Happened early this afternoon. I was pretty rough on the House Freedom Caucus for torpedoing the first iteration of the American Health Care Act, but if this latest version goes down in the House, it doesn't appear it will be their fault. The HFC has officially signed off.
The moderate counterpart to the HFC is called the Tuesday Group. (Why, I have no idea, and who cares?) Their concern is going to be that the new AHCA allows states to wave Essential Health Benefits, although I've never really understood why Republicans of any stripe want EHBs mandated by Washington. If you want more stuff covered, then shop for a policy that covers more stuff. Don't force everyone to pay for that level of coverage, since some of us think the premiums for such policies are an extremely unwise investment.
Via The Hill, here's where things appear to stand:
The Freedom Caucus's move came after a new amendment from centrist Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.) and conservative Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) that would allow states to apply for waivers to opt out of core ObamaCare protection for people with pre-existing conditions, which conservatives say drives up premiums.
But so far, no moderates have moved from no to yes on the bill, and some centrists have said privately that MacArthur was not negotiating on their behalf.
Weakening ObamaCare protections for people with pre-existing conditions could even move some moderates even further away from the bill.
“Those are the kind of concerns that obviously make me have to think long and hard about it,” said moderate Rep. Ryan Costello (R-Pa.) on Wednesday.
Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), co-chairman of the centrist Tuesday Group, and Reps. Dan Donovan (R-N.Y.), Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) have all said previously they're still opposed to the bill even with the changes.
House GOP leaders will very likely need to flip some moderate Republicans to get to the needed 216 votes to pass the bill.
Mandating that insurers take those with pre-existing conditions is popular politically because it seems mean to turn down someone who's sick and needs help. The problem, of course, is that this allows people to game the system by waiting until they're sick and then buying insurance. There has to be some protection for insurers, since the whole point of insurance is that you insure against risk before the risk presents itself.
When a person with a pre-existing condition gets trapped because of a job change or something along those lines, you can deal with it through portability. But forcing insurers to simply take all comers regardless of whether they could or should have been insured all along is completely unreasonable. Popular, yes, but only because most people don't understand health care finance.
Regardless, the repeal of ObamaCare is essential, and is becoming increasingly urgent because of the tax and budget impacts looming. I do not expect the outcome to be as free-market a health care system as you, Rob, Herman or I would prefer. But because of the pernicious nature of ObamaCare as it stands, getting rid of it and replacing it with the best alternative that's politically plausible is absolutely essential for the fiscal well-being of the nation.
Don't blow it, Tuesday Group.
