House Freedom Caucus leaders back new health-care plan

[TomCADem]

Source: MSN/Washington Post

White House officials and several Republican lawmakers claimed Tuesday they were nearing a deal on health-care legislation with the House Freedom Caucus, with at least three leading figures in the hard-line group ready to support an overhaul after the dramatic collapse of talks last month.

Reps. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), and Raúl R. Labrador (R-Idaho) — all leaders of the Freedom Caucus and central figures in the latest discussions — signaled Tuesday they are ready to support a new plan, according to two White House officials who were not authorized to speak publicly. A lawmaker close to the Freedom Caucus later confirmed that those members were close to or ready to support the tweaked bill.

* * *
The agreement at the crux of the revised bill would allow states to opt out of some insurance regulations in the Affordable Care Act. Through a federal waiver, insurers could be freed from a requirement to cover certain essential health benefits as defined by the federal government. And while they’d still be required to cover people with preexisting conditions, they could charge those patients higher premiums.

The language was crafted jointly in recent days by Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.), the co-chairman of the moderate Tuesday Group, and Meadows, who heads the Freedom Caucus, with White House officials involved in those conversations, the people said.

Read more: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-freedom-caucus-leaders-back-new-health-care-plan/ar-BBAnk4K

---

Bottom line is that the new crap proposal will cover even less people than prior crap proposal.

[Phoenix61]

1. They just aren't going to be happy until they

have totally screwed us all into the ground.

[MBS]

7. That's it in a nutshell.

[PJMcK]

2. Of course, they did

Their new plan will kick 25-30 million people off their insurance policies instead of merely 20-24 million.

Republicans suck.

[Astraea]

3. Hopefully it dies in the Senate

nt

[rurallib]

4. must be really bad

[reggaehead]

5. They are not even trying

The plan here is to paint Dems as obstructionist. Another fail.

[6000eliot]

6. I read that it isn't even coming up for a vote until at least September.

[Doreen]

8. In order to drive legally I am supposed to have

epilepsy meds. Well, if I can no longer afford them I am still going to damn well drive. I am not going to lose my transportation due to their fucking greed. This angers me that there are other people like me who are not allowed to do things unless they have meds and they will be at risk of losing those things. I live in a small town that has a crappy bus system and it is getting worse and I do not doubt that at some point it will disappear. I have a mother who I help when the bus is not convenient for her and most of my friends are 30 minutes or longer away. Do not forget the train is about to go down in services also and the Greyhound is a disaster for any type of convenience. The destruction of health care has an effect on more than just health itself. Get rid of my car?...no, it might end up being my home.

[drray23]

9. this means they still wont have to votes.

now the moderate republicans will not get on board.

[PoliticAverse]

10. And how are they going to get any Democrats to vote for it in the Senate? n/t

[turbinetree]

11. They are close to a tweak bill

They are close to having a full fledged DEATH PANEL, lets call it what it is.

And these three hypocrites plus the other 244 of these right wing republican hypocrites need to have phone calls and letters written to them-------------they are just f***ing assholes

[progree]

12. Re: cutting some benefits in order to lower premiums ...

GOP plan to trim insurance benefits might not tame premiums, Kaiser Health News · Apr 21, 2017

At the heart of those negotiations (amongst Republicans) is the (ACA) law's requirement that most insurance plans offer 10 specific categories of "essential health benefits." They include hospital care, doctor and outpatient visits and prescription drug coverage, along with things like maternity care, mental health and preventive care services.

Opponents of the required benefits point to coverage for maternity care and mental health and substance abuse treatment as things that drive up premiums for people who will never use such services.

But eliminating those benefits wouldn't have much of an impact, Bayram says. Hospital care, doctor visits and prescription drugs "are the three big ones," she says. "Unless they were talking about ditching those, the other ones only have a marginal impact."

... Maternity care and mental health and substance abuse, he says, "are probably less than 5 percent" of premium costs.

Much more: a good read: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2017/04/21/npr-gop-plan-to-trim-insurance-benefits-might-not-tame-premiums

[marybourg]

13. How does this jibe with their

much-touted plan to allow insurers to "save money" by selling plans "across state lines"?

[DallasNE]

14. Trump Caves, Will Now Opt For MOAB Of Healthcare

Just as Trumpcare II was worse than Trumpcare I, Trumpcare III is worse than Trumpcare II. And you can be sure that something this rushed has bad features that have yet to be identified.

My guess is that the CBO will declare that more people will lose insurance under Trumpcare III than gained insurance under Obamacare and that means we will be in worse shape than before Obamacare. Think about that for awhile.