Muted Response From Health Lobby as Affordable Care Act Faces Repeal

[flamingdem]

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/us/politics/affordable-care-act-health-care-lobby.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

But far from reflecting the magnitude of the moment, the most prominent message from lobbyists that lawmakers saw in their first week back at work was a narrowly focused advertisement from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce demanding the repeal of “Obamacare taxes,” especially an annual fee imposed on health insurance companies to help pay for the expansion of coverage under the health law.

“More than 20 million people could lose their health insurance, and states could lose billions of dollars in Medicaid money,” said Kenneth E. Raske, the president of the Greater New York Hospital Association. But, he added, many health care executives “don’t want to get on the wrong side of the new administration or the Republican majority in Congress.”

Health care professionals are not totally silent, but industries that were integral to the creation of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 are keeping their voices down as Republicans rush to dismantle it. Some Republican lawmakers are openly fretting about their leaders’ repeal strategy, saying they must develop an Affordable Care Act replacement before they repeal it. Five Republican senators proposed on Monday to extend the deadline for drafting repeal legislation by five weeks, until March 3. One of the five, Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, said the extra time would allow Congress and the Trump administration to “get the policy right” as they try to arrange a smooth transition to a new system of health coverage.

But the naysayers are getting no cover from a major lobbying and advertisement blitz like the ones that blanketed the airwaves in 2009 and 2010.

To block the repeal effort, said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, “we need two or three Republicans to join us.”

Doctors are telling Congress to proceed with caution, insisting that no one should lose coverage. The American College of Physicians, representing 148,000 specialists in internal medicine, has sent letters to senators urging them to “vote no” this week on the budget resolution.

Hospitals were expecting to receive tens of billions of dollars in additional revenue for treating people who were newly insured under the health law, and they are alarmed at the prospect that it may now be repealed. But, they say, if Congress goes ahead and rolls back the expansion of coverage, it must also restore tens of billions of dollars that the health law cut from Medicare payments to hospitals.

Top executives from state hospital associations will fly to Washington this week to develop their strategy. Many also plan to visit offices on Capitol Hill, where they will warn of the potential damage if Congress repeals the health law without guaranteeing similar coverage for those who would lose it

[golfguru]

1. ACA is a Godsend to poor & those with preconditions

The problem with ACA is it is unaffordable to middle class working Americans. It is already in trouble, with or without Trump winning electorally.

[flamingdem]

2. What would you suggest as a tweak?

The tweak that is coming is tax breaks for the rich and loss of insurance for the rest of us

[golfguru]

5. No tweak is needed.

Obamacare is already on it's way out, regardless of tRump or no tRump.

[Gary S]

7. The most important tweak is...

The most important tweak (if the ACA is to be repaired) is to fund the risk pool already included in the Affordable Care Act. The Republican congress funded only 12.6% of the risk payments authorized under the ACA, knowing it would cause insurers to raise their rates, and know that some insurers would simply drop out.

[flamingdem]

8. Thanks, you stated this very clearly

I should have known they did something to screw up the risk pools already

[Blues Heron]

3. Not compared to a single night in the hospital - that 'll run you $7000+

So yeah, roll those dice and ride uninsured... Maybe you won't get sick or have a accident.

[golfguru]

4. A healthy young person under 30

does not require anything more than a policy for catastrophic heath issues. Under Obamacare, this young person is mandated to buy a policy with coverages suitable for older folks.

A young family starting out has limited financial resources.

Also that 50+ employees rule is causing too many part time jobs.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

6. K&R