House
Republicans plowed ahead with their effort to dismantle the Affordable Care
Act, brushing aside new criticism of what their proposed legislation would do ―
and ignoring protests over the hurried process they are using to enact it.
Two
House committees’ ― Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means ― spent dozens of
hours Wednesday
and Thursday
to advance complementary portions of the American Health Care Act, the
long-awaited bill to repeal and “replace” the 2010 health care law. The Ways
and Means Committee completed its work around 4:30 a.m. Thursday, and the Energy
and Committee followed early Thursday
afternoon.
The
proceedings themselves moved at a typically sluggish pace, as lawmakers
re-litigated the Affordable Care Act, traded barbs about the GOP bill, and
squabbled about procedure. In the end, the measure departed the Ways and Means
Committee unchanged, and only one minor Republican amendment found its way onto
the legislation in the Energy and Commerce Committee. The next step is the
Budget Committee, then the House as a whole.
These
lengthy committee markups shouldn’t be mistaken for a prolonged consideration
of the bill. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has said he hopes to wrap up the
process before the April recess, which would mean the bill would go from
introduction to passage in just a few weeks.
The
rapid pace of action, with committee markup less than two days after GOP
leaders first allowed the public to see the bill, comes amid growing discontent
over the legislation. Democrats uniformly oppose Affordable Care Act repeal and
the proposed GOP “replacement.” But Republican leaders face bigger problems in
the forms of a conservative revolt against their plan, as well as public
opposition from the American Medical Association, the American Hospital
Association, AARP and other organizations.
The
GOP bill would roll back the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid and
further reduce funding for the program, then restructure federal tax subsidies
in ways that would generally provide less help for people with lower incomes
and higher insurance costs. The bill would also reduce taxes on corporations
and wealthy individuals, and loosen regulations on the insurance industry.
Some
people would benefit, because they could get cheaper coverage or because they
would get tax relief they don’t get now. But others would struggle mightily ―
probably causing millions to lose coverage.
At
least, that’s what most experts expect would happen. In reality, everybody
talking about the law is still relying on some guesswork, because the
independent organizations that typically conduct formal assessments haven’t had
time to crunch the numbers with any precision. And the Congressional Budget
Office, which produces official estimates for lawmakers’ debate, probably
won’t finish its projection until next week, congressional sources have said.
On
Wednesday, during the hearings, Democrats on both committees complained about
the absence of a CBO score, noting that it meant they had only a hazy idea of
what the proposal would mean for insurance coverage and even less knowledge of
what it would mean for the federal budget.
“We
need to know what this is going to cost, we need to know what kind of health
insurance is going to be possible,” Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) said at the
Energy and Commerce Committee meeting. “You either don’t care about it or you
are worried what’s going to come out.”
“You’ve
been harping on this for almost seven years. You can’t wait a couple of weeks?”
Eshoo said. “We are playing with people’s lives.”
Over
and over again, GOP leaders turned down Democratic requests for more time,
dismissing concerns about the lack of CBO scoring. At the same markup, House
Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) slammed the budget agency as “unelected
bureaucrats in Washington.” Those remarks echoed attacks on the CBO from other
GOP leaders in Congress, as well as remarks that White House press secretary Sean
Spicer made on
Wednesday.
The
chorus of criticism directed at the CBO sounded a lot like a preemptive effort
to undermine faith in the agency’s assessment, which ― when it finally appears
― is unlikely to validate GOP boasts that their plan will provide better access
to care. The ratings agency Standard & Poor’s has already said it estimates
6 million to 10 million people would become uninsured if GOP legislation were
to become law. The Brookings Institution projects at least 15 million would
lose coverage.
The
Senate, for its part, hasn’t really done much on repeal yet. But it’s poised to
act quickly if and when the House sends over a bill. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell
(R-Ky.) has said he will bring legislation directly to the floor for a vote,
bypassing committees’ altogether. If the Senate votes yes, then it would just
be a matter of working out differences between the chambers, to whatever extent
they exist, so that Congress could send a final bill to President Donald Trump for
his signature.
In
the seven years since the Affordable Care Act became law, Republicans have
frequently attacked Democrats for supposedly crafting legislation in secret and
then rushing votes before lawmakers really understood what it would do. In
reality, those deliberations lasted more than a year, with hundreds of hours of
hearings and floor debate, and with CBO estimates guiding discussion at every
step.
That
contrast was a topic of frequent discussion during the committee proceedings Wednesday
and Thursday,
with Democrats proposing amendments that would have prohibited votes before
hearing from the CBO ― and Republicans defeating those amendments. At the Ways
and Means hearing, Rep. Sandy Levin (D-Mich.), who sponsored one of those
amendments, accused Republicans of rushing votes because they wanted to avoid
scrutiny of the legislation.
“You’re
fearful that the CBO will provide answers to questions that you don’t like,”
Levin said Wednesday.
“You want essentially a sneak attack...before the public hears and we have from
the CBO. That is something inexcusable.”
Ways
and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Wis.) denied the charge, and
suggested that Republicans were merely conducting their hearings in the same
way that Democrats had back in 2009. As proof, he noted that the very same
committee, Ways and Means, had marked up health care legislation without a full
CBO projection, relying instead on a letter from the agency’s director.
“Did
you have CBO score on that massive bill?” Brady said Wednesday. “Absolutely
not.”
As
Levin pointed out, that “letter” was actually a 14-page document that included
detailed, if preliminary, tables breaking down the bill’s expected impact on
insurance coverage and the deficit. It gave lawmakers a solid grasp of what the
legislation would do ― something very conspicuously lacking in either committee
on Wednesday.
And
as if the activity in those two committees was not enough for one day, the
House Education and Workforce Committee was also working on health care
legislation, adopting three related but smaller bills.
This
article has been updated to include approval of the legislation by the Ways and
Means, and Energy and Commerce committees.
No comments:
Post a Comment