Republicans See Leverage From Supreme Court for Obamacare Overhaul

GOP leaders are happy to help if SCOTUS strikes down health care exchanges, but it would come at a heavy price for the ACA.

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohip) attends a press conference following the weekly House Republican conference meeting at the U.S. Capitol February 25, 2015 in Washington, DC with Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.).
National Journal
Dylan Scott
Add to Briefcase
Dylan Scott
March 3, 2015, 3 p.m.

House Re­pub­lic­an lead­ers say they’re happy to help with a con­tin­gency plan if the Su­preme Court in­val­id­ates Obama­care’s tax cred­its in the 30-plus states that use the fed­er­al Health­Care.gov web­site.

But that help would come at a high price.

Should the Court rule against the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion, the GOP lead­ers would seize the op­por­tun­ity to sig­ni­fic­antly re­shape the health care land­scape — while keep­ing some of the more pop­u­lar parts of the Af­ford­able Care Act.

A plan from three key Re­pub­lic­an com­mit­tee chair­men pro­poses giv­ing states the op­por­tun­ity to re­peal Obama­care’s in­di­vidu­al and em­ploy­er man­dates as well as its cov­er­age re­quire­ments. That alone would change the law’s mech­an­ics in fun­da­ment­al ways and rep­res­ent a huge polit­ic­al and policy vic­tory for the GOP. States, the ma­jor­ity of which are con­trolled by Re­pub­lic­ans, would be able to opt out of some of the law’s ma­jor and most-hated pro­vi­sions.

(RE­LATED: Will John Roberts or An­thony Kennedy Save Obama­care?)

The Su­preme Court will hear or­al ar­gu­ments in King v. Bur­well on Wed­nes­day. If the justices rule against the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion and dis­al­low tax cred­its on Health­Care.gov later this year, as many as 8 mil­lion people are ex­pec­ted to lose their fin­an­cial aid un­der the law.

“If that hap­pens, then you’ll have some 4 [mil­lion], 5 mil­lion people who will find them­selves where they didn’t think they were go­ing to be. So we think it’s im­port­ant to have some pro­vi­sions in place,” House Edu­ca­tion and the Work­force Chair­man John Kline, R-Minn., told Na­tion­al Journ­al.

“In the lar­ger sense, I think the pro­pos­als that we’re look­ing at would in­deed be much bet­ter for health care, be­cause ob­vi­ously we don’t like the Af­ford­able Care Act,” Kline ad­ded. “Those things “¦ are ways to look to lower costs, so we think that King v. Bur­well may be what al­lows us to make them.”

Kline, Ways and Means Chair­man Paul Ry­an, R-Wis., and En­ergy and Com­merce Chair­man Fred Up­ton, R-Mich., in­tro­duced the pro­pos­al Monday in a Wall Street Journ­al op-ed.

Aside from point­ing a policy path for­ward, the Re­pub­lic­an pro­pos­als serve an­oth­er role: sig­nal­ing to the Su­preme Court that con­gres­sion­al Re­pub­lic­ans would be ready to act if the Court ruled to nix the tax cred­its on Health­Care.gov, which could oth­er­wise send the in­sur­ance mar­kets in the states that use the fed­er­al web­site in­to chaos.

Their plan would keep some fea­tures of Obama­care in place. It would cre­ate a tax cred­it to help people buy in­sur­ance, in­ten­ded to re­store fin­an­cial aid to the mil­lions of people who would lose it if the Court ruled against the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion, al­though the spe­cif­ics would dif­fer from the ACA’s cur­rent tax sub­sidy. The GOP plan would keep the law’s ban on life­time be­ne­fits and al­low chil­dren to stay on their par­ents’ in­sur­ance un­til age 26. It would also provide some pro­tec­tions for people with preex­ist­ing con­di­tions and al­low small busi­nesses to pool to­geth­er to pur­chase in­sur­ance.

(RE­LATED: 5 Things to Watch in SCOTUS’ Obama­care Ar­gu­ments)

And by giv­ing states a choice, some states — namely, the dozen-plus that have cre­ated their own ex­changes and wouldn’t be dir­ectly af­fected by a Court rul­ing strik­ing down the Obama­care sub­sidies — could con­tin­ue im­ple­ment­ing the law whole­sale.

Some of the policies that Re­pub­lic­ans would al­low to stand are ones that they have sup­por­ted since be­fore Obama­care, Kline said.

“That pro­pos­al, for ex­ample, the age-26 [pro­vi­sion], was in the al­tern­at­ive we pro­posed be­fore the ACA passed,” he said. He also lis­ted al­low­ing people to buy in­sur­ance across state lines and the small-busi­ness pools as policies in their King con­tin­gency plan that the GOP had pro­posed be­fore. “Those were all pieces that we had pro­posed be­fore this was jammed through in 2009.”

There is the catch, though, that these pro­pos­als aren’t yet co­di­fied in le­gis­lat­ive lan­guage, where the all-im­port­ant minu­tia will be fleshed out. House Re­pub­lic­ans plan to form­al­ize their pro­pos­al in le­gis­la­tion be­fore the Court makes its rul­ing, ex­pec­ted this sum­mer, an aide said.

“If you take these ideas from Re­pub­lic­an lead­ers at face value, it’s ap­par­ent that at least at the level of broad prin­ciples, the cent­ral aims of Obama­care have be­come hard to op­pose,” said Larry Levitt, vice pres­id­ent of the Kais­er Fam­ily Found­a­tion. “These pro­pos­als could, of course, look very dif­fer­ent once the de­tails are fleshed out. And, they sig­nal much less reg­u­la­tion of the in­sur­ance in­dustry than un­der the Af­ford­able Care Act.”

Sens. Lamar Al­ex­an­der, R-Tenn., Or­rin Hatch, R-Utah, and John Bar­rasso, R-Wyo., wrote an op-ed in The Wash­ing­ton Post on Monday, an­noun­cing that they too would put for­ward a post-King plan. Hatch, Up­ton, and Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., re­leased an­oth­er health care pro­pos­al earli­er this month, al­though it is a full re­peal-and-re­place plan not as dir­ectly tied to the King case.

What We're Following See More »
POTENTIAL CONTEMPT CHARGE
Nadler: Goodlatte Could Subpoena Rosenstein
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee says Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., is poised to subpoena the Justice Department for former FBI Director James Comey’s memos, which the agency so far has failed to produce. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., warned such a move puts Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in jeopardy of being placed in contempt of Congress and the special counsel investigation of being shut down prematurely."

Source:
NO NEW FUNDING INCLUDED
House Ag Committee Passes Farm Bill
3 days ago
THE DETAILS
"On a party-line vote, the House Agriculture Committee approved a five-year farm bill on Wednesday that tweaks the supports now in place—a promise of certainty, leaders said, during a period of low commodity prices and threats of a trade war with agriculture on the front line." The bill includes no new funding over the last farm bill.
Source:
WOULD ASSURE ANYONE PARDONED BY TRUMP CAN BE PROSECUTED BY STATE
Schneiderman Urges NY Lawmakers to Close “Double Jeopardy Loophole”
3 days ago
THE LATEST
INTRO’d LAST NIGHT
Ryan Tamps Down AUMF Talk
4 days ago
THE LATEST

Referring to the AUMF introduced by Sens. Tim Kaine and Bob Corker Monday evening, House Speaker Paul Ryan said Tuesday "he won’t allow any bill to come to the House floor that he thinks would restrict military commanders’ ability to fight." Ryan "defended the legality of U.S. military strikes last week against chemical weapons-related sites in Syria, saying President Trump had the authority to order them under the Constitution’s Article II commander-in-chief powers."

PROSECUTORS WILL GET FIRST LOOK
Judge Denies Requests by Cohen, Trump
5 days ago
THE LATEST

Attorneys for both President Trump and his attorney Michael Cohen lost a court challenge today, as they sought to suppress evidence gathered in a raid of Cohen's office and hotel room. "U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood denied the requests and ruled that prosecutors will get first access to the information, followed by Cohen’s defense team ten days later. Wood noted that she has not yet decided whether she will appoint a special master in the case at all."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login