Graham-Cassidy Pulled: After Dozens of Votes DOA and Hopefully Forever

Four who this time and hopefully forever killed repeal movement

(My advice: Duck....!!! Tweets from you-know-who spotted on radar 

and inbound on hot missile run)

America's Troika: Standing for good and decent healthcare

(Yeah, sure thing)

Oval Office Desk and Pen

(Trump vs. Needy Americans)

Update (again): I had thought that the below updates would have been my last pending a vote on the Graham-Cassidy repeal bill deadline (Friday Sep 29), but alas it’s not to be. So, why not?

Seems the bribes have landed and aim to take over the Senate…!!! To wit this:

My View: The purpose of any congressional legislation should be and I strongly believe be geared to the positive, the good, what is right, and NOT that which is politically fitting for the moment, or for political gain or survival *a novel idea, um?

We hear the GOP (mostly GOP) chants from their awful 1-minute floor speeches:

“We serve the American people – we have their best interests in mind and in our hearts.”

Well… I’m sure some of those speakers are sincere – sadly most are not and right now with this sustained another “repeal the ACA (Obama-care)” vote looming, well, it’s easy to blame the GOP. Let’s face it: They deserve all the blame the public can heap on them, too.

This update underscores a lot of views and points in that regard.

This update from TPM below in part: I call it: “Let’s Make More Deals for More Votes”

The story: Amid crumbling support for the Senate GOP’s last-ditch bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act, the authors of the Graham-Cassidy repeal bill dropped revised text late Sunday night in an attempt to woo dissenting Republicans back into the fold.

The latest GOP changes and weak-ass attempts to offer something for everyone against the new bill:

1.  More insurance deregulation and the weakening of protections for people with pre-existing conditions for far-right skeptics like Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ted Cruz (R-TX).

2.  Re-jiggered state numbers to soothe the fears of GOP moderates like Sens. like Susan Collins (R-ME) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK).

3.  And added an extra sweetener for the home state of bill author Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA).

“Waiving the Waivers” might work, too – shall we?

Like the first version of the bill unveiled last week, the legislation would repeal Obamacare’s employer and individual mandates and federal tax credits, and convert Medicaid funding into block grants that shrink over time.

That aspect in part of the new bill allows states to segregate healthy and sick people into separate risk pools, which combined with the steep cuts in federal funding for most states could send premiums sky-high for people with serious health needs.

But in the new bill, which may not even get a partial CBO review before a potential vote this week, states would have even fewer hoops to jump through in order to waive insurance regulations set up to protect people with pre-existing conditions.

Instead of having to apply for a waiver in order to, say, allow insurers to offer plans that don’t cover mental health or to charge sick people higher rates, states would merely have to describe their system to the federal government in order to receive a block grant.

Message for Sens. Graham and Cassidy:

Fist bump all you two jokers want – it ain’t gonna work

This Closing: An awful, harsh, nasty, ugly, mean-spirited bill without question with one purpose: GOPers to show “see we keep promises” – this is good politics, NOT good policy.

Continue story at the link above, and thanks for stopping by.

Keep your fingers crossed…

Previous Posts: 

This may be my last update on this before the Senate votes on the Graham-Cassidy bill.

I am not great at making predictions (whoever really is) or guessing congressional actions, but my hope is that McConnell will hold a PR next week, come out and say he is pulling the bill.

Then the entire Congress can focus on more important issues facing the country and indeed the world at large (e.g., North Korea nukes, Iran nuke deal, and Russia thingy). But, with this bunch now in power, who knows. 

My other coverage is here, FYI. So on all this, stay tuned.

REMINDER: This bill was not even introduced until September 13, which does not give the CBO enough time to do its customary analysis on the ramifications of the bill. But third-party researchers have been running the numbers, and they’re going from bad to worse.

From the nonpartisan Brookings Institution: It finds Cassidy-Graham would reduce the number of Americans with insurance by about 21 million through 2026, after that, another 11 million would lose coverage: That’s a total of 32 million additional uninsured Americans. Why?

The bill includes some funding for people no longer covered under the ACA (Obama-care) through 2026, but no funding at all after that.

In the meantime, it imposes new limits on the maximum amount states can spend on Medicaid (e.g., health program from the poor and others), and that would cut enrollment in Medicaid over the long run despite population growth.

Besides the Brookings gloomy analysis, which darkened an already gloomy picture, an analysis by Avalere Health found that the bill would cut overall funding for health care by $215 billion through 2026, which is why so many people would lose coverage. After that, federal health care funding would plunge because of the absence of spending provisions.

The AARP found the law could raise the cost of health insurance for a low-income 60-year-old by more than $16,000 per year. The plan would also give states the option to “waive” rules that prevent insurers from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. A provision preventing insurers from doing that is one of the more popular elements of the ACA.

Related other “bad news” sites on Graham-Cassidy – here FYI:

1.  From PBS

2.  From The New Yorker

3.  From Forbes (Insurance Industry against the bill)

4.  All 50 States Medicaid Directors (against the bill)

5.  The public is squarely against the bill (the most-important group of all)

So, will the GOP-run Senate wake up or commit mass suicide against these groups and Americans in general? We are about to see where they honor and loyalty truly lies (and no pun intended).

Original Post and Previous Updates Starts Below: 

WASHINGTON ― Sen. John McCain has all but killed Obamacare repeal (the so-called Graham-Cassidy bill), but there’s still one senator in particular who could make it a done deal and nobody knows where she stands: Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK).

She’s been wavering on the Graham-Cassidy bill for days, and given her role in killing previous bills to gut the ACA and she’s left people clamoring to know if she’s prepared to do it again. In light of McCain’s announcement on Friday that he’ll oppose the bill, a “no” vote by Murkowski would officially kill the repeal effort for now. Her office had no comment in response to McCain’s decision simply issuing a statement saying: “No update from us.”

However, there are plenty of reasons to think she won’t support this bill. Murkowski already took a political risk in July when she voted down the last repeal bill. She was hailed as a hero for it by many in Alaska, too, greeted by hugs and flowers when she went back home. She’s also not up for reelection until 2022, and this photo of her hula-hooping soon after that vote seemed to show a liberated senator living her best life and not looking back. 

But there’s a simpler reason, too. It’s just math; it does not benefit citizens in Alaska.

Continue at this link above and here.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Two Previous Major Updates (same day at 6 pm):

Update from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) - bill sponsor and close friend of McCain - he and McCain share one of the closest friendships in Congress. 

His statement in part: 

“My friendship with John McCain is not based on how he votes but respect for how he’s lived his life and the person he is. I respectfully disagree with his position not to proceed forward on Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson. I know Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson is the best chance to repeal and replace Obamacare. Obamacare is collapsing in Arizona, South Carolina, and across the nation — driving up premiums and reducing choices.  I feel an obligation to fix this disaster and intend to push forward for state-centric health care versus Washington-knows-best health care. I’m completely convinced taking money and power out of Washington and returning it to states to administer health care is the best way to replace a collapsing Obamacare system. I’m excited about solutions we have found in Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson. We press on.”

McCain for his part said: “Republicans should not be content to pass healthcare legislation on a party-line basis.”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME): “I am leaning no on Graham-Cassidy.”

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ): “I cannot in good conscience support Graham-Cassidy bill.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) does not like it and has turned back threats from McConnell and others – he wants 100% repeal of ACA (Obama-care).

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) offered “political bribes” for her “yes” vote.

Then this update from both RED and BLUE state medical directors: “The bill will undermine and fail all of our attempts to deliver good healthcare.” 

Looks like it's going down, folks. and rightly so — Graham-Cassidy seen here (Cassidy looking down very gloom) outta say this:

We surrender - We give up 

(Hopefully not our seats they wish...)

Original Post and from here (my other blog) - same subject:

Introduction and an excellent rundown here (NY Times) by Paul Krugman.

ACA has reduced the percentage of Americans without health insurance to a record low, and it was created on a three-legged stool premise.

1. Regulations that prevent insurers from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions.

2. A requirement that individuals have adequate insurance, even paying into the system while healthy – analogy to defy GOP illogical views: Young healthy people not buying under that requirement that is designed to help keep all costs down, spread the premiums across a wide range, and give everyone care is like them also saying: “I don’t want or need fire insurance, my house is not on fire.”

3.  Provides subsidies to make insurance affordable for the lowest-income families via insurance provided directly by Medicaid.

Most RED states did not like the Medicaid “expansion,” but under the Graham-Cassidy bill they get a block grant to do that taking money from those states that did expand Medicaid by reducing their like in NY and Calif, while helping Texas who resisted Medicaid expansion and now gets a bundle of cash.

Graham-Cassidy takes away that safety net and does this:

1.     It like other Republican plan attempts eliminates the individual mandate.

2.     It replaces direct aid to individuals with block grants to states, under a formula that sharply reduces funding relative to current law, and especially penalizes states that have done a good job of reducing the number of uninsured (Calif and NY example).

3.     It effectively eliminates protection for Americans with pre-existing conditions.

                                                                                           

Seems like novices put this new repeal bill together and now:

The AMA, the insurance industry overall like Blue Cross/Blue Shield, and others have all warned that markets would be destabilized and millions would lose coverage. The GOP is not waiting on new CBO numbers since the Sep 30th deadline hangs over them (e.g., the FY ends and they have to go back to a 60-vote rules threshold in a new budget year or change the rules again for only 50 votes).

Also, this excellent view from here (NY magazine). It also hits the proverbial nail on the head: “If there was an oral exam on the contents of the proposal, graded on a generous curve, only two Republicans could pass it,” a senior Republican aide told a reporter this week — before stipulating that the bill’s putative co-author, Lindsey Graham, was not one of them.

But you need not take an anonymous aide’s word on it. Vox’s Jeff Stein asked nine GOP senators what problems the Graham-Cassidy health-care bill solves, and how it solves them. The lawmakers responded with platitudes about federalism, the phrase “read the bill and you’ll understand,” and a bizarre reference to the final scene of Thelma and Louise (i.e., over the cliff).

Still, Republicans know a few things about their latest iteration of Trump-care. 

They know that the bill reforms one-sixth of the American economy so radically the Congressional Budget Office will need weeks to generate a detailed analysis of its likely effects; that every major health-care-industry stakeholder — from doctors and patients and hospitals to insurers and medical charities — opposes the legislation.

Even seven of their own party’s governors also oppose it.

The health-care-policy analysts believe the bill would make health insurance unaffordable for many people with preexisting conditions.

It would radically reduce Medicaid and federal subsidies for health insurance.

Some expert analysts say those cuts would increase the ranks of the uninsured by 32 million over the next decade.

Accordingly, 48 Republicans (of the 52 in the GOP-run Senate) are ready to vote “Yea” for the bill next week and that raises the question: “Why is almost every GOP senator ready to vote for widely reviled legislation that they do not understand?”

All this is solely based on a GOP political campaign promise which is all well and good, but it is not sound public or health care policy or close to any even rational concern for people those in Congress say they are in office to serve.

This is a potentially very ugly policy. It is harshness that only GOP conservatives love.

Finally, how can anything be this harsh and cruel be labeled or judged worthy by our Congress as good, decent, right, or just? That kind of thinking is based not on empirical evidence, but instead based on harsh opinion, raw rumor, and wild-ass thinking, and that is just flat out wrong by any standard.

Stay tuned for sure.