By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
JULY 28, 2017, 4:54
A.M. E.D.T.
WASHINGTON — Opponents of President Barack
Obama's health care law who wanted to get rid of the
penalty people were assessed for not having health insurance will have to wait
longer for relief after the Senate early Friday defeated the GOP's scaled-back
version of legislation repealing the Affordable Care Act. .
One of the main reasons GOP lawmakers had
given in their quest to overturn "Obamacare" was that they want to
lower premiums for people who buy individual health insurance policies,
particularly constituents who get no help from the law's tax credits. Some
states are facing a second year of double-digit hikes.
"There is no doubt whatsoever that
premiums in the individual insurance market would go up," said Larry
Levitt of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. "There is irony here
in that the mantra from Republicans throughout this debate has been the need to
lower premiums, but this step would do just the opposite."
Premiums would have gone up because insurers
feared that without the penalty and the health law's underlying requirement to
carry insurance, some healthy people would drop their coverage. That would have
left insurers with a pool of sicker, costlier customers.
How big an increase?
An analysis last year from the nonpartisan
Congressional Budget Office estimated an increase of roughly 20 percent, and
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer of New York says the budget office has
told his staff that estimate still stands.
The CBO estimated this week that about 16
million people would become uninsured if the coverage requirement is repealed. Without
the penalty, healthier people and those juggling tight household budgets might
decide to take a chance and drop coverage.
The penalty for going without coverage last
year was the greater of $695 or 2.5 percent of household income, due when
taxpayers file their returns. The amount is adjusted annually for inflation, so
it would be higher this year if the penalty stays on the books. According to
the latest IRS figures available, about 6.5 million households paid the penalty
for tax year 2015, averaging about $470 each.
Repeal of the penalty was the centerpiece of
the GOP's so-called "skinny repeal" bill, the last-ditch effort to
get legislation through the Senate that failed in the early morning vote
Friday. The bill would have left most of the ACA intact, striking only some of
its most unpopular provisions. Senate Republicans say it wasn't meant to be a
final product, but, instead, a maneuver to advance legislation so a
House-Senate conference committee can rework it into a comprehensive package.
Indeed, some senators fear the House would suddenly pass the measure and
declare victory.
"I've told everybody this cannot be the
final product," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
"If you passed it as a stand-alone
proposition it would destroy the insurance markets and we would own the failure
of Obamacare," Graham added.
The health insurance industry opposed the
provision.
Ten governors — five Republicans and five
Democrats — have asked the Senate to drop the idea, warning it is
"expected to accelerate health plans leaving the individual market,
increase premiums, and result in fewer Americans having access to
coverage." The governors want Congress to start over and try to come up
with a bipartisan approach.
The unpopular penalty and coverage requirement
were intended to nudge healthy people into the insurance market. They are
modeled on an approach that Massachusetts passed in 2006 under former
Republican Gov. Mitt Romney. The Massachusetts health overhaul had wide
acceptance in that state, but the federal version under Democrat Barack Obama
proved to be highly controversial.
Nonetheless, previous Republican health bills
have recognized the importance of having some kind of penalty for people who
don't maintain their coverage. Proposals have ranged from a surcharge on
premiums to waiting periods. Something like that would likely be part of any final
House-Senate legislation.
Those ideas are also unpopular with Americans.
A recent AP-NORC poll found that 72 percent would oppose a six-month waiting
period, and 67 percent would oppose a surcharge on people who had a break in
coverage.
___
Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick
contributed to this report.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/07/27/us/politics/ap-us-health-overhaul-insurance-penalty.html?utm_campaign=KHN%3A%20First%20Edition&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=54732817&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8hjhBFYK2rWdIlc9vXHBGyiEwEBj0LokLAunyYHmAMw7LBjkPxLlZTS-9Gnzx9LgpGjqSNfjt2VA06xmiHBb_b8hsVDA&_hsmi=54732817
No comments:
Post a Comment