance Markets, And Decrease Access To Affordable Coverage And Care.” “On behalf of the physician and medical student members of the American Medical Association (AMA), I am writing to express our opposition to the Cassidy-Graham-Heller-Johnson Amendment to H.R. 1628, the “American Health Care Act of 2017.” We also urge the Senate to reject any other legislative efforts that would jeopardize health insurance coverage for tens of millions of Americans. Instead, in the short term we urge Congress to pursue legislation that will stabilize health insurance premiums in the individual insurance market by continuing to fund cost-sharing reduction payments. Similar to proposals that were considered in the Senate in July, we believe the Graham-Cassidy Amendment would result in millions of Americans losing their health insurance coverage, destabilize health insurance markets, and decrease access to affordable coverage and care.” [AMA, 9/19/17]

American Medical Association: “Allowing States To Get Waivers To Vary Premiums Based On Health Status Would Allow Insurers To Charge Unaffordable Premiums Based On Those Pre-Existing Conditions.” “In addition, the amendment does not take steps toward coverage and access for all Americans, and while insurers are still required to offer coverage to patients with pre-existing conditions, allowing states to get waivers to vary premiums based on health status would allow insurers to charge unaffordable premiums based on those pre-existing conditions. Also, waivers of essential health benefits will mean patients may not have access to coverage for services pertinent to treating their conditions.” [AMA, 9/19/17]

American Medical Association: “We Also Continue To Oppose Congressionally-mandated Restrictions On Where Lower Income Women (And Men) May Receive Otherwise Covered Health Care Services.” “We also continue to oppose congressionally-mandated restrictions on where lower income women (and men) may receive otherwise covered health care services — in this case the prohibition on individuals using their Medicaid coverage at clinics operated by Planned Parenthood and other similar organizations.” [AMA, 9/19/17]

American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Osteopathic Association, American Psychiatric Association: “The Proposal Fails To Protect The Health Care Coverage And Consumer Protections Available Under Current Law.” “Our organizations, which represent over 560,000 physicians, oppose the new Graham-Cassidy bill and its approach to reforming our health care system. The proposal fails to protect the health care coverage and consumer protections available under current law. Additionally, it would create a health care system built on state-by-state variability that would exacerbate inequities in coverage and most likely place millions of vulnerable individuals at risk of losing their health care coverage.” [Letter, 9/13/17]

American College Of Physicians: “We Believe That The Substantial Cuts To Medicaid Authorized By This Legislation Would Cause A Significant Increase In The Number Of Uninsured Patients And That It Would Undermine Essential Benefits Provided For Patients Insured Under Current Law.” “We believe that the substantial cuts to Medicaid authorized by this legislation would cause a significant increase in the number of uninsured patients and that it would undermine essential benefits provided for patients insured under current law. We urge you to set aside this legislation and instead allow the Senate to consider any improvements to the ACA, through a more deliberative process of regular order, in which hearings are held to solicit the advice of health care experts and stakeholders, with any such improvements considered in a bipartisan manner in which both parties may offer amendments.” [ACP, 9/13/17]

American Academy Of Pediatrics: “By Turning Medicaid Into A Block Grant, Capping Its Funding And Ending Its Expansion, This Proposal Would Have Devastating Effects On The Nearly 37 Million Children Across The Country Who Rely On The Program.” “As a pediatrician, I am fearful for my patients and the uncertain future they would face under Senators Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Bill Cassidy’s (R-La.) health care proposal, currently set for a vote next week in the U.S. Senate. As president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, I must speak out against this dangerous, ill-conceived policy on behalf of our 66,000 pediatrician, pediatric surgical specialist and pediatric medical subspecialist members, and stop it from advancing…By turning Medicaid into a block grant, capping its funding and ending its expansion, this proposal would have devastating effects on the nearly 37 million children across the country who rely on the program.” [AAP, 9/20/17]

American College Of Emergency Physicians: “We urge you not to bring this amendment to the Senate floor for consideration, as its passage would have devastating impacts on millions of Americans.” “We urge you not to bring this amendment to the Senate floor for consideration, as its passage would have devastating impacts on millions of Americans. ACEP cannot support any legislation that does not include emergency medical care as a covered benefit in health insurance. The Affordable Care Act included emergency services as an essential health benefit, and any replacement legislation must do the same. Yet the Cassidy-Graham-Heller-Johnson Amendment to H.R. 1628, the American Health Care Act, allows states to easily forego requiring insurers to adhere to important consumer protections, including the requirement to cover the ten essential health benefits, and protections for those with pre-existing conditions.” [ACEP, 9/19/17]

American Nurses Association: “As With All Other Repeal And Replace Proposals To Date, The Current Proposal Fulfills None ANA’s 4 Principles For Health System Transformation.” “The Graham-Cassidy bill — also supported by Sens. Dean Heller (R-NV) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) — is not substantially different from any of the other repeal and replace bills we have seen from House and Senate Republicans. It repeals Medicaid expansion in 2020; it eliminates the $1 billion Prevention and Public Health Fund; it creates high-risk pools for individuals with pre-existing conditions; it defunds Planned Parenthood for a year; it puts a per-capita cap on Medicaid funding and gives states the option to convert their Medicaid programs into block grants; and it ends premium tax credit assistance and cost-sharing subsidies and puts greater control of healthcare spending in state hands. As with all other repeal and replace proposals to date, the current proposal fulfills none ANA’s 4 principles for health system transformation.” [ANA, 9/19/17]

CONSUMER GROUPS

AARP: “The Graham/Cassidy/Heller/Johnson Bill Would Result In An Age Tax For Older Americans Who Would See Their Health Care Costs Increase Under This Bill.” “Should this bill be brought to the Senate floor for a vote, we strongly urge all Senators to vote NO. As our members expect from AARP, we will monitor each Senator’s vote should this bill come to the Senate floor and notify older Americans by reporting the vote in our publications, online, through the media, and in direct alerts to our members…The Graham/Cassidy/Heller/Johnson bill would result in an age tax for older Americans who would see their health care costs increase under this bill…We have serious concerns that Graham/Cassidy/Heller/Johnson would allow states to once again permit insurance companies to charge people with pre-existing conditions more just because they have cancer, asthma or diabetes.” [AARP, 9/19/17]

AARP: “#GrahamCassidy Would Price Gouge Older Americans With An Age Tax, Decrease Coverage, And Undermine Pre-existing Condition Protections.” “AARP stands ready to work with Congress on commonsense, bipartisan solutions to improve health care. #GrahamCassidy is not that bill. #GrahamCassidy has the same flaws as the proposals rejected by AARP, consumer groups, doctors, hospitals, & the public earlier this year. #GrahamCassidy would price gouge older Americans with an age tax, decrease coverage, and undermine pre-existing condition protections. #GrahamCassidy’s Medicaid caps would also jeopardize the ability of older Americans to stay in their own homes as they age. #GrahamCassidy is just another bad bill that would 🔺 costs & 🔻 coverage. We urge Congress to reject it & the flawed approach it represents.” [AARP Advocates, 9/15/17]

Consumers Union: “This Is Just Another Version Of The Previous Failed Proposals That Were Not Only Rejected By The Majority Of Americans, They Were Rejected By The Senate Itself.” “The Graham-Cassidy bill is the third strike in this losing game of repealing the Affordable Care Act. Just like its predecessors, this plan would leave tens of millions uninsured, threaten key consumer protections and coverage requirements, and fundamentally alter Medicaid by drastically cutting funding and shifting billions of dollars of healthcare costs onto states and consumers. This is just another version of the previous failed proposals that were not only rejected by the majority of Americans, they were rejected by the Senate itself.” [Consumers Union, 9/13/17]

National Farmers Union: “The Graham-Cassidy Bill Does Not Address The Barriers That Farmers And Ranchers Face In Accessing Health Coverage, And It Would Only Make Matters Worse.” “I write on behalf of nearly 200,000 members of National Farmers Union (NFU) who are engaged in all forms of family farming and ranching. NFU’s member-driven policy ‘affirms the right of all Americans to have access to affordable, quality health care.’ The Graham-Cassidy bill does not address the barriers that farmers and ranchers face in accessing health coverage, and it would only make matters worse. We urge you to vote no on the legislation. NFU will be monitoring each Senator’s vote and will include it in our Congressional scorecard.” [NFU, 9/21/17]

PATIENT GROUPS

ALS Association, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Diabetes Association, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Arthritis Foundation, Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, Family Voices, JDRF, Lutheran Services in America, March of Dimes, National Health Council, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, National Organization for Rare Diseases, Volunteers of America, WomenHeart: “This Bill Would Limit Funding For The Medicaid Program, Roll Back Important Essential Health Benefit Protections, And Potentially Open The Door To Annual And Lifetime Caps On Coverage, Endangering Access To Critical Care For Millions Of Americans.” “This bill would limit funding for the Medicaid program, roll back important essential health benefit protections, and potentially open the door to annual and lifetime caps on coverage, endangering access to critical care for millions of Americans. Our organizations urge senators to oppose this legislation…Our organizations, instead, strongly support the bipartisan hearings spearheaded by Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-Wash.) in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and by Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) in the Senate Finance Committee.” [Letter, 9/18/17]

American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network: “With Repeal Of The Health Care Law As Its Starting Point, The Graham-Cassidy Bill Is Distracting And, If Enacted, Would Be Disruptive To The Health Care Markets — Creating Uncertainty For Millions Of Americans.” “ACS CAN commends HELP Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) for initiating this bipartisan examination of health care solutions and for restoring long-needed regular legislative order to the debate. With repeal of the health care law as its starting point, the Graham-Cassidy bill is distracting and, if enacted, would be disruptive to the health care markets — creating uncertainty for millions of Americans…On behalf of cancer patients, survivors and their families, we urge lawmakers to continue to focus on practical, bipartisan efforts to strengthen health care coverage and urge Senators Cassidy and Graham to work within, and not around, the HELP Committee process.” [ACS CAN, 9/14/17]

National Coalition For Cancer Survivorship Of More Than 35 Cancer Organizations: “35+ Cancer Orgs, Representing 16 Million #Cancer Pts & Survivors, Ask Sen To Vote No On Harmful #ACA Repeal.” “35+ cancer orgs, representing 16 MILLION #cancer pts & survivors, ask Sen to vote NO on harmful #ACA repeal.” [National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship, 9/19/17]

Coalition To Stop Opioid Overdose Of 469 Mental Health And Substance Use Disorder Groups: “We Are Very Concerned That The GCHJ’s Proposed Changes To Our Health Care System Will Result In Reductions In Health Care Coverage, Particularly For Individuals With Substance Use Disorders And Mental Illness, And We Cannot Support The Bill.” “The undersigned organizations are writing to share our serious concerns with several of the health system reforms included in the Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson (GCHJ) proposal. We are very concerned that the GCHJ’s proposed changes to our health care system will result in reductions in health care coverage, particularly for individuals with substance use disorders and mental illness, and we cannot support the bill.” [Letter, 9/19/17]

DISABILITY RIGHTS

Consortium For Citizens With Disabilities: “We Cannot Overstate The Danger Facing The Millions Of Adults And Children With Disabilities If The Proposal’s Medicaid Provisions Are Adopted.” “As we have commented on multiple proposals considered by the Senate, we cannot overstate the danger facing the millions of adults and children with disabilities if the proposal’s Medicaid provisions are adopted. The proposal’s imposition of a per capita cap and the elimination of the adult Medicaid expansion would decimate a program that has provided essential healthcare and long term services and supports to millions of adults and children with disabilities for decades. We are also extremely concerned about the changes proposed to the private individual health insurance market and the tax credits that currently assist low-income individuals, including individuals with disabilities, to purchase insurance.”

The Arc: “Architects Of This Bill Are Still Ignoring The Pleas Of Their Constituents With Disabilities.” “While this piece of legislation has a new title and makes new promises, it is more of the same threats to Medicaid and those who rely on it for a life in the community. The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson proposal cuts and caps the Medicaid program. The loss of federal funding is a serious threat to people with disabilities and their families who rely on Medicaid for community based supports.” [The Arc, 9/14/17]

HOSPITALS

American Hospital Association: “This Proposal Would Erode Key Protections For Patients And Consumers And Does Nothing To Stabilize The Insurance Market Now Or In The Long Term” And “The Block Grant To Provide Support For The Expansion Population Expires In 2026, Thereby Eliminating Coverage For Millions Of Americans.” “We believe that coverage could be at risk for tens of millions of Americans under the Graham-Cassidy proposal. We continue to urge senators to work in a bipartisan manner to address the challenges facing our health care system. This proposal would erode key protections for patients and consumers and does nothing to stabilize the insurance market now or in the long term. In addition, the block grant to provide support for the expansion population expires in 2026, thereby eliminating coverage for millions of Americans. For these reasons, we oppose the Graham-Cassidy plan.” [AHA Statement, 9/19/17]

Arizona Hospital And Healthcare Association: “A Central Goal Of The Arizona Hospital And Healthcare Association Is To Ensure More Arizona Families Have Access To Quality Care They Can Afford” And “Graham-Cassidy…Falls Short On Both Counts.” “A central goal of the Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association is to ensure more Arizona families have access to quality care they can afford. The Graham-Cassidy legislation being considered by Congress falls short on both counts. This proposal erodes critical protections for patients and consumers, and would lead to costlier premiums for many individuals — especially those with pre-existing conditions. Millions would lose coverage altogether.” [AzHHA, 9/21/17]

Kansas Hospital Association: “We Will Continue To Urge Our Senators To…Protect Health Coverage And Oppose The (Graham-Cassidy) Bill.” “‘We will continue to urge our senators to address the challenges facing our health care system, protect health coverage and oppose the (Graham-Cassidy) bill,’ said Cindy Samuelson, vice president for public relations at the Kansas Hospital Association. Her group is pushing Kansas Sen. Moran, who previously criticized his party’s efforts to roll back Medicaid, to vote against the latest bill.” [Modern Healthcare, 9/18/17]

Greater New York Hospital Association And 35 New York Provider, Labor, Consumer, And Insurers: The Bill’s “Implementation Would Catastrophically Cut Federal Funding To New York’s Health Care System And Severely Compromise Your Constituents’ Access To Health Care Coverage And Services.” “Our coalition of New York State consumers, health care and human service workers, and providers and insurers urge you to strongly oppose the new Graham-Cassidy bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which could be voted on in the Senate in the coming days. If the bill clears the Seante, it would be sent to the House for your consideration. Your opposition to the bill is critical, as its implementation would catastrophically cut Federal funding to New York’s health care system and severely compromise your constituents’ access to health care coverage and services.” [GNYHA, 9/19/17]

Federation Of American Hospitals: “The Graham-Cassidy Proposal Could Disrupt Access To Health Care For Millions Of The More Than 70 Million Americans Who Depend On Medicaid And The Marketplaces For Their Health Coverage.” “The Graham-Cassidy proposal could disrupt access to health care for millions of the more than 70 million Americans who depend on Medicaid and the marketplaces for their health coverage. It is time to move on to secure the health coverage for those who have it, and find solutions for those who don’t. We urge the Senate to reject legislation that fails to move us forward in assuring Americans access to affordable health care and coverage.” [FAH, 9/20/17]

Children’s Hospital Association: “This Bill Would Have Devastating Consequences For Children And Families.” “The nation’s children’s hospitals stand in strong opposition to the most recent legislative proposal introduced by Sens. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., Bill Cassidy, R-La., Dean Heller, R-Nev., and Ron Johnson, R-Wis. Their legislation would slash funding for Medicaid, the nation’s largest health care program for children, by one-third, reducing access and coverage for more than 30 million children in the program. Furthermore, the legislation weakens important consumer safeguards, and as a result, millions of children in working families would no longer be assured that their private insurance covers the most basic of services without annual and lifetime limits and regardless of any underlying medical condition. This bill would have devastating consequences for children and families.” [CHA, 9/18/17]

America’s Essential Hospitals: “It Appears To Significantly Restrict Federal Health Care Funding Through Per-Capita Caps And Block Grants, Which Would Shift Costs To States, Patients, Providers, And Taxpayers.” “It appears to significantly restrict federal health care funding through per-capita caps and block grants, which would shift costs to states, patients, providers, and taxpayers. Further, by taking an approach so close to that of the earlier House and Senate plans, it’s reasonable to conclude it would have a similar result: millions of Americans losing coverage…Further, it would impose strict new limits on how states raise support for the safety net. Rather than providing flexibility, this would limit states’ coverage and financing choices. Rather than consider a proposal with no CBO score or committee review, the Senate should stay focused on bipartisan efforts to shore up the insurance market, extend Children’s Health Insurance Program funding, and delay Medicaid DSH cuts.” [AEH, 9/15/17]

Catholic Health Association: “I Strongly Urge You To Reject The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson Legislation And Instead Support Bipartisan Efforts To Improve Our Health Care System Focusing On Insurance Market Stabilization, Affordability, And Coverage Access And Expansion.” “On behalf of the Catholic Health Association of the United States (CHA), the national leadership organization of more than 2,000 Catholic health care systems, hospitals, long-term care facilities, sponsors, and related organizations, I strongly urge you to reject the Graham-Cassidy-HellerJohnson legislation and instead support bipartisan efforts to improve our health care system focusing on insurance market stabilization, affordability, and coverage access and expansion.” [CHA, 9/19/17]

MEDICAID PROGRAMS

National Association Of Medicaid Directors: “We Are Concerned That This Legislation Would…Fail To Deliver On Our Collective Goal Of An Improved Health Care System.” “The Board of Directors of the National Association of Medicaid Directors (NAMD) urges Congress to carefully consider the significant challenges posed by the Graham-Cassidy legislation. State Medicaid Directors are strong proponents of state innovation in the drive towards health care system transformation. Our members are committed to ensuring that the programs we operate improve health outcomes while also being fiscally responsible to state and federal taxpayers. In order to succeed, however, these efforts must be undertaken in a thoughtful, deliberative, and responsible way. We are concerned that this legislation would undermine these efforts in many states and fail to deliver on our collective goal of an improved health care system.” [NAMD, 9/21/17]

SCHOOLS

The School Superintendents Association And The Save Medicaid In Schools Coalition: “Graham-Cassidy Reneges On Medicaid’s 50+ Year Commitment To Provide America’s Children With Access To Vital Healthcare Services That Ensure They Have Adequate Educational Opportunities And Can Contribute To Society.” “The 70 undersigned organizations of the Save Medicaid in the Schools Coalition are concerned that the Graham-Cassidy bill jeopardizes healthcare for the nation’s most vulnerable children: students with disabilities and students in poverty. Specifically, Graham-Cassidy reneges on Medicaid’s 50+ year commitment to provide America’s children with access to vital healthcare services that ensure they have adequate educational opportunities and can contribute to society by imposing a per-capita cap and shifting current and future costs to taxpayers in every state and Congressional district. While children currently comprise almost half of all Medicaid beneficiaries, less than one in five dollars is spent by Medicaid on children. Accordingly, a per-capita cap, even one that is based on different groups of beneficiaries, will disproportionately harm children’s access to care, including services received at school. Considering these unintended consequences, we urge a ‘no” vote on Graham-Cassidy.” [Letter, 9/19/17]

INSURERS

America’s Health Insurance Plans: “The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson Proposal Fails To Meet [Our] Guiding Principles, And Would Have Real Consequences On Consumers And Patients.” “The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson proposal fails to meet these guiding principles, and would have real consequences on consumers and patients by further destabilizing the individual market; cutting Medicaid; pulling back on protections for pre-existing conditions; not ending taxes on health insurance premiums and benefits; and potentially allowing government-controlled, single payer health care to grow.” [AHIP, 9/20/17]

Blue Cross Blue Shield Association: “We Share The Significant Concerns Of Many Health Care Organizations About The Proposed Graham-Cassidy Bill.” “Although we support providing states with greater flexibility in shaping health care options for their residents, we share the significant concerns of many health care organizations about the proposed Graham-Cassidy bill. The bill contains provisions that would allow states to waive key consumer protections, as well as undermine safeguards for those with pre-existing medical conditions. The legislation reduces funding for many states significantly and would increase uncertainty in the marketplace, making coverage more expensive and jeopardizing Americans’ choice of health plans. Legislation must also ensure adequate funding for Medicaid to protect the most vulnerable.” [BCBSA, 9/20/17]

Blue Shield Of California: “We Believe This Proposal Will Cause Millions Of Californians To Lose Their Health Insurance Coverage While Requiring Major State Tax Increases Over The Long-Term To Fund Basic Levels Of Access.” “We are therefore writing to express our strong opposition to the Cassidy-Graham proposal that the Senate may soon consider. We believe this proposal will cause millions of Californians to lose their health insurance coverage while requiring major state tax increases over the long-term to fund basic levels of access. This would undo much of the substantial progress California has made expanding coverage in recent years.” [Blue Shield of California, 9/21/17]

Association Of Community Affiliated Plans: “We Are Disappointed To See That The Senate Is Repeating — And In Some Ways, Doubling Down On — Many Of The Same Mistakes As It Made With The Better Care Reconciliation Act.” “We are disappointed to see that the Senate is repeating — and in some ways, doubling down on — many of the same mistakes as it made with the Better Care Reconciliation Act. As with previous efforts to overhaul the health care system, ACAP has compared the language of the Cassidy-Graham proposal against a set of stated principles surrounding health reform, which we have shared with Congress before…We’ve seen what’s possible with health reform; there have been promising talks in the Senate HELP Committee around stabilizing Marketplaces and bipartisan progress around the must-pass funding extension for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), for which no new allotments exist after the end of the month. We urge the Senate in the strongest possible terms to turn away from partisan politics and instead build on the promising work around CHIP and the HELP committee.” [ACAP, 9/18/17]

protectourcare
In Uncategorized

Senate GOPers Demanded CBO Score, Until Now

Time and again, Senate Republicans demanded an analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office before they would vote on repealing the Affordable Care Act. This analysis let the Senators know about how much people’s premiums and costs would increase and how many people would lose coverage.

Now, as they rush a partisan, secretly drafted health care repeal bill to a vote, Senate Republicans don’t seem to care. They don’t want to know the truth about how much their constituents’ health care costs will go up or how many will lose coverage. Senator Lindsey Graham put it best himself when he said that a bill without a CBO score “needs to be viewed with suspicion.”

See the history for yourself.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): “Any Bill…Not Scored? Needs To Be Viewed With Suspicion.” “‘Like y’all, I’m still waiting to see if it’s a boy or a girl,’ said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). ‘Any bill that has been posted less than 24 hours, going to be debated three or four hours, not scored? Needs to be viewed with suspicion.’” [Politico, 5/5/17]

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): “We Like The CBO When They Agree With Us…When They Don’t, They’re A Bunch Of Losers.” “Graham, however, argued that his GOP colleagues should spending time reviewing and trying to address the the budget office’s findings. ‘We like the CBO when they agree with us,’ the South Carolina senator told reporters. ‘When they don’t, they’re a bunch of losers.’” [The Hill, 3/13/17]

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) Called For A CBO Score, Wants To See How Many People Lose Coverage, How Much Is Added To The Debt. [Steven Dennis Tweet, 3/6/17]


Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI): Calls For CBO Score As The Starting Point For Debate, “We Need Better Information At The Start Of The Process.” “Johnson said he’s not asking for the discussions to go on for months, but ‘let’s take a couple of weeks and be thoughtful. Give me a chance to make the case to improve it.’ He did say he’ll vote no this week on a measure to move the bill forward, as he believes it’s too early to make that decision. ‘This is such an alternative universe,’ said Johnson. ‘We’ve gotten through the process until we get the CBO score, at the end of the process. We need better information at the start of the process.’” [Newsmax, 6/27/17]

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): “I Think We Need To Do The Job Right, And We Certainly Need A CBO Analysis.” “‘I think we need to do the job right, and we certainly need a CBO analysis,’ she said on Thursday afternoon. ‘Part of the problem is we don’t have a CBO analysis of the impact of the bill, so I don’t know what it is for coverage and cost sharing and the individual insurance markets. There are so many unanswered questions.’” [Vox, 5/4/17]

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): On CBO Not Having A Score In Time For GCHJ, “That’s Problematic.” “Sen. Susan Collins said she is upset that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office won’t have enough time to fully review a last-minute bill to overhaul Obamacare. The Maine Republican has not taken a position on the bill co-sponsored by Sens. Bill Cassidy, R-La., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. However, she said she was concerned that CBO said that it won’t be able to determine how the bill would affect insurer coverage and premiums by early next week. ‘That’s problematic because that is part of the problem of short-circuiting the process,’ she told reporters Monday.” [Washington Examiner, 9/18/17]

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL): If Senator Mitch McConnell Does Not Honor Normal Senate Processes And Traditions, “They Won’t Have The Votes In The Senate.” “There was also a creeping concern about how quickly the bill was moving. Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, essentially promised to move the bill to the Senate floor without the hearings and other processes that are normal for such a far-reaching piece of legislation. He had promised when Republicans took the majority that they would honor normal Senate processes and traditions. ‘I think if that’s the approach they take,’ Mr. Rubio said, ‘they won’t have the votes in the Senate.’” [New York Times, 3/8/17]

Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND): “I…Want To See The CBO Score And Additional Analysis Of The Legislation.” “As I’ve said all along, our overall goal for health care reform legislation is to provide Americans with access to patient-centered health care and health insurance at an affordable rate. I did not support the Senate’s first draft. Now, I will review the new draft legislation and want to see the CBO score and additional analysis of the legislation. I will reserve judgment until we do so.” [Sen. Hoeven, Statement, 7/13/17]

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA): CBO Score “Becomes An Important Part Of The Consideration For The Final Product.” “‘I don’t think it slows it down, but it’s very important,’ Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), a member of the 13-member working group focused on health care, said about the CBO score. ‘It becomes an important part of the consideration for the final product.’” [Morning Consult, 5/10/17]

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): “The CBO Score On The Senate Bill Is Going To Be What Counts.” “Cornyn: ‘The CBO score on the Senate bill is going to be what counts.’” [Twitter, 5/24/17]

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO): “The Senate’s Going To Have To Have The Kind Of Score They Need To Move This Forward.” “‘The Senate’s going to have to have the kind of score they need to move this forward and the Senate’s going to be looking at this to see what we can do to take the House work, look at what the House did, look at what we can do to improve that in our view,’ Blunt told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” [The Hill, 5/7/17]

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ): “We’ll See When CBO Comes Back How That Scores…” “On the other side, Flake views the bill’s refundable tax credits as more taxpayer subsidies. ‘We’ll see when CBO comes back how that scores, but it’s still pretty expensive,’ Flake said, referring to the pending cost and coverage estimates by the Congressional Budget Office.” [AZ Central, 3/12/17]

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV): “I Look Forward To Reviewing The Revised Senate Health Care Legislation And Forthcoming CBO Report To Determine The Impact On West Virginians.” “Any health care bill to replace Obamacare must provide access to affordable health care coverage for West Virginians, including our large Medicaid population and those struggling with drug addiction. I opposed the previous draft because it did not ensure access to affordable health care in West Virginia, did not do enough to combat the opioid epidemic that is devastating my state, cut traditional Medicaid too deeply, and harmed rural health care providers. I look forward to reviewing the revised Senate health care legislation and forthcoming CBO report to determine the impact on West Virginians but continue to have serious concerns about the Medicaid provisions.” [Sen. Capito Statement, 7/13/17]

protectourcare
In Uncategorized

On Health Care Repeal, The Facts Keep Getting Worse

As Republicans continue their partisan push to repeal health care, the damage their repeal would cause turns out to be even worse than the repeal bills they’ve tried in the past.

That probably explains why they refuse to wait for the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimate of how their plan would impact people’s coverage and costs.

  • The Washington Post now reports, “The latest Obamacare overhaul bill gaining steam on Capitol Hill slashes health-care spending more deeply and would likely cover fewer people than a July bill that failed precisely because of such concerns.”
  • Fitch Rating Agency found that this bill was “more disruptive for most states than prior Republican efforts.”
  • New York Republican Representatives Peter King and Tom Reed are doubtful they’ll support the bill, despite voting for earlier health care repeal bills.
  • Republican Governors from Ohio, Massachusetts and New Hampshire have come out against the plan.
  • GOP Senator Rand Paul opposes it, writing in an op-ed, “In all ways, this bill is also ObamaCare Lite. In no way is it repeal the way we promised. I will oppose this bill as I did the other fake repeal bills, and I urge those who want repeal to do so, as well.“

Maybe the GOP should live up to their promise to work across-party-lines and hear from experts to make reforms that improve our health care system instead of this hyper-partisan health care repeal that is overwhelmingly opposed by most Americans.


protectourcare
In Uncategorized

Partisan Graham-Cassidy Repeal Fails the McCain Test

Washington — Senate Republicans are again pursuing a strategy of secretive, partisan repeal of the health care law despite failing to do so just weeks ago and despite the momentum behind a bipartisan approach to stabilizing insurance markets which has permeated the health care debate in the Senate over the last few weeks.

The current repeal effort being sponsored by U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA), among others, also clearly violates the McCain Test laid out in his floor speech on July 25th where he declared his opposition to partisan repeal based on it failing to meet the traditions and protocols of the United States Senate and for which he received broad acclaim. McCain gave the speech upon returning to the Senate after being diagnosed with brain cancer. Among other things, McCain called for a return to regular order, compromise and bipartisanship and noted that the Republican effort to ram through partisan repeal written in secret and without hearings violated those standards.

“Graham-Cassidy is a return to the very partisan approach and tactics McCain deplored in his speech and fails the McCain Test in every way,” said Protect Our Care Campaign Director Brad Woodhouse. “This repeal bill was written in secret with Republican input only, there have been no hearings on it, there has been no CBO score and there’s not a hint of compromise in the approach which repeals but fails to replace the Affordable Care Act. Graham-Cassidy is a disaster substantively and as it relates to the McCain Test for how the Senate should operate it’s a miserable failure.”

The McCain Test from his July 25th Floor Speech:

· Cooperation

· Compromise

· Common Ground

· Trust

· Working Together

· Regular Order

· Committee Process

· Bipartisanship

· Deliberative

The McCain Test reiterated yesterday on Face the Nation:

MCCAIN: “Are we going to ram through our proposal with, with Democrats and the president? That’s not the way to do it. We got to go back. If I could just say again, the way to do this is have a bill, put it through the committee. We have Patty Murray and Lamar Alexander are doing fine — bring it to the floor. Have debate. Have amendments.”

Graham-Cassidy Fails the McCain Test:

· Partisan

· Secret

· No Hearings

· Rushed


protectourcare
In Uncategorized

McCain and Kasich Rebuke Partisan Health Care Repeal with No Committee Hearings

On CBS’s Face the Nation this weekend, Senator John McCain reiterated his belief that any health care repeal needs bipartisan input and public hearings, as opposed to the secret, closed, partisan process currently driving the Graham-Cassidy health care repeal.

In response to McCain’s statement, Ohio Governor John Kasich agreed.


Here’s McCain’s full quote from Face the Nation:

MCCAIN: “Are we going to ram through our proposal with, with Democrats and the president? That’s not the way to do it. We got to go back. If I could just say again, the way to do this is have a bill, put it through the committee. We have Patty Murray and Lamar Alexander are doing fine — bring it to the floor. Have debate. Have amendments.”


protectourcare
In Uncategorized

112 Days Ago, Bill Cassidy Cared About The Damage of Health Care Repeal, Now He Doesn’t

Senator Bill Cassidy doesn’t care about how damaging the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says his health care repeal bill will be to people.

It’s far different from 112 days ago when he actually cared about the impact of health care repeal. The latest repeal scheme bears Cassidy’s name but was written in secret without hearings or expert input.

See here.

5/26/17 — Senator Bill Cassidy on CBO: “I think we need to be instructed by [the score],”

9/15/17 — Senator Bill Cassidy on CBO: ““I just don’t care about the coverage numbers”

protectourcare
In Uncategorized

Graham-Cassidy-Heller Bill Would End Medicaid As We Know It

Latest GOP Repeal Bill Hurts Seniors, Kids, People with Disabilities, Working Families, and Leaves States in Crisis on Their Own

The GOP has been consistent this year in its crusade against Medicaid, and the latest repeal proposal from Senate Republicans is no different. The Graham-Cassidy-Heller bill would end Medicaid as we know it, hurting seniors, children, people with disabilities, and working families, breaking key promises that the bill’s sponsors have made.

The Graham-Cassidy-Heller proposal would destroy Medicaid, turning it into a shrinking block grant that would not be able to support the nearly 75 million Americans who rely on Medicaid for their health care.

Here’s a look at just how damaging the latest repeal proposal is for Medicaid:

Graham-Cassidy-Heller would force states to raise taxes or make draconian cuts to schools and other priorities, and states would be left on their own when they need help the most in times of crisis and natural disasters.

  • The severe cuts to Medicaid would blow a hole in state budgets, forcing states to either raise people’s taxes or make draconian cuts to schools or other vital programs.
  • States and people would be left on their own at risk during natural disasters. Per capita caps would mean states facing higher costs due to increased health care needs during an epidemic like the Zika virus, or following a natural disaster like Hurricanes Harvey and Irma would be left on their own.
  • Medicaid funding helps schools support children with disabilities get individualized attention and therapy, and helps eligible kids get vision and dental screenings. Severe cuts to school funding will affect not only students on Medicaid, but will trigger a domino effect that leads to across-the-board education cuts, threatening extra-curricular programs and forcing schools to expand class sizes.

End Medicaid expansion, which has extended coverage to over 14 million low-income adults.

  • Graham-Cassidy-Heller ends the Medicaid expansion entirely, replacing it with a small, temporary block grant, and would threaten the health coverage of over 14 million Americans who currently rely on the program
  • The block grant would then disappear altogether after 2026, repealing the program altogether despite the major coverage gains as a direct result of allowing states to expand Medicaid.

Disproportionately harm states that chose to expand Medicaid coverage, like Alaska, Louisiana and Nevada.

  • States that expanded Medicaid are seeing record low uninsured rates according to the latest Census data. Under Graham-Cassidy-Heller, these same states would see the most significant cuts in federal funding.
  • Louisiana, for example, had an uninsured rate of nearly 15 percent in 2014, and after expanding Medicaid that number dropped 5 points to just 10 percent in 2016.
  • Louisiana would lose more than $3.2 billion in federal funding under Graham-Cassidy-Heller.
  • Sen. Cassidy’s own bill would wipe out the recent progress made due to Medicaid expansion, and cost his state more than $3 billion.
protectourcare
In Uncategorized

Republicans Introduce Last-Ditch Partisan Repeal Bill, Arguably The Worst Yet, And Are Only A…

In a last-ditch effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act with only Republican votes before the September 30th deadline, Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Dean Heller (R-NV) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) unveiled their latest proposal this week. While some may look at this effort as a Hail Mary pass with little chance to succeed, Sen. Cassidy said today that 48 or 49 Republican senators are on board with this bill, meaning they are only a couple of votes away from being able to pass the bill on the Senate floor.

The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson (GCHJ) bill would radically change our health care system — getting rid of the Affordable Care Act tax credits and Medicaid expansion and changing them into block grants with dramatically less funding for states. It would also convert traditional Medicaid into a per capita cap program. In short, this bill would slash coverage, raise costs, eliminate protections for millions of people across America, as well as gut Medicaid. In fact, it is potentially the worst of the repeal bills that we have seen to date.

Given Republicans will have to ram this partisan repeal bill through the Senate in the next two weeks in order to meet this September 30 deadline there will be no time for a regular process for the public to fully understand the impacts on their health care — with no time for adequate hearings, consultations with experts, constituent input, and amendments. Republicans in the Senate are resorting back to a secret, partisan process to force through health care repeal out of public view. — The American people need to know the facts about how this bill will impact them. Here are the top six (6) reasons why they should reject GCHJ just as they have rejected the previous repeal attempts.

GCHJ Cuts Funding to Most States & Punishes States that Expanded Medicaid

Overall, Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson cuts spending on marketplace tax credits and Medicaid expansion and converts them into a block grant. Between 2020 and 2026, GCHJ would cut $239 billion from what was projected to be spent under current law for the tax credits and expansion. After 2026, the block grant funding is eliminated altogether. Moreover, GCHJ would convert traditional Medicaid into a per capita program and cut spending by another $175 billion from 2020 to 2026. This aspect is what makes GCHJ potentially the worst among all the partisan repeal bills.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities analyzed the latest Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson proposal and found that all but twelve states would receive less federal funding. In 2026, Alaska would lose $255 million; Arizona, $1.6 billion; Louisiana, $3.2 billion; Maine, $115 million; Nevada, $639 million; Ohio, $2.5 billion; and West Virginia,

$554 million, just to name a few.


Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 9/13/17

Moreover, GCHJ’s state funding allocation redistributes funding to states that did not expand Medicaid at the expense of states that did. In other words, this bill punishes states that expanded Medicaid and chose to provide health coverage to more of their citizens. As the Center on Budget writes:

The block grant would not only cut overall funding for the Medicaid expansion and marketplace subsidies but also, starting in 2021, redistribute the reduced federal funding across states, based on their share of low-income residents rather than their actual spending needs. In general, over time, the plan would punish states that have adopted the Medicaid expansion or been more successful at enrolling low- and moderate-income people in marketplace coverage under the ACA. It would impose less damaging cuts, or even raise funding initially, for states that have rejected the Medicaid expansion or enrolled few low-income residents in marketplace coverage.


Source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 9/13/17

GCHJ Would Slash Coverage

The billions of dollars in cuts to Medicaid and marketplace tax credits would result in millions of people losing health care coverage. For example, GCHJ ends Medicaid expansion, which has extended health coverage to 11 million low-income adults.

Another important point is that GCHJ ends block grant spending in 2026, or rather, spending for Medicaid expansion and marketplace tax credits. What that means is in 2026 GCHJ repeals the Affordable Care Act without a replacement. Earlier analyses showed a “repeal-without-replace” would result in 32 million people losing coverage and individual markets collapsing.

GCHJ Would Raise Health Care Costs

Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson raises consumer health costs in a variety of ways. As discussed above, the bill would cut funding people get to help pay for premiums — through marketplace tax credits and by getting affordable coverage through Medicaid expansion.

According to the Brookings Institution, the result would be “that no one in a state’s individual market that waived EHBs would have access to comprehensive coverage. Insurers would likely sell separate policies for benefits not covered in their core plan offerings, but these supplemental policies would be subject to tremendous adverse selection, leading to very high premiums and enrollment almost exclusively by those with pre-existing conditions.” For example, a woman who purchases a separate insurance rider for maternity care would have to pay $17,320 more, according to the Center for American Progress. For states that no longer required substance use disorders or mental health to be covered, coverage for drug dependence treatment could cost an extra $20,450.

Allowing states to opt out of the essential health benefits coverage means that insurance companies could once again put lifetime and annual limits on the amount of care you receive. Moreover, this would even impact people with coverage from their employer. The Center for American Progress estimates that 20 million people with health coverage through their employer would face lifetime limits on coverage, and 27 million would face annual limits

GCHJ Would Gut Protections for People With Pre-Existing Conditions

The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network said allowing states to waive essential health benefits “could render those protections meaningless” for people with pre-existing conditions.

The American College of Physicians called for regular order and wrote that “We believe that the substantial cuts to Medicaid authorized by this legislation would cause a significant increase in the number of uninsured patients and that it would undermine essential benefits provided for patients insured under current law.”

Consumers Union said that allowing states to waive essential health benefits would be “putting meaningful coverage out of reach for many Americans, especially those with chronic and pre existing conditions.” Because states could opt out of covering these basic benefits, insurers would likely only offer policies that covered much less than they do now. The Kaiser Family Foundation found that the benefits most likely to no longer be covered would be maternity care, mental health or substance abuse coverage.

Key Stakeholders Oppose GCHJ

On Wednesday, key health care stakeholders — including the American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Osteopathic Association and the American Psychiatric Association — sent a letter to the Senate opposing the Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson bill saying it would “have a negative impact on affordable coverage for patients across our nation.” The groups urged the Senate to go through a regular order to find bipartisan solutions on health care.

In addition, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network said GCHJ “would be disruptive to the health care markets — creating uncertainty for millions of Americans.”

GCHJ Undermines Bipartisan Negotiations Underway

Last week, we saw Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, led by Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Patty Murray (D-WA), work together to find a solution to stabilize the individual market by making payments to help consumers lower out-of-pocket costs and deductibles. Insurers have cited the threat of defaulting on these payments-which the Trump administration has repeatedly threatened to do- as the main reason they would raise premiums or exit the markets. A bipartisan group of governors and insurance commissioners testified before the HELP Committee agreeing these payments needed to be made. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded failure to make these payments would result in premiums skyrocketing 20 to 25 percent and adding nearly $200 billion to the federal debt.

The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson bill threatens this bipartisan work by once again injecting partisan repeal into the process for no reason.

protectourcare
In Uncategorized

GOP Senators: Health Care Legislation Must Be Bipartisan

In the time since the House passed its partisan health care repeal, the vast majority GOP senators, including Sens. Bill Cassidy, Lindsey Graham and Dean Heller, have consistently called for bipartisan health care legislation. Take a look for yourself…

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) On His Bill With Sen. Graham: “I Think We’ll Have Hearings.” [The Advocate, 9/9/17]

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): “Any Bill…Not Scored? Needs To Be Viewed With Suspicion.” “‘Like y’all, I’m still waiting to see if it’s a boy or a girl,’ said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). ‘Any bill that has been posted less than 24 hours, going to be debated three or four hours, not scored? Needs to be viewed with suspicion.’” [Politico, 5/5/17]

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): “We’re Going To Do All These Things By September 30? Give Me A Break.” “‘We’re going to do all these things by Sept. 30? Give me a break. We’re going to cut taxes, pass health care, set aside sequestration?’ said Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican.” [Politico, 6/2/17]

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): No Deal On Friday Signals “End Of [One-Party] Health Care Talks.” “[Graham] tells [Kasie Hunt] that if GOP doesn’t reach an agreement on health care by Friday it’ll be the end of the 1 party health care talks.” NBC News Frank Thorp Tweet, 6/28/17]

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-TX): “And I Think, Frankly, Bipartisan Solutions Tend To Be More Durable.” “‘There’s a lot the American people expect of us, but we’ve seen with fragile majorities in the Senate that we are forced to work together to try to solve these problems. And I think, frankly, bipartisan solutions tend to be more durable,’ Cornyn said. Democrats have sent Republicans multiple letters on healthcare that asked, for example, for an all-Senate meeting and suggested a list of rooms where they could hold a public hearing.” [The Hill, 8/1/17]

Senate Finance Committee Chair Orrin Hatch (R-UT) On Moving Forward On Health Care: “I Hope It’ll Be Bipartisan.” “‘It’s a constant battle. Health care is one of the most difficult things,’ said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). ‘It has to come back before the end of the year. We have to face it.’ Hatch paused when asked if he’s referring to another party-line repeal effort. ‘Oh, I hope it’ll be bipartisan,’ he said.” [Politico, 7/31/17]

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): “I Have Repeatedly Said That Healthcare Reform, And Especially Major Entitlement Reform, Should Go Through The Committee Process Where Stakeholders Can Weigh In And Ideas Can Be Vetted In A Bipartisan Forum.” “I have repeatedly said that healthcare reform, and especially major entitlement reform, should go through the committee process where stakeholders can weigh in and ideas can be vetted in a bipartisan forum. I voted ‘no’ today to give the Senate another chance to take this to the committee process.” [Murkowski Statement, 7/25/17]

  • Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): “The Senate Should Step Back And Engage In A Bipartisan Process To Address The Failures Of The ACA And Stabilize The Individual Markets.” “As I’ve been saying, the Senate should take a step back and engage in a bipartisan process to address the failures of the ACA and stabilize the individual markets. That will require members on both sides of the aisle to roll up their sleeves and take this to the open committee process where it belongs.” [Murkowski Statement, 7/18/17]
  • Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): “This Is Not For Republicans To Fix Or Democrats To Fix — This Is For Us As Americans To Fix.” “‘This is not for Republicans to fix or Democrats to fix — this is for us as Americans to fix,’ Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said.” [MSNBC, 6/27/17]
  • Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): “We Should Be Working With Our Colleagues On The Other Side Of The Aisle.” ‘When did we get to the point where we said, ‘No, we’re not going to talk to Democrats about a fix?’ We should be working with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle,’ Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, told NBC News Tuesday.” [NBC News, 6/27/17]

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): “We Must Work In A Bipartisan Way To Fix The ACA’s Serious Flaws.” “I voted no on motion to proceed. When dealing with a complex issue that affects millions of Americans and 1/6th of our economy, we must proceed carefully. Making sweeping changes to the 50-year-old Medicaid program without a single Senate hearing is a mistake. We must work in a bipartisan way to fix the ACA’s serious flaws.” [Collins Tweet, 7/25/17]

  • Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): “I Want To Work W/ My GOP & Dem Colleagues To Fix The Flaws In ACA.” “I want to work w/ my GOP & Dem colleagues to fix the flaws in ACA. CBO analysis shows Senate bill won’t do it.” [Collins Tweet, 6/26/17]
  • Sen. Susan Collins (R-Me): “Go Back To The Drawing Board” And Work With Democrats To “Correct” Problems In The ACA. [Bloomberg’s Sahil Kapur Tweet, 6/27/17]

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ): Writing Bill Behind Closed Doors And Forcing Passage Against A Unified Opposition Is Not “Going To Work In The End. And It Probably Shouldn’t.” “We’ve tried to do this by coming up with a proposal behind closed doors in consultation with the administration, then springing it on skeptical members, trying to convince them it’s better than nothing, asking us to swallow our doubts and force it past a unified opposition. I don’t think that is going to work in the end. And it probably shouldn’t.” [Sen. McCain Remarks, 7/25/17]

  • Sen. John McCain (R-AZ): Sen. McCain Calls For Return To Regular Order, Including “Input From Members Of Both Parties.” “The Congress must now return to regular order, hold hearings, receive input from members of both parties, and heed the recommendations of our nation’s governors so that we can produce a bill that finally provides Americans with access to quality and affordable health care.” [Sen. McCain Statement, 7/17/17]

Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV): “Republicans And Democrats Should Sit Down Together.” [Ralston Tweet, 6/27/17]

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA): “I Wish We Weren’t Doing It One Party.” “Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said in an interview broadcast on Sunday that he wants the healthcare bill to be negotiated with both parties. ‘I wish we weren’t doing it one party. But that said, if you can lower premiums, that is common ground,’ Cassidy said on NBC’s ‘Meet The Press.’” [The Hill, 7/2/17]

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV): “Collaborating With Democrats On The Other Side, To Me, Is Not An Exercise In Futility.” “‘Collaborating with Democrats on the other side, to me, is not an exercise in futility,’ Capito said, noting that she has spoken with Manchin and other Democrats about tackling health care together. ‘That may be where we end up, and so be it.’” [Politico, 7/9/17]

  • Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV): “It’s Never Good To Pass Major Legislation Without The Input Of Both Parties.” “It’s hard for me to see how we get there. I think a better approach would be to try to involve some moderate Democrats in the process and see if we can come up with a bipartisan bill. It’s never good to pass major legislation without the input of both parties.” [The Hill, 6/28/17]

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI): “I Wish We Were Doing This On A Bipartisan Basis.” “‘I wish we were doing this on a bipartisan basis,’ Johnson told CNN’s Chris Cuomo on “New Day.” ‘I think it was a mistake saying right away we were going to do this partisan, that’s where we’re out. Maybe what we’re going to have to do is our partisan bill, Democrats do theirs, we’re not going to fix all of these problems. Then maybe, maybe everybody will sit down and lets long-term fix the healthcare system, let’s start controlling healthcare costs,’ the Wisconsin senator continued.” [The Hill, 6/28/17]

Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA): “We’ve Got To Come Together, Republicans And Democrats And Deal With The Issues That Are Making Health Insurance So Expensive.” “The Affordable Care Act is the law of the land. As said by the majority leader and the minority leader Thursday night or Friday morning, neither party did anything to fix it. We’ve still got some things that need to be done. We’ve got to come together, Republicans and Democrats and deal with the issues that are making insurance so expensive. I think we will, and I think we’ll eventually get it done.” [Isakson Interview with Marietta Journal editorial staff, 8/1/17]

Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY): “For Big Things That Affect The Country, It Should Be Done In A Bipartisan Way.” “As lawmakers in Washington remain divided over the future of health care in the United States, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, says there should be a bipartisan approach when it comes to legislation. ‘Should have been bipartisan when Obamacare was passed. It should be now as well,’ Barrasso said Sunday on ‘Face the Nation.’ ‘For big things that affect the country, it should be done in a bipartisan way,’ he added.” [CBS Face the Nation, 7/23/17]

protectourcare
In Uncategorized

Republicans: Graham-Cassidy-Heller Repeal Bill Dead in the Senate

Now Republicans Must Stop Trump’s Sabotage by Ensuring Cost Sharing Reduction Payments Are Made or Hold the Bag for Skyrocketing Premiums

Before it has even been introduced, the latest desperate attempt at health care repeal from Republicans is dead on arrival according to Republican Senators. The repeal proposal from Senators Graham, Cassidy and Heller was the most vicious bill yet and can’t seem to get the support from members of their own party. Sen. Hatch gave the possibility of a vote on the bill a firm, “No” on Monday. Sen. Rand Paul said the bill “sounds to me like a bad idea.” The bill proposes the same deeply unpopular provisions of previous repeal bills, including deep cuts to Medicaid, ending federal funding for Medicaid Expansion states, eliminating payments to help lower out-of-pocket costs and deductibles for lower-income individuals, and increasing out-of-pocket costs for people with pre-existing conditions. The bill would also disproportionately hurt states that expanded Medicaid over states that did not.

“The now dead Graham-Cassidy-Heller bill would have been the worst of all the partisan health care bills Senate Republicans have pursued to date — worse even than those that were already soundly rejected by the American people,” said Protect Our Care Campaign Director Brad Woodhouse. “Now is the time for Republicans to finally abandon these failed, partisan repeal efforts and work toward bipartisan solutions to improve health care like immediately making good on the cost-sharing reduction payments to prevent premiums from skyrocketing for Americans by twenty percent and provide much-needed certainty to the health care market. If Republicans don’t quickly stand up to Trump’s sabotage and ensure these payments are made, they will be to blame when the premiums rise, coverage lapses occur and the debt explodes by $200 billion.”

Close Menu