Republican Alternative to Obamacare Relies on Repeal

Rep. John Fleming, R-La., once operated 30 Subway restaurants and had a stake in 130 UPS stores, from Mississippi to Texas.
National Journal
Sophie Novack Clara Ritger
Sept. 22, 2013, 8:50 a.m.

Des­pite passing le­gis­la­tion in the House on Fri­day to de­fund the Af­ford­able Care Act, Re­pub­lic­ans aren’t com­pletely op­posed to health care re­form.

Some are say­ing the Obama­care re­peal ef­fort must be ac­com­pan­ied by a re­place­ment pro­pos­al. Rep. Dar­rell Issa, R-Cal­if., said last week he wouldn’t re­peal “without vi­able re­place­ments for many of the things that the Af­ford­able Care Act chose to do.”

That’s why the Re­pub­lic­an Study Com­mit­tee in the House last week un­veiled the Amer­ic­an Health Care Re­form Act, a plan de­signed to re­peal Obama­care and re­place it with “mar­ket-based solu­tions.”

It’s not the first ACA al­tern­at­ive the GOP has pro­duced. In June, Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga. in­tro­duced the Em­power­ing Pa­tients First Act. It would provide in­sur­ance-premi­um tax cred­its based on in­come, sim­il­ar to the ACA, but wouldn’t out­law dis­crim­in­a­tion against people with preex­ist­ing con­di­tions. It has been re­ferred to com­mit­tee.

If the le­gis­la­tion sounds fa­mil­i­ar, it’s be­cause Price sponsored it in the last two Con­gresses. It did not make it out of com­mit­tee in either ses­sion.

The House GOP’s latest plan is an om­ni­bus pack­age con­tain­ing meas­ures that failed to gain trac­tion in the past. It has about 30 co­spon­sors. But a ma­jor stum­bling block is that the bill is not draf­ted as a re­form of the cur­rent law; it de­pends on a re­peal that is go­ing nowhere in the Sen­ate.

“Obama­care is not fix­able or re­par­able,” said Rep. John Flem­ing, R-La. who worked with the RSC on the bill. “It’s kind of like a sky­scraper that was built on a ter­rible found­a­tion. You would have to tear it down and start over.”

Re­pub­lic­an Study Com­mit­tee Chair­man Steve Scal­ise, R-La., called the bill a 180-de­gree turn from Obama­care. It would of­fer stand­ard­ized tax de­duc­tions across in­come levels, while the ACA provides tax cred­its on a slid­ing scale, de­pend­ing on age and in­come. Un­der the GOP plan, every­one would be giv­en the same in­come- or payroll-tax de­duc­tion: $7,500 for in­di­vidu­als and $20,000 for fam­il­ies. For low-in­come tax­pay­ers, the de­duc­tion would be up to the amount of their in­come taxes or payroll taxes owed.

The GOP plan would use the cur­rent in­di­vidu­al mar­ket but al­low con­sumers to pur­chase in­sur­ance across state lines. It also would al­low small busi­nesses to pool to­geth­er to lower their risk and re­duce in­sur­ance costs.

The ACA cre­ates a sep­ar­ate mar­ket­place — the ex­change — where in­di­vidu­als are able to shop around for the best deal on cov­er­age. However, in­surers can opt out of par­ti­cip­at­ing in the ACA ex­changes and only choose to serve the private mar­ket, which in some states has res­ul­ted in less com­pet­i­tion than in­ten­ded.

The plans also dif­fer in their treat­ment of low-in­come in­di­vidu­als and those with preex­ist­ing con­di­tions. Un­der the Re­pub­lic­an plan, in­di­vidu­als not cur­rently on Medi­caid or Medi­care would be buy­ing their in­sur­ance on the ex­ist­ing in­di­vidu­al mar­ket. The GOP be­lief is that mar­ket com­pet­i­tion would drive premi­um costs down so there are no pro­tec­tions in place for lower-in­come in­di­vidu­als. While the ACA of­fers states the chance to ex­pand Medi­caid and provides high­er sub­sidies for lower-in­come in­di­vidu­als, un­der the GOP plan, those in­di­vidu­als would rely on their stand­ard­ized tax de­duc­tions.

The Re­pub­lic­an plan, like the ACA, provides some pro­tec­tions for people with preex­ist­ing con­di­tions. But un­like the ACA, which sends these in­di­vidu­als to the ex­change, the GOP plan re­in­states the state high-risk pools and ex­pands fed­er­al sup­port to $25 bil­lion over 10 years, while cap­ping their premi­ums at 200 per­cent of the av­er­age premi­um in the state.

Re­pub­lic­ans who worked on the bill said their pro­posed struc­tur­al changes ad­dress what they see as the biggest prob­lem in the Amer­ic­an health care sys­tem: costs. Among the pro­vi­sions are a cap to the total dam­ages for med­ic­al li­ab­il­ity for doc­tors and a re­peal to the fed­er­al an­ti­trust ex­emp­tion for health in­surers in an ef­fort to break up mono­pol­ies and in­crease com­pet­i­tion in the mar­ket.

To ap­pease con­ser­vat­ives, the GOP bill elim­in­ates tax in­creases, which in the ACA fund the sub­sidies that make cov­er­age af­ford­able for low-in­come Amer­ic­ans. Ac­cord­ing to Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., Scal­ise in­sisted that “you can’t have any man­dates in this bill. You can’t raise taxes. You’ve got to re­form the tax code, but there can’t be any sub­sidies in­volved.”

“That’s pretty lim­ited in what we can do,” Roe ad­ded. “I think with­in those para­met­ers, we came up with a pretty good bill.”

What We're Following See More »
AT LEAST NOT YET
Paul Ryan Can’t Get Behind Trump
10 hours ago
THE LATEST

Paul Ryan told CNN today he's "not ready" to back Donald Trump at this time. "I'm not there right now," he said. Ryan said Trump needs to unify "all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement" and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of. And we've got a ways to go from here to there."

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Preet Bharara Learned at the Foot of Chuck Schumer
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

In The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin gives Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, the longread treatment. The scourge of corrupt New York pols, bad actors on Wall Street, and New York gang members, Bharara learned at the foot of Chuck Schumer, the famously limelight-hogging senator whom he served as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee staff. No surprise then, that after President Obama appointed him, Bharara "brought a media-friendly approach to what has historically been a closed and guarded institution. In professional background, Bharara resembles his predecessors; in style, he’s very different. His personality reflects his dual life in New York’s political and legal firmament. A longtime prosecutor, he sometimes acts like a budding pol; his rhetoric leans more toward the wisecrack than toward the jeremiad. He expresses himself in the orderly paragraphs of a former high-school debater, but with deft comic timing and a gift for shtick."

Source:
DRUG OFFENDERS
Obama Commutes the Sentences of 58 Prisoners
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama has announced another round of commutations of prison sentences. Most of the 58 individuals named are incarcerated for possessions with intent to distribute controlled substances. The prisoners will be released between later this year and 2018.

STAFF PICKS
Trump Roadmapped His Candidacy in 2000
12 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The Daily Beast has unearthed a piece that Donald Trump wrote for Gear magazine in 2000, which anticipates his 2016 sales pitch quite well. "Perhaps it's time for a dealmaker who can get the leaders of Congress to the table, forge consensus, and strike compromise," he writes. Oddly, he opens by defending his reputation as a womanizer: "The hypocrites argue that a man who loves and appreciates beautiful women (and does so legally and openly) shouldn't become a national leader? Is there something wrong with appreciating beautiful women? Don't we want people in public office who show signs of life?"

Source:
‘NO MORAL OR ETHICAL GROUNDING’
Sen. Murphy: Trump Shouldn’t Get Classified Briefigs
12 hours ago
THE LATEST
×