House GOP reveals AHCA: Update - Repeal of ACA IS BACK ON

[tru_m.a.c]

Medicaid coverage under Republican health plan could cost RI up to $70 million by 2021

Rhode Island may need to spend another $25 million to $30 million to keep 70,000 low-income adults from losing their Medicaid coverage under the House Republicans' plan to replace the Affordable Care Act in 2020, according a preliminary analysis performed by health experts for The Providence Journal.

And that's just in the first year. In 2021, the additional cost is projected to run between $65 million and $70 million — an expense, some experts say, the state would likely be unable or unwilling to absorb.


The preliminary analysis, provided by former state Health Insurance Commissioner Christopher F. Koller and reviewed by several local health experts, is the first publicly released estimate of the impact of the proposed funding cuts on Rhode Island's Medicaid expansion program.

The Republican plan to replace Obamacare would dramatically reduce the amount of funding the federal government provides to help states pay for Medicaid, according to the Congressional Budget Office report released this week.

Medicaid insures close to 300,000 Rhode Islanders, or nearly one-third of the population. State health experts say the first hit from the proposed changes would be to the state's Medicaid expansion population — roughly 70,000 adults who became newly eligible for coverage in 2014 under Obamacare.

Rhode Island is among 31 states, along with the District of Columbia, that adopted the federal law's expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid. In Rhode Island, that meant low-income adults who are not disabled and have no dependent children. Their coverage currently costs $450 million — or one-fifth of the state's $2.3-billion Medicaid program.

Medicaid coverage under Republican health plan could cost RI up to $70 million by 2021

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Illinois experts say Republican health care plan could cost state $40 billion

Illinois stands to lose an estimated $40 billion in federal money over the next decade under the Republican health care proposal being considered in Congress, experts told state lawmakers Thursday.

The $40 billion projection is based on a report released this week by the Congressional Budget Office that said 24 million Americans would lose coverage by 2026 under the Republican plan, David Gross, senior vice president of government relations for the Illinois Health and Hospital Association, told lawmakers. The report said states could lose out on a possible $880 billion in federal funding over that same period.

Illinois experts say Republican health care plan could cost state $40 billion

 

[tru_m.a.c]

How the Republican health care plan will affect residents of every Georgia county

How Georgia counties voted for president and how the Republican health care plan will affect people from different age and income groups

Americans with different incomes and varying insurance costs are squeezed into one category under the Republican plan.

Take, for instance, Clay County, which has a median income of $20,438 and Forsyth County, the richest county in Georgia with a median income of $88,816. Under the current healthcare system, a 60 year-old Clay County resident making $30,000 a year pays the same in premiums as a resident of Forsyth County of the same age and income.

However, it costs more to insure the Clay County resident than their counterpart in Forsyth, and so the Clay County resident receives a much higher subsidy under the current system. The replacement proposal would lump both of these counties under the same tax credit slab, which would leave the Clay County resident paying much higher premiums than Forsyth residents if the Republican plan goes into effect.

How the Republican health care plan will affect Georgia counties

 

[FAH1223]

As ACA Repeal Vote Nears, Kansas Debates Expanding Medicaid

Only possible because moderate GOP and Democrats got elected...

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Rural Wisconsin takes hit in GOP health plan after backing Donald Trump

No congressional district in Wisconsin delivered a bigger victory margin for Donald Trump last fall (20 points) than the rural northern one represented by Republican Sean Duffy.

But by one key measure, no district in Wisconsin would lose more health care aid under the GOP plan to replace Obamacare.

Wisconsin is part of a national pattern in which the Obamacare enrollees who appear to be hit the hardest by the Republican plan fit the demographic and geographic profile of Trump’s political base.

In Wisconsin, the cuts would be much smaller in the southwest and south central parts of the state. In Sauk County, for example, a 60-year-old with an income of $30,000 would lose $1,300 in tax credits and subsidies for his or her health care plan compared to current law.

But in some northern and western counties, that assistance would decrease by more than $7,000.

The main reason?

Under Obamacare, the financial aid people get to help them buy their health insurance is more generous in areas where health care costs are higher. Those areas include many rural counties where there are fewer health care providers.

In the legislation, the biggest losses in tax credits in Wisconsin would occur in two mostly rural congressional districts, the northern seat held by Duffy and the western seat held by Democrat Ron Kind.

Duffy’s district has the highest number of Obamacare enrollees in the state (more than 35,000 last year) and Kind’s has the third highest.

Both areas were carried by Trump last fall. They are also the two congressional districts in Wisconsin that saw the biggest swings toward the GOP in 2016.

In both districts, a 60-year-old making $30,000 would lose an average of more than $5,500 a year in health care tax credits under the GOP plan, based on a Journal Sentinel analysis of the Kaiser data.

For older, low-income couples, the loss in tax credits would top $15,000 in parts of both districts.

But Duffy said he did not favor the approach under Obamacare of offering bigger tax credits to people in higher-cost counties (though that has meant more generous subsidies in his rural district). And that view appears to be the prevailing one among House Republicans.

Duffy said that is the kind of government “micromanaging … we’re trying to get away from.”

More broadly, Duffy argued that Obamacare was unpopular in his district and was making health care more costly. He argued the GOP plan would create more competition, lower costs and, as a result, “my communities will get helped far more than what they have under Obamacare.”

While northern and western Wisconsin would see the biggest losses in tax credits under the GOP plan, parts of southern Wisconsin would be hurt a lot less.

The district that would see by far the smallest cuts in tax credits for older enrollees is one that voted heavily against Trump: the seat anchored by Madison and represented by Democrat Mark Pocan.

There were roughly 240,000 people enrolled in health plans on the federal marketplace under Obamacare last year in Wisconsin.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...lth-plan-after-backing-donald-trump/99349712/

 

[tru_m.a.c]

A half million Texans could be without insurance under GOP health care plan
Under GOP plan, 500,000 could lose coverage

As many as a half-million Texans could become uninsured under the Republican plan to replace the Affordable Care Act, wiping out at least half the gains the state has made in reducing the number of uninsured residents in recent years, according to health care analysts.

A half million Texans could be without insurance under GOP health care plan

 

[tru_m.a.c]

AARP report: Obamacare replacement would hurt older Floridians

How many older Floridians with Affordable Care Act coverage would see their premiums rise under the Republican replacement plan?

About 454,000, according to a new analysis by AARP.

Low-income people in their 60s would be hardest hit, the analysis found. For some, the proposal under consideration in Congress could mean an annual tax credit reduction of nearly $6,000.

Ryan added that the amount of the credit would increase with age, because health insurance plans cost more for older individuals.

The maximum $4,000, however, is still less than most older people currently receive, according to the AARP analysis. Under existing law, the average tax credit for a 64-year-old person with $15,000 in annual income is $9,854.

More than 1.7 million Floridians are enrolled in coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace — more than any other state, according to the latest figures from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

A poll released by Florida Atlantic University this week found that a majority of Floridians want to expand the current health care law or keep it the way it is. Three-quarters of respondents said they opposed letting insurance companies charge older customers more.

AARP report: Obamacare replacement would hurt older Floridians

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

A showbusiness coastal elite isn't working hard to benefit America's pudgy, white, opioid-addicted blue collar Heartland folks?

 

[Tommy Fits]

A showbusiness coastal elite isn't working hard to benefit America's pudgy, white, opioid-addicted blue collar Heartland folks?

BROTHER

 

[Regular_P]

As ACA Repeal Vote Nears, Kansas Debates Expanding Medicaid

Parents in a four person family earning less than $9,200 are the only people eligible right now? No single people?

 

[Bleed The Freak]

This gets repealed you may see single payer or universal coverage to deal with the clusterfukk...because the hemorrhaging of $$ will be so severe and the impact so damaging they'll likely agree to anything to stem the bleeding of their budgets.

Not to mention the pisssssssssedd off folks who got fukked on their health insurance....either getting cut off or price went thru the roof.....just wait when they found out their god sold them out.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

House Republicans Recycle Controversial 2003 Bill To Boost Small-Business Insurance

In a bid to improve the health insurance purchasing clout of small businesses, Republicans have dusted off a piece of controversial legislation more than a decade old and reintroduced it as part of their effort to remake the market after they throw out the Affordable Care Act.

The earlier bill, which passed the House in 2003 but didn’t advance, was widely panned by groups representing consumers, providers, the health insurance industry and state officials. At the time, they argued that it would do little to enhance the coverage options or control costs of many small businesses, especially those that employ older, sicker workers, while at the same time weakening consumer protections against plan insolvency and fraud.

Health policy experts say there’s no reason to change that assessment now.

“It was a bad idea in 2003, and it’s a worse idea today,” said Timothy Jost, an emeritus professor at Washington and Lee University School of Law in Virginia who is an expert on the health law.

The bill would allow the establishment of nationwide “association health plans” that could be offered by professional or trade groups, chambers of commerce and the like. Small businesses could buy coverage through these associations, in theory gaining strength in numbers to enhance their bargaining leverage with insurers, leading to cheaper, better coverage and lower administrative costs.

The Small Business Health Fairness Act of 2017 is slated to head to the House floor this week. Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has expressed enthusiasm for association health plans and said he intends to move the legislation in tandem with the reconciliation bill that would unwind budget-related provisions of Obamacare, another name for the ACA.

House Republicans Recycle Controversial 2003 Bill To Boost Small-Business Insurance

 

[tru_m.a.c]

In Deep-Red Western N.C., Revered Congressman Leads Charge Against GOP Bill

His gerrymandered district covers 17 counties, spanning 150 miles across western North Carolina. The populous liberal bastion of Asheville is mostly carved out of his district like a bite from a cookie. What’s left is a retiree-rich constituency of 750,000 people that is heavily Republican, mostly white and lives mainly in small, rural towns amid pockets of extreme wealth. Its survival could hinge on a Supreme Court ruling expected this year in a case alleging racial bias in the state Legislature’s 2011 redrawing of North Carolina’s congressional map.

Meadows wants to cut off all 10 million Americans who today get federal subsidies to buy health coverage, which he says the country can ill afford. With enough support, Meadows could either block the House leadership from passing its plan or force it to approve a more conservative replacement that would face little chance of getting through the more moderate Senate.

Meadows’ hard line doesn’t bother most folks back in western North Carolina, where Obamacare is unpopular. Only about 5 percent of those in his district receive government-subsidized health plans made available by the law.

Even the local hospital industry — which typically opposes any effort to scale back the health law — remains firmly in Meadow’s corner.

“We are big fans of Mark. He’s a man of integrity and he has the heart,” said Jimm Bunch, CEO of Park Ridge Health, a 103-bed hospital in Hendersonville, N.C. He heaps praise on Meadows even as the congressman fights to eviscerate the law that helped the hospital achieve one of its best financial years ever. As more patients got insurance, Park Ridge gained $600,000 a year in funding it used to provide free care to other patients.

Because North Carolina did not expand Medicaid under Obamacare, many poor adults remained uninsured. The state’s uninsured rate fell from 20.4 percent in 2013 to 13.6 percent in 2016, 2.5 points higher than the national average, according to Gallup.

Small-business owners, who provide most jobs in the district, are reluctant to take on Meadows., who is seeking to eliminate their government assistance to get health coverage.

At Sanctuary Brewing in Hendersonville, co-owner Joe Dinan said the Obamacare coverage he bought this year helped him get skin cancer surgery on his head. “I don’t want to see the subsidy end,” Dinan said. He won’t say anything critical about Meadows though, demurring that Hendersonville is a small town.

In Deep-Red Western N.C., Revered Congressman Leads Charge Against GOP Bill

 

[tru_m.a.c]

GOP Bill’s Unheralded Changes In Rules Could Undermine Health Of Neediest

An under-the-radar provision in the Republican proposal to replace the Affordable Care Act would require the millions of Medicaid enrollees who signed up under the Obamacare expansion to renew their coverage every six months — twice as often as under current law.

That change would inevitably push many people out of coverage, at least temporarily, experts say, and help GOP leaders phase out Medicaid expansion — a key goal of the pending legislation.

“That’s designed to move people off those rolls as soon as possible,” said Ken Jacobs, chairman of the University of California, Berkeley, Center for Labor Research and Education.

The proposal to cut renewal time in half is among other changes that seem only procedural but could have a profound effect on Medicaid enrollees’ health, pocketbooks and ability to get — and keep — coverage.

Another proposal would eliminate the ability of new Medicaid enrollees to request retroactive coverage for up to three months before the month they apply, which they can do under the current law — assuming they were eligible during that previous period.

Health care experts and advocates fear that could potentially saddle people on Medicaid with unaffordable medical bills, shortchange providers and raise costs throughout the health care system.

In California, the potential loss of federal dollars caused by the rollback of the expansion would be massive. The state Legislative Analyst’s Office estimated last month that the Golden State is slated to receive more than $17 billion from the federal government for the Medi-Cal expansion in 2017-18.

GOP Bill’s Unheralded Changes In Rules Could Undermine Health Of Neediest

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Republicans modify Obamacare repeal bill to win more GOP votes

Republicans released a modified health care bill Monday in an attempt to shore up support among both conservatives and moderates for their legislation to replace the Affordable Care Act before the House votes Thursday — seven years to the day after President Obama signed the act.

Under the modified version of the GOP replacement bill, states would be allowed to require able-bodied Medicaid recipients without dependents to work beginning in October — and would get a funding boost as a reward for doing so. States could also receive federal funding for the program as a lump sum — instead of a per capita allotment — for children and non-disabled, non-elderly adults.

Taxes imposed by the ACA on the wealthy, sectors of the health care industry and others to pay for expanded coverage would be repealed in 2017 instead of 2018.

Those changes were made to draw support from conservative members disappointed the original bill didn’t go far enough to undo the ACA, popularly known as Obamacare.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...4Z9ewuhKhWWJoGRm52LJ4_-f7zrfsw&_hsmi=48325710