 |
| Trump's Health Care Victory Party |
The Republican majority pushed it through the House of Representatives although many legislators admitted they hadn't even read it. They voted without waiting for the Congressional Budget Office appraisal and that was no accident.
However the CBO ran the numbers on TrumpCare and it's looking like the Great Orange Bloat's victory celebration was premature.
The American Health Care Act would cause 23 million people to lose health insurance over the next decade, and would disproportionally impact older, poorer Americans, according to an analysis released Wednesday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
...
The amended version of the bill — which would allow states to waive pre-existing condition protections as well as mandates on procedures and services insurance companies must cover — had not been scored by the CBO when the House passed it.
But the CBO has now scored the amended version, and the analysis is unlikely to make the bill any easier for the Senate to pass.
For example, a 64-year-old earning $26,500 a year in a state that took waivers would see their premium rise from $1,700 a year to $13,600, the CBO says of the amended AHCA. That's a 700% increase.
Even more, the CBO says the provision allowing states to waive pre-existing conditions would have sweeping negative consequences for those with existing health conditions.
Unless Trump starts kidnapping senators' grandchildren and holding them for ransom, his healthcare bill is not getting through the Senate.
4 comments:
Doctor Brian Day, a Vancouver champion of private health care, must be rooting for Trump on this.
Rationally, Trumpcare makes no sense, but the Republicans gave up on making sense long ago. Never underestimate McConnell's ability to strong-arm GOP senators, especially when juicy tax cuts for him and his fellow 1% are at stake. I have no doubt that Yertle the Turtle will get this through the senate come hell or high water.
Cap
Actually, Cap, it makes perfect sense if you're looking to free up money that can instead be used to float tax cuts despite continual and growing deficits.
When we first retired, we decided it would be great to escape the 'wet' coast for a few months so headed for Arizona. Of course, had to purchase private insurance for the time we spent out of province. On the very first trip, my husband had an incident that required emergency/hospital care and once he was deemed fit to carry on, we received a "dear valued customer" letter from the our insurance provider that we should head right back to BC because he was no longer covered by said insurance.
The following year, we applied to the same company and discovered they demanded more than double the fee to give him coverage because, in their words, he had a "lung disease" and therefore a pre-existing condition. We checked with his family doctor who advised that while he had suffered a pulmonary embolism, and other than taking a low dose blood thinner, he did not have a lung disease or any other pre-existing condition. Turns out, the insurance company can give any diagnosis they went and the doctor's health records on any patient means nothing.
Having had this experience, I fully understand how vulnerable all Americans are with the Trumpanzee version of health care coverage.
In addition, as many women are pointing out, don't all females have pre-existing conditions? say, from about the age of 13 and up?
Post a Comment