Dean Heller of Nevada and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, would eliminate the ACA's individual insurance marketplace subsidies and the increased federal Medicaid funds states like CT received under the ACA to expand that health care program for the poor. That is the home state of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, the driving force behind every attempt to repeal Obamacare.
"I can't say at this point that I would vote for the Graham-Cassidy plan, and I'm not as satisfied with that legislation as I was with the American Health Care Act". Refusing to learn lessons from failures of the past, the bill makes it easier for private insurance companies to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, eliminates the penalty for those refusing to buy insurance (originally a Republican idea), and slashes premium-lowering subsidies that make it easier for lower-income families to participate.
Over the last week, other analyses of the proposal have concluded that CT would be hit particularly hard by the funding cuts.
The plan would require states to craft their own programs by January of 2020, which the directors claim would be next to impossible, "especially considering the apparent lack of federal funding in the bill to support these critical activities".
As of Friday, it wasn't clear if Republicans had enough votes to pass the proposal but Sen.
"I can not in good conscience vote for the Graham-Cassidy proposal", McCain wrote in a statement.
Portman praised the flexibility the bill gives to states, saying OH would do a better job than the government in distributing health care money.
Kaiser's analysis concluded CT would lose $5.8 billion in federal funding between 2020, when the law goes into effect, and 2026, when it expires - less than the OPM estimate. These adults were ineligible for Medicaid before the Affordable Care Act, according to the Connecticut Health Foundation.
Alaska will lose almost two-thirds of the federal funding it now receives for health insurance marketplace subsidies and Medicaid by 2026 under the latest Senate Republican legislation, according to a study conducted for the state. "Perhaps most egregious, this bill fails to address in any form rising health care costs and instead shifts those burdens directly onto consumers and states". The Alliance for Positive Health supports this effort to ensure access to affordable health insurance coverage. This language could mean "potentially hundreds of millions" of extra dollars for Wisconsin, said Grady.
"Given our state's fiscal situation, we can't expect the state to spend an additional $55 million a year to keep premiums from rising 40 percent", she said in the Facebook event.
"Yes, yes they are", host Joe Scarborough said in response.