TRUMPCARE DEAD

House Republican lead­ers on Friday pulled their bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act, sig­nal­ing defeat on what was sup­posed to be a major leg­isla­tive accom­plish­ment for President Donald Trump.

The news was first report­ed by Robert Costa of The Washington Post, who spoke to the pres­i­dent direct­ly, fol­low­ing a meet­ing between Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R‑Wis.).

Trump said he agreed to pulling the bill once Ryan made it clear the leg­is­la­tion lacked the votes to pass.

In sub­se­quent remarks, both Trump and Ryan indi­cat­ed they were ready to move on from health care to oth­er issues.

The fail­ure to pass the bill rep­re­sents a dev­as­tat­ing defeat for Trump and Ryan ― and throws into doubt a cru­sade that has defined Republican pol­i­tics for over sev­en years.

We came real­ly close today, but we came up short,” Ryan said at a press con­fer­ence. “This is a dis­ap­point­ing day for us.”

The news capped a week of chaot­ic activ­i­ty at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, as Trump, Ryan and their lieu­tenants tried des­per­ate­ly to round up votes for the mea­sure they intro­duced less than three weeks ago ― which they were attempt­ing to move through the leg­isla­tive process at break­neck speed.

Less than 24 hours before, Trump had issued an ulti­ma­tum to the House, demand­ing a vote on what both he and Republican lead­ers had iden­ti­fied as a top leg­isla­tive pri­or­i­ty ― and threat­en­ing to move on to oth­er leg­isla­tive items if they refused.

Trump’s demand was an auda­cious act of polit­i­cal brinkman­ship, designed to rat­tle and win over dis­si­dent Republican law­mak­ers who, for var­i­ous rea­sons, were object­ing to the bill.

But the gam­bit failed, and it failed spectacularly.

As for the cur­rent health care law, on which some 20 mil­lion peo­ple depend for insur­ance, its odds of sur­vival seem bet­ter than at any time since Trump’s elec­tion, when its repeal seemed near­ly inevitable.

We’re going to be liv­ing with Obamacare for the fore­see­able future,” Ryan admit­ted Friday.

What The GOP Bill Would Have Done

The American Health Care Act, the Republican pro­pos­al to replace the ACA, would have amount­ed to arguably the sin­gle biggest roll­back of a social wel­fare pro­gram in American history.

The bill would have end­ed Obamacare’s expan­sion of Medicaid eli­gi­bil­i­ty and cut fund­ing for the rest of the Medicaid pro­gram going for­ward. It would have scaled back reg­u­la­tions on what insur­ance cov­ers. It also would have redis­trib­uted finan­cial assis­tance, so that peo­ple with low­er incomes and high­er insur­ance costs would get less than they do today ― even as more afflu­ent peo­ple would qual­i­fy for sub­stan­tial new subsidies.

The bill would have made some oth­er major changes, as well ― such as end­ing the “indi­vid­ual man­date,” the unpop­u­lar finan­cial penal­ty for peo­ple who do not get health insur­ance, and rolling back new tax­es on the wealthy and health care com­pa­nies that the gov­ern­ment uses to finance the law’s cov­er­age expansion.

During the 2016 cam­paign and in the ear­ly days of his pres­i­den­cy, Trump had promised not just to repeal the Affordable Care Act, but to replace it with “great health care” and “insur­ance for every­body.” But when the Congressional Budget Office ana­lyzed an ear­ly ver­sion of the GOP pro­pos­al, it pre­dict­ed the num­ber of peo­ple with­out insur­ance would increase by 24 mil­lion over the next decade, going up by 14 mil­lion in 2018 alone.

Declining gov­ern­ment spend­ing would reduce the fed­er­al deficit, the CBO pre­dict­ed in that report, and aver­age pre­mi­ums for peo­ple buy­ing cov­er­age on their own would end up low­er than they would have been oth­er­wise. But those low­er pre­mi­ums would be a byprod­uct of old­er and sick­er peo­ple drop­ping insur­ance alto­geth­er ― because insur­ers would have made it too pricey for them, and because the plans avail­able on the mar­ket would have tend­ed to cov­er much less.

Why GOP Leaders Couldn’t Get The Votes

Those find­ings, which the CBO pub­lished ear­ly last week, halt­ed the polit­i­cal momen­tum the repeal leg­is­la­tion had gained when it sailed through two com­mit­tee votes ear­li­er this month. As Trump admin­is­tra­tion offi­cials and House Republicans began prepar­ing for con­sid­er­a­tion by the full House, they quick­ly real­ized the bill lacked enough sup­port to pass.

Over and over again, GOP lead­ers argued that their pro­pos­al rep­re­sent­ed the party’s best chance to kill Obamacare. But efforts to cor­ral Republicans failed, in part because lead­ers were deal­ing with two sep­a­rate groups with diver­gent interests.

More con­ser­v­a­tive mem­bers, led by the House Freedom Caucus, were angry that the bill left some of the Affordable Care Act’s insur­ance reg­u­la­tions in place. Those reg­u­la­tions, they sug­gest­ed, would keep pre­mi­ums from falling fur­ther ― although the pre­cise rela­tion­ship between each of these reg­u­la­tions and actu­al pre­mi­ums is murky.

More mod­er­ate mem­bers, many of them from Democratic-lean­ing states and states that used Affordable Care Act mon­ey to expand Medicaid, wor­ried that the bill would take away insur­ance cov­er­age from too many peo­ple ― and that, if pre­mi­ums real­ly did come down, they would do so only by increas­ing out-of-pock­et costs for peo­ple who held on to their coverage.

Put more sim­ply, con­ser­v­a­tives wor­ried that repeal didn’t go far enough, while mod­er­ates wor­ried that it went too far. Every effort Republican lead­ers made to appease one group alien­at­ed the other.

Complicating mat­ters fur­ther, Republicans have been try­ing to pass repeal leg­is­la­tion through “bud­get rec­on­cil­i­a­tion” ― an expe­dit­ed process that would allow Republicans to get a bill through the Senate with­out the threat of a Democratic fil­i­buster, so that a sim­ple major­i­ty vote would be sufficient.

Reconciliation rules stip­u­late that only pro­vi­sions with a direct effect on the fed­er­al bud­get may get con­sid­er­a­tion through this process. That could exclude many of the reg­u­la­to­ry changes that more con­ser­v­a­tive Republicans want to make, like changes to rules regard­ing what insur­ance cov­ers. These rules also require the leg­is­la­tion, on net, to reduce the bud­get deficit.

And on top of every­thing else, Republicans were fight­ing an increas­ing­ly skep­ti­cal pub­lic. Multiple polls have sug­gest­ed the GOP mea­sure is deeply unpop­u­lar, while the law it aimed to replace, long the sub­ject of con­tro­ver­sy and the object of scorn among con­ser­v­a­tives, is now becom­ing more pop­u­lar.

Late this week, Trump and GOP lead­ers agreed to mod­i­fy the bill by elim­i­nat­ing a require­ment that all insur­ance plans cov­er “essen­tial” ben­e­fits, such as men­tal health and mater­ni­ty care, and then offer­ing spe­cial funds to cov­er the costs of pre­cise­ly those ser­vices. Experts imme­di­ate­ly warned that mak­ing these changes could dra­mat­i­cal­ly alter health insur­ance mar­kets, mak­ing it dif­fi­cult to find com­pre­hen­sive cov­er­age as insur­ers would grav­i­tate toward offer­ing less gen­er­ous policies.

The pre­cise effects of those changes on insur­ance cov­er­age and the fed­er­al bud­get are unknown ― because Republican lead­ers, deter­mined to rush a vote, would not allow time for the CBO to ana­lyze the changes. In fact, it wasn’t until late Thursday evening that lead­er­ship post­ed the text of the changes.

In the end, how­ev­er, the effort was for naught. Leaders couldn’t come up with lan­guage that would draw enough votes from the two hold­out GOP fac­tions to over­come the uni­fied oppo­si­tion of Democrats.

Why The Health Care Debate Isn’t Going Away

Regardless of what hap­pens now, health care is like­ly to remain a sub­ject of controversy.

The Affordable Care Act is respon­si­ble for his­toric progress, bring­ing the num­ber of unin­sured Americans to a record low, there­by improv­ing access to care and bol­ster­ing finan­cial secu­ri­ty. But mil­lions of peo­ple are unhap­py with their cov­er­age, and in some states, new­ly reg­u­lat­ed insur­ance mar­kets have strug­gled ― with pre­mi­ums ris­ing even high­er and insur­ers, stung by finan­cial loss­es, pulling up stakes.

The Obama admin­is­tra­tion expend­ed tremen­dous effort shap­ing and nur­tur­ing the new sys­tem dur­ing its infan­cy and address­ing prob­lems as they came up. Now the Trump admin­is­tra­tion is in charge of man­ag­ing these mar­ket­places, and its inten­tions are not clear.

Trump has said more than once that polit­i­cal­ly speak­ing, the eas­i­est choice for Republicans would be to sit back and let the sys­tem oper­ate on its own. Doing so, Trump pre­dict­ed, would lead to a total col­lapse.  http://​www​.huff​in​g​ton​post​.com/​e​n​t​r​y​/​h​o​u​s​e​-​l​e​a​d​e​r​s​-​c​a​n​c​e​l​-​v​o​t​e​-​o​b​a​m​a​c​a​r​e​-​r​e​p​e​a​l​_​u​s​_​5​8​d​5​4​c​d​d​e​4​b​0​3​6​9​2​b​e​a​5​5​63e?