Stakeholders Get Limited Say In Obamacare-Repeal Process

Outside groups say they are not actively negotiating with Republican lawmakers on their health care overhaul, a stark contrast with the deals struck to pass the Affordable Care Act

AP Photo/Charles Dharapak
June 19, 2017, 8 p.m.

Hill Demo­crats aren’t the only key play­ers who feel shut out of the Obama­care-re­peal pro­cess.

Out­side groups with much to gain or lose from the health-care over­haul ef­fort ap­pear to have had lim­ited in­put on what Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans are draft­ing—a re­peat of the pro­cess that un­fol­ded in the House—with some lob­by­ists not­ing that act­ive ne­go­ti­ation is ab­sent from their meet­ings with law­makers and staffers.

“This has been the most closed le­gis­lat­ive pro­cess I have ever seen in my ca­reer in Wash­ing­ton, and that ap­plies to the House ac­tion as well,” said Dick Wood­ruff, seni­or vice pres­id­ent of fed­er­al ad­vocacy at the Amer­ic­an Can­cer So­ci­ety Can­cer Ac­tion Net­work.

Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans have been meet­ing for weeks on the le­gis­la­tion and have said that pieces of their bill are be­ing run by the Con­gres­sion­al Budget Of­fice. Dur­ing this pro­cess, stake­hold­ers say of­fices have been will­ing to listen, but haven’t ac­tu­ally al­lowed them in­to the rooms where key de­cisions are be­ing made.

“There is an open­ness to listen­ing to your con­cerns,” said one health care lob­by­ist who wanted to re­main an­onym­ous giv­en the sens­it­iv­ity of the health care dis­cus­sions. “There is not a give-and-take ne­go­ti­ation like there is in a lot of in­stances. … There’s not a ne­go­ti­ation go­ing on of any kind.”

Wood­ruff said he was very con­cerned that this was all be­ing done be­hind closed doors without the be­ne­fit of any hear­ings or pub­lic testi­mony. “It seems to be a bit of a black box,” he said.

The Re­pub­lic­an pro­cess for their health care over­haul is a stark con­trast with the one that pro­duced the Af­ford­able Care Act. The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion ne­go­ti­ated with dif­fer­ent in­terest groups and even­tu­ally cut a deal with the phar­ma­ceut­ic­al in­dustry to help the law get passed.

“The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion entered in­to ex­tens­ive dis­cus­sions with stake­hold­ers as it was design­ing le­gis­la­tion,” said former Demo­crat­ic Rep. Henry Wax­man. He ad­ded that the ad­min­is­tra­tion kept con­gres­sion­al staff in­formed, some­times after deals were cut.

But Wax­man said the Re­pub­lic­ans are now ig­nor­ing every in­terest group. “Re­pub­lic­ans have learned if people don’t know what’s in it … it makes their job easi­er to le­gis­late in secrecy,” he said.

Of course, the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion’s ap­proach had its own pros and cons. The White House at the time was cri­ti­cized for cut­ting deals, ac­cused by some of dol­ing out giveaways to power­ful lob­by­ists and spe­cial in­terests. But get­ting key in­dustry groups on board early also meant that the pres­id­ent had im­port­ant al­lies when it came time to lobby for votes on Cap­it­ol Hill and sell the fi­nal pack­age to the pub­lic.

In the cur­rent de­bate, the Sen­ate GOP’s de­cision to re­duce stake­hold­er in­volve­ment could be a re­ac­tion to neg­at­ive at­ten­tion groups gave the House bill, the Amer­ic­an Health Care Act.

“If you re­call, a num­ber of prom­in­ent health groups came out against the AHCA in the House, and giv­en re­ports that the Sen­ate’s ef­forts may be largely sim­il­ar to the House bill on some key pro­vi­sions, Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans may be try­ing to pre­vent that same kind of pub­lic op­pos­i­tion to their ef­forts,” said Molly Reyn­olds, a fel­low in gov­ernance stud­ies at the Brook­ings In­sti­tu­tion.

Some GOP law­makers ex­pressed sym­pathy for the groups’ con­cerns.

“We speak to stake­hold­ers every day, a lot them. But I would like to see hear­ings on this, as you know,” said Sen. Rob Port­man.

Sen. Mike Rounds said mul­tiple parties would like to have more im­pact on the le­gis­la­tion. “I think every­body would like to have more, in­clud­ing mem­bers of Con­gress,” said Rounds. “We’re do­ing our best to try to get dif­fer­ent or­gan­iz­a­tions to come in and speak to us. Sen. [Lamar] Al­ex­an­der had a great series of meet­ings early on with stake­hold­ers com­ing in, but there’s al­ways room for more in­put.”

Oth­er Re­pub­lic­an law­makers have voiced com­plaints about secrecy. Sen. Susan Collins re­cently slammed the pro­cess in an in­ter­view with the Port­land Press Her­ald and said she has largely been kept in the dark. Sen. Dean Heller earli­er this month pressed Health and Hu­man Ser­vices Sec­ret­ary Tom Price for an­swers on what lead­er­ship may be look­ing at when it comes to chan­ging Medi­caid.

“I’m try­ing to find an an­swer to this ques­tion, and I can’t get it out of our meet­ings,” said Heller. As it turns out, as of last week, Price had also not seen le­gis­lat­ive text.

But a former sen­ate staffer said what Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans are do­ing isn’t so out of the norm, not­ing that the Re­pub­lic­ans are try­ing to un­wind cur­rent law rather than cre­ate a whole new health care sys­tem. “I think there is a little dif­fer­ence in nu­ance in cre­at­ing something and un­wind­ing a lot of something,” he said.

What We're Following See More »
FOR IMPROPER SPENDING, INFLUENCE
Trump Inauguration Spending Now Under Investigation
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are investigating whether President Trump’s 2017 inaugural committee misspent some of the record $107 million it raised from donations, people familiar with the matter said. The criminal probe by the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office, which is in its early stages, also is examining whether some of the committee’s top donors gave money in exchange for access to the incoming Trump administration, policy concessions or to influence official administration positions."

Source:
PINS KHASHOGGI KILLING ON MBS
Senate Moves to End Support for Saudi War
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE
FACES UP TO FIVE YEARS
Butina Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy
3 days ago
THE LATEST

"Alleged Russian spy Maria Butina pleaded guilty in federal court Thursday for conspiracy to act as an illegal foreign agent in the United States. Butina, 30, was accused of working to infiltrate Republican political circles through groups such as the National Rifle Association to bolster Russian interests." She admitted to acting "under direction of" Alexander Torshin. "She faces a maximum of five years in prison and will likely be deported after serving any time."

Source:
HIS LAWYERS ASKED FOR LENIENCY
Cohen Sentenced to 36 Months in Prison
4 days ago
THE LATEST
HEADS TO HOUSE FOR FINAL PASSAGE
Senate Passes Farm Bill, 87-13
5 days ago
THE LATEST
×
×

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