AHCA supporters say the proposal would return health care decisions to the states and offer Americans access to high-quality health care options that are affordable and tailored to meet their needs.
Advertisement
Perhaps naïvely, I expect this legislation will not only die but end up embarrassing Ryan, Trump and anyone else who endorses it. If you’re one of those people – of which there were about 10.5 million in 2016, according to the White House – you’ll pay less.
The rest of Trump’s team discredited the CBO before the report was even released.
Many people are anxious about how potential changes to the federal health law might affect them.
“Basically, you’re setting up winners and losers. We’re going to have insurance for everybody”. “When people have more choices, costs go down”. The effect could be felt more quickly in rural counties with a higher share of older residents. “They can’t get it together to get all the paperwork together”.
The VHHA also takes issue with the proposal for refundable tax credits for health insurance, which the replacement plan bases on age rather than on income, as is the case under the ACA.
Missouri legislators voted against expanding the program to people who make less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level, and IL voted in favor.
Today by comparison, a review of ACA coverages and rates now available on the www.insurance.pa.gov website shows comparable individual PPO Bronze plans at $237 per month and Platinum level coverage at $620 per month. We urge Congress and the Trump administration to make changes in the current plan that will keep the promises they made, prior to the election, of affordable health care coverage for all Americans who need it. “I don’t know how I can financially afford to be sick, then”, said Jody Stewart.
How much does it save? The report found that under Trumpcare, 24 million fewer Americans would have health insurance over the next decade, average healthcare premiums would rise by 15-20% over the next two years and critical federal healthcare funding to states would be cut by $880 billion. But since the time of Ronald Reagan, Republicans have argued this is a bad system because it acts as an endless federal subsidy on health care and costs a lot. It failed to get the young and healthy to participate to offset the more expensive costs to cover older, less healthy people.
Rich Renner of Collingswood, N.J., asks, if the law is repealed “and whatever replaces it does not include a pre-existing conditions provision, are there any programs in place at the state level that would step in to help?”
PhRMA agreed to an $80 billion cut to quash efforts to control drug prices and other concessions; in return, it committed 0 million to an ad campaign to help get the bill passed.
Advertisement
Republican leaders spent Tuesday trying to rally support for their plan.
