Trump, GOP Leaders Try to Seal the Deal on Health Bill

House Republicans released a series of tweaks to their Obamacare-repeal legislation in hopes of wooing both moderate and conservative votes.

President Trump arrives to speak at a rally at the Kentucky Exposition Center in Louisville on Monday.
AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
Daniel Newhauser, Erin Durkin and Alex Rogers
Add to Briefcase
Daniel Newhauser and Erin Durkin and Alex Rogers
March 20, 2017, 8:49 p.m.

House Re­pub­lic­an lead­ers are count­ing on a vis­it by Pres­id­ent Trump and a last-minute policy re­write to push their health care le­gis­la­tion over the fin­ish line, but their mar­gin for er­ror will be razor-thin as scores of mem­bers have yet to com­mit to sup­port­ing the bill.

Re­pub­lic­an lead­ers re­leased a slate of changes Monday night aimed at draw­ing votes from mod­er­ate and con­ser­vat­ive Re­pub­lic­ans. But find­ing the le­gis­lat­ive “sweet spot” that House Speak­er Paul Ry­an has been seek­ing is prov­ing dif­fi­cult, as mem­bers on the Left and Right ex­pressed re­ser­va­tions about the be­lea­guered bill.

Mem­ber con­cerns seem to be cen­ter­ing on the in­ter­play between the House and the Sen­ate, with House mem­bers frus­trated that their bill can­not go farther to un­ravel Obama­care be­cause of Sen­ate rules or wary that the Sen­ate will strip out policies they con­sider must-haves.

House Free­dom Caucus Chair­man Mark Mead­ows said Monday even­ing that des­pite lead­ers’ pro­posed changes to the bill, he and sev­er­al of his HFC col­leagues will vote against it be­cause it does not go far enough. He said there are enough “no” votes in the con­ser­vat­ive Free­dom Caucus to keep the bill from passing.

“His­tory shows that it typ­ic­ally doesn’t get bet­ter in the Sen­ate,” he said.

The grous­ing from con­ser­vat­ives comes des­pite an over­ture from lead­er­ship in the form of a pro­posed change that would phase out Obama­care taxes a year earli­er than ori­gin­ally planned.

In­stead, con­ser­vat­ives want the House bill to re­peal the Af­ford­able Care Act’s es­sen­tial-health-be­ne­fit re­quire­ments, but lead­er­ship be­lieves that do­ing so would run afoul of Sen­ate rules. The le­gis­la­tion is be­ing brought to the floor un­der the so-called budget-re­con­cili­ation pro­cess, which al­lows Re­pub­lic­ans to pass their bill with a simple ma­jor­ity and without any Demo­crat­ic votes, but dis­cour­ages policy changes with a min­im­al im­pact on the budget.

The same Sen­ate pro­ced­ure, called the Byrd Rule, en­dangers a pro­vi­sion that would pro­hib­it tax cred­its from be­ing spent on plans that cov­er abor­tion. Mem­bers of the House Pro-Life Caucus met with Vice Pres­id­ent Mike Pence at the White House on Monday, but Rep. Trent Franks, a mem­ber of the Pro-Life Caucus and the Free­dom Caucus, said he still has con­cerns.

“The way to get me to ‘yes’ is to as­suage any con­cerns I have about the pro-life pro­vi­sions be­ing elim­in­ated … and in­clud­ing [the re­peal of] these Obama [reg­u­la­tions] in the bill be­cause if we don’t, the policy it­self will be at risk,” he said. “What we’re do­ing here, wheth­er we real­ize it or not, is we’re let­ting the Sen­ate rules sub­or­din­ate the policy dis­cus­sion here.”

House lead­ers are count­ing on an en­dorse­ment from the an­ti­abor­tion Na­tion­al Right to Life Com­mit­tee to help bring along some of those mem­bers. The group an­nounced it would key-vote the bill, mean­ing that any­one who votes against it would have a less-than-100-per­cent rat­ing on its score­card.

Lead­ers are also re­ly­ing heav­ily on Trump—who spent Monday even­ing ral­ly­ing with a friendly crowd in Louis­ville, Ken­tucky—and his ad­min­is­tra­tion to bring along con­ser­vat­ives. They are bet­ting that mem­bers from deep-red states don’t want to be on the wrong side of a pres­id­ent who ex­celled in their dis­tricts last Novem­ber.

Mean­while, lead­er­ship also plans to amend the le­gis­la­tion to cre­ate a $75 bil­lion re­serve fund to help low-in­come seni­ors pay their premi­ums, which would jump sig­ni­fic­antly un­der the Re­pub­lic­an bill. But the mech­an­ism to do so drew some ques­tions from mod­er­ates, whom it was cre­ated to ap­pease.

Rep. Charlie Dent, co­chair­man of the mod­er­ate Tues­day Group, said he is con­cerned that the House amend­ment would not ac­tu­ally set up the tax cred­its for low-in­come seni­ors, but rather in­struct the Sen­ate to do so, mean­ing House mem­bers would vote for the bill without be­ing cer­tain it will ad­dress their con­cerns.

“I would rather see the cred­its en­hanced in the House bill as op­posed to de­pend­ing on the gentle tender mer­cies of the U.S. Sen­ate,” Dent said.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Le­htin­en said she will vote against the bill be­cause no amount of budget­ary plus-ups could mit­ig­ate the dam­age that it would do to her dis­trict, which has the most re­cip­i­ents of Obama­care of any con­gres­sion­al dis­trict.

“It would be prac­tic­ally im­possible for the lead­er­ship to make the kind of changes that could ac­com­mod­ate the needs of my con­stitu­ents. They will be severely hit,” she said.

Still, some changes did flip some votes from “no” to “yes.” The lead­er­ship amend­ment, which is ex­pec­ted to be ad­ded to the bill in the Rules Com­mit­tee on Wed­nes­day, will in­clude pro­vi­sions that would in­sti­tute op­tion­al Medi­caid work re­quire­ments and block grants for states.

The pro­vi­sion is a con­ces­sion to mem­bers of the Re­pub­lic­an Study Com­mit­tee, who met with Trump last week and com­mit­ted to vote for the bill if its asks were met.

Even if the bill passes the House this week, it’ll need changes be­fore it could pass the Sen­ate, where enough Re­pub­lic­ans have already come out in op­pos­i­tion to sink the bill in its cur­rent form. Some sen­at­ors from states that ex­pan­ded Medi­caid un­der the Af­ford­able Care Act have cri­ti­cized the bill’s ef­forts to roll that back in 2020, as mil­lions few­er low-in­come people would have cov­er­age and state budgets take a hit without the en­hanced fed­er­al fund­ing.

Oth­er con­ser­vat­ives, such as Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee, want to start over, re­peal much of the ACA, and then be­gin the task of re­form­ing the health care sys­tem. Earli­er this year, the non­par­tis­an Con­gres­sion­al Budget Of­fice found that at least 18 mil­lion people would lose cov­er­age in the first year if Re­pub­lic­ans re­pealed the ACA without a re­place­ment. The CBO found that 24 mil­lion more people would be un­in­sured in the House bill than un­der Obama­care over a dec­ade, but it would re­duce the fed­er­al de­fi­cit by $337 bil­lion.

Sen­ate aides are prep­ping for a fight over the Byrd Rule. The par­lia­ment­ari­an’s in­ter­pret­a­tion of the rule could have ma­jor con­sequences. One seni­or Sen­ate aide said that about a dozen pro­vi­sions are be­ing de­bated as to what should or should not com­ply. An­oth­er Sen­ate aide said, “Demo­crats are very, very far from any de­cisions on this pro­cess.”

Re­ports sug­gest that two par­tic­u­lar pro­vi­sions are sus­pect: al­low­ing in­surers to charge the old­est en­rollees five times as much as the young­est, and the sur­charge for people who don’t main­tain con­tinu­ous cov­er­age.

What We're Following See More »
House Approves Opioid Package
4 hours ago

"The House on Friday overwhelmingly passed sweeping bipartisan opioid legislation, concluding the chamber’s two-week voteathon on dozens of bills to address the drug abuse epidemic. The measure combines more than 50 bills approved individually by the House focusing on expanding access to treatment, encouraging the development of alternative pain treatments and curbing the flow of illicit drugs into the U.S. It was passed 396-14, with 13 Republicans and one Democrat voting against the package."

Trump Tells Congress North Korea Remains a Threat
4 hours ago

In a letter to Congress on Friday, President Trump wrote that he's continuing the national emergency status with respect to North Korea, citing the country's “provocative, destabilizing, and repressive actions," which "continue to constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat” to the United States. In a series of tweets following his meeting with Kim Jong-un, Trump said Americans could sleep well at night because North Korea no longer poses a nuclear threat.

Navy Document Outlines Plans For Detention Camps
5 hours ago

"The U.S. Navy is preparing plans to construct sprawling detention centers for tens of thousands of immigrants on remote bases in California, Alabama and Arizona, escalating the military’s task in implementing President Donald Trump’s 'zero tolerance' policy for people caught crossing the Southern border." The document outlines plans for "temporary and austere" internment camps for 25,000 migrants "at abandoned airfields just outside the Florida panhandle," and in Alabama, for 47,000 people near San Francisco, and "as many as 47,000 people at Camp Pendleton" in California. The document estimates that operating a camp to detain 25,000 people for six months would cost approximately $233 million.

U.S. Military Aircraft Targeted By Lasers
8 hours ago

"Lasers have targeted pilots of American military aircraft operating over the western Pacific Ocean more than 20 times in recent months," said U.S. officials. The lasers appeared to be coming from Chinese fishing boats in the South China Sea, said the officials, which is the setting of a "long-running dispute between China and Japan over the control of nearby islands ... The incidents likely will come up as part of a broader discussion of issues when Defense Secretary Jim Mattis visits Beijing next week and meets Chinese President Xi Jinping."

Trump Overturns Obama Orders on Oceans
8 hours ago

"President Donald Trump has unveiled a new policy that depicts the world’s oceans as a resource ripe for expanded business opportunities, reversing the Obama administration's emphasis on protecting 'vulnerable' marine environments." Rather than emphasizing environmental protection, as Obama's policy did, "Trump’s directive speaks mostly to the oceans as a resource for promoting national security" and creating jobs.


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.