On Wednesday, the Senate Finance Committee is holding a hearing on the October launch of the Affordable Care Act’s health insurance exchanges. While the committee’s Republicans are expected to keep up their extreme, Ted Cruz-led attacks calling for the wholesale repeal of Obamacare, it’s worth remembering that a number of them sang a different tune during the problematic implementation of Medicare Part D in 2006.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), for example, now the Finance Committee’s ranking member, said of Medicare Part D in 2006 that “any program of that size and magnitude will have problems initially!” Hatch also commended a CMS administrator for doing a good job with “this very, very difficult to implement bill that we saddled you with.” And fellow Finance Committee member Mike Crapo (R-ID) argued in 2006 that glitches shouldn’t outweigh the benefits of positive public policy, saying of Medicare Part D that “we should not let these problems overshadow the fact that every day there are folks who are paying far less for their medications than they were before.”
But the similarities between the rollout problems facing the Affordable Care Act and Medicare Part D are unlikely to buy Obamacare any leeway from a Republican Party that has been bent on destroying health care reform from the outset. Like their counterparts in the House, who have voted nearly 50 times to repeal or defund the health care reform law, Senate Republicans have introduced dozens of bills designed to chip away at the law and repeatedly tried to use political tactics to undermine its viability. Yet the GOP’s blind devotion to sabotaging the health care law at any opportunity ignores the millions of Americans who would suffer if the legislation were repealed, including those with pre-existing conditions and seniors who fall into the prescription drug “donut hole.”
Wednesday’s hearing follows several similarly themed events held in recent weeks by other Senate and House committees, at which Republicans berated witnesses from CMS and HHS and used the opportunity to attack Obamacare as a whole. With the Finance Committee’s Ted Cruz-led Senate Republicans likely to pile on, it’s clear that the GOP’s real interest is partisan grandstanding, not fixing the glitches in the law.
Despite Early Problems, GOP Lawmakers – Including Some Of The Very Same Committee Members At Today’s Hearing – Defended Medicare Part D
November 2005: “The Rollout Of The New Medicare Drug Benefit Has Been Anything But Smooth.” According to the Washington Post, “The rollout of the new Medicare drug benefit has been anything but smooth. At a news briefing yesterday, Mark B. McClellan, head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, provided a how-to demonstration of the much-awaited Medicare Prescription Drug Plan Finder, which he said would be available on http://www.medicare.gov by 3 p.m. It wasn’t. The online interactive tool has been pitched as a high-tech way to help the 43 million Medicare beneficiaries sort through all the drug coverage choices. After seniors key in their name, birth date, the names of drugs they take and other information, the Web site spits out a personalized list of drug plans in their area ranked by annual cost. Advocates for seniors say they expect the tool to be an indispensable aid in signing people up for this significant new government-sponsored benefit. Problem is, the Medicare folks have had some trouble getting the tool up and running. The original debut date was Oct. 13, but officials delayed it, citing the Jewish holiday Yom Kippur. Next it was promised on Oct. 17, but that day, too, came and went without personalized plan comparisons being available.” [Washington Post, 11/8/05]
January 2006: “Rising Discontent With…New Prescription Drug Benefit.” According to the Washington Post, “President Bush’s top health advisers will fan out across the country this week to quell rising discontent with a new Medicare prescription drug benefit that has tens of thousands of elderly and disabled Americans, their pharmacists, and governors struggling to resolve myriad start-up problems.” [Washington Post, 1/18/06]
- “State Officials And Health Care Experts Continued To Report Widespread Difficulties, Especially For The Poorest And Sickest Seniors.” According to the Washington Post, “Even as federal leaders touted the enrollment figures, state officials and health care experts continued to report widespread difficulties, especially for the poorest and sickest seniors who were forced to switch from state Medicaid programs to the new Medicare plans on Jan. 1. Nearly two dozen states have intervened, saying they will pay for medications for any low-income senior who is mistakenly rejected. The District, Maryland and Virginia have not intervened.” [Washington Post, 1/18/06]
Bush HHS Secretary: “Since This Is A New Program, Some People May Experience A Problem.” According to the Washington Post, “[Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Mike] Leavitt conceded that HHS caseworkers have responded to tens of thousands of complaints by seniors, pharmacists and others who could not get the correct medications at the correct price. But he promised to ‘fix every problem as quickly as possible.’ To do that, HHS has hired thousands of customer service representatives and set up special phone lines for pharmacists. It also has notified insurers that if a drug is not going to be covered, the plans must provide a 30-day ‘transitional’ supply until the patient’s physician can recommend a comparable medicine that is covered. ‘Since this is a new program, some people may experience a problem the first time they go to get their medicines, but we’re confident that after you use it once, things are going to go more smoothly,’ he said. ‘If you are one of those seniors experiencing problems, our message is don’t leave the pharmacy without your drugs.’” [Washington Post, 1/18/06]
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
Hatch is the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee and was also a member during the 109th Congress.
Hatch On Medicare Part D: “Any Program Of That Size And Magnitude Will Have Problems Initially!” In a speech to the Generic Pharmaceutical Association Orrin Hatch stated, “And the same is true with the Medicare prescription drug program. Any program of that size and magnitude will have problems initially! The Administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Dr. Mark McClellan, who I am going to miss tremendously when he leaves CMS, has been more than open with Congress about these bumps in the road and has worked with us to resolve these matters. Both he and Secretary Leavitt have testified before the Senate Finance Committee and have had private meetings with Finance Committee members to discuss these problems in more detail.” [Hatch.Senate.gov via Archive.org, 9/20/06]
Hatch On Medicare Part D: “I Think We Did The Best We Could Do…There Are Millions Of People Who Are Pleased With What We’ve Done. Some Are Frustrated.” According to a transcript of a Senate Finance Committee hearing on the implementation of Medicare Part D, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said to CMS Administrator Mark McClellan, “I’ve seen a lot of great public servants in my time here and in both parties and both administrations. But I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anybody who’s worked as hard or done as proficient and good of job as you and your staff. You’ve done, with regard to this very, very difficult to implement bill that we saddled you with. And frankly, I think we did the best we could do and it’s — and there are millions of people who are pleased with what we’ve done. Some are frustrated. Pharmacists are frustrated.” [Senate Finance Committee Hearing Transcript via Nexis, 2/8/06]
Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID)
Crapo is currently a member of the Senate Finance Committee and was also a member during the 109th Congress.
Crapo On Medicare Part D: “It’s Easy To Forget That The Parent Program, Now Used By Over 42 Million Americans, Had Start-Up Glitches As Well.” According to a news release from Sen. Crapo, “In July 1966, when Medicare was first implemented, this quote reflected national concern with the then-new program–that publicity and outreach efforts by government and industry would not sufficiently inform people about details and process. When considering challenges encountered in the new Medicare Part D prescription drug program, it’s easy to forget that the parent program, now used by over 42 million Americans, had start-up glitches as well.” [Crapo.Senate.gov, 2/15/06]
Crapo On Medicare Part D: “Any Time The Government Undertakes A Project Of This Magnitude, Complications Will Arise.” According to a news release from Sen. Crapo, “The new Medicare drug program is the largest federal entitlement program to be enacted in four decades. Any time the government undertakes a project of this magnitude, complications will arise.” [Crapo.Senate.gov, 2/15/06]
Crapo On Medicare Part D: “The Prescription Drug Benefit Is The Most Significant Change Since The Inception Of Medicare And It Is Only Expected That Trouble Spots Would Arise.” According to a press release from Sen. Crapo, “In a Senate Finance Committee briefing this morning, Idaho Senator Mike Crapo noted that the state of Idaho is doing nation-leading work in managing the complexity and inevitable start-up problems associated with the new Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit. […]Following the briefing, Crapo said, ‘This prescription drug benefit is the most significant change since the inception of Medicare and it is only expected that trouble spots would arise.’” [Crapo.Senate.gov, 1/25/06]
Crapo On Medicare Part D: “We Should Not Let These Problems Overshadow The Fact That Every Day There Are Folks Who Are Paying Far Less For Their Medications Than They Were Before.” According to a press release from Sen. Crapo, “In a Senate Finance Committee briefing this morning, Idaho Senator Mike Crapo noted that the state of Idaho is doing nation-leading work in managing the complexity and inevitable start-up problems associated with the new Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit. […] We should not let these problems overshadow the fact that every day there are folks who are paying far less for their medications than they were before.” [Crapo.Senate.gov, 1/25/06]
Crapo On Medicare Part D: “These Problems Are Unacceptable And Improvements Are Being Implemented.” According to a news release from Sen. Crapo, “Challenges remain. I know about confusing new co-payments and formularies, tied-up phone lines and malfunctioning computer systems. These problems are unacceptable and improvements are being implemented.” [Crapo.Senate.gov, 2/15/06]
Crapo On Medicare Part D: “While Many Of The Problems Were Anticipated, A Few Were Not And We Are Fixing Them.” According to a press release from Sen. Crapo, “In a Senate Finance Committee briefing this morning, Idaho Senator Mike Crapo noted that the state of Idaho is doing nation-leading work in managing the complexity and inevitable start-up problems associated with the new Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit. […]Following the briefing, Crapo said, ‘This prescription drug benefit is the most significant change since the inception of Medicare and it is only expected that trouble spots would arise. While many of the problems were anticipated, a few were not and we are fixing them.’” [Crapo.Senate.gov, 1/25/06]
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
Grassley is a member of the Senate Finance Committee and was its chair from 2003-2007.
Grassley On Medicare Part D: “There Have Been Some Disappointing Start-Up Problems…But What Would You Expect When…You Have 44 Million People Rushing Into A Brand New Government Program?” According to the Congressional Record, Senator Chuck Grassley said, “I know there have been some disappointing startup problems, especially for some of our Nation’s most frail and vulnerable beneficiaries. But what would you expect when, on January 1, you have 44 million people rushing into a brand new Government program? There are obviously going to be some roadblocks, when people sign up on December 31 and go to the drugstore on January 2 to get drugs under a plan that you are trying to squeeze 44 million Americans into. It is quite obvious that there would be some problems.” [Library of Congress, 3/15/06]
Grassley On Medicare Part D: “When You’re Dealing With 44 Million People You Tend To Have Some Start-Up Issues.” According to a transcript of a Senate Finance Committee hearing on the Implementation of the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, then-Senate Finance Committee chair Chuck Grassley said, “Obviously, today’s hearing is about the oversight of our committee on the implementation of legislation that we passed and have responsibility for, the Medicare prescription drug benefit. […] I have confidence that we are going to hear how some of those are being handled today, and handled successfully. But we are also going to probably be told about some problems that are just now coming to light, because, when you are dealing with 44 million people, you tend to have some start-up issues.” [Senate Finance Committee Hearing, 2/8/06]
Grassley On Medicare Part D: “We Need To Fix Those Problems And Fix Them Fast.” According to a transcript of a Senate Finance Committee hearing on the Implementation of the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, then-Senate Finance Committee Chair Chuck Grassley said, “I wish I could say that implementation has gone smoothly, but, as we all know, it has not, especially for some of our Nation’s neediest beneficiaries, also referred to as dual eligibles. […]All of these situations, we all agree, are unacceptable, and we need to fix those problems, and fix them fast.” [Senate Finance Committee Hearing, 2/8/06]
Grassley On Medicare Part D: “I Would Say That A Great Deal Of The Bewilderment Comes From…The Rhetoric Of People Who Don’t Like This Plan And Have Tried To Kill It.” In a statement on the Senate floor, Sen. Grassley said, “Mr. President, I have some points I would like to make. Before I do that, I will respond to a couple of points that the Senator from Florida made. One was his speaking about the bewilderment among seniors about the program. I would say that a great deal of the bewilderment comes from the confusion that people have because of the rhetoric of people who don’t like this plan and have tried to kill it with rhetoric because they didn’t have the votes on the floor of the Senate. That has not created a very good environment. On the other hand, I can say that at my town meetings–I held 16, Monday through Thursday, during our last break–people who came expressed some wonderment about exactly what program to get into. But people who also had already selected a program gave very positive comments about the benefit of the program to them.” [Library of Congress, 3/15/06]
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC)
Burr is currently a member of the Senate Finance Committee.
Burr: “Starting Any New Program Can Be Frustrating.” According to a press release from Sen. Burr, “The beginning of 2006 brought major improvements to Medicare. Every American with Medicare, regardless of income, health status, or prescription drug usage was given access to prescription drug coverage. As the May 15 deadline for seniors to sign up for Medicare prescription drug coverage without penalty quickly approaches, I want to provide answers to commonly asked questions. Starting any new program can be frustrating. It is understandable to have questions about what the new coverage means for Medicare beneficiaries and how to access and choose the best plan to meet specific needs. Seniors do not need to be an expert to make the right choice. There are many services and Medicare personnel available to help.” [Burr.Senate.gov, 3/14/06]
Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY)
Enzi is currently a member of the Senate Finance Committee.
Enzi On Delaying Enrollment For Medicare Part D: “Deadlines Are A Marvelous Thing…To Move It Beforehand And Not To Put The Pressure On It, I Think That Would Be A Huge Mistake.” According to the Portland Press Herald, “Congress may yet relent. The deadline could be extended. Or the penalty could be removed, which would yield the same result. But for now, the deadline is firm. ‘Deadlines are a marvelous thing,’ Health Committee chairman Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said Thursday to a proposed delay. ‘To do it before Monday would probably preclude a lot of people from making that decision and would give people the impression that we will move the deadline now, move the deadline next time, move the deadline next time. That won’t get people signed up.’ He added, ‘We have time to move the deadline after the deadline, if that seems to be a major concern. . . . But to move it beforehand and not to put the pressure on it, I think that would be a huge mistake.’” [Portland Press Herald via LexisNexis, 5/14/06]
Enzi: “The Task Of Deciding Which Medicare Prescription Drug Plan Is The Best Choice May Be Challenging, But In Wyoming There Are Several Sources Of Free Assistance To Help You Choose.” In a news release Mike Enzi stated, ‘It is important that seniors know that help with signing up for Medicare Part D is available throughout the state free of charge. The task of deciding which Medicare prescription drug plan is the best choice may be challenging, but in Wyoming there are several sources of free assistance to help you choose the right plan for your needs,’ Enzi said. ‘Seniors do not – and should not – have to pay a service fee to sign up for the Part D program.’” [Enzi.Senate.gov, 3/3/08]
Former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)
Santorum was a member of the Senate Finance Committee during the 109th Congress.
Santorum On Medicare Part D: “Remarkable To Expect” Perfect Implementation After Messy Passage; “We Should Not Be So Flippant In Casting Out Babies With Bathwaters.” According to Santorum’s opening statement at a Senate Special Committee on Aging hearing, “So it is somewhat remarkable to expect that something that is the product of deep division, lots of haggling, lots of changes that occurred throughout the legislative process, is going to result in a perfect system that would be implemented without error. Those who stand here and suggest that somehow or another that the whole thing should be thrown out may have forgotten that it took us 20 years to get the whole thing passed in the first place and that just throwing it out would doom seniors, 24 million of whom are signed up today and receiving benefits, to a situation where they would be getting less care than they are today. So we should not be so flippant in casting out babies with bathwaters when it comes to a program that was hard fought to get accomplished in the first place.” [Hearing of the Senate Special Committee On Aging, 2/2/06]
Santorum On Medicare Part D: There May Be Problems, “But That Doesn’t Mean We Need To Start All Over Or Throw This Program Out.” According to Santorum’s opening statement at a Senate Special Committee on Aging hearing, “I am happy that Dr. McClellan is here. As he knows, we have had many conversations in the last few weeks about the situation in Pennsylvania. I have spoken to Secretary Leavitt on more than one occasion and have encouraged him and am still working with him to have him come up to Pennsylvania. But that does not mean that we need to start all over or throw this program out. We need to continue to look at it, see if we can implement it correctly, solve the problems that exist, make changes if some are necessary here in the Congress that in all likelihood we created in the design of the program, and then go about the process of making sure that seniors get the kind of care that we have told them that we are delivering to them.” [Hearing of the Senate Special Committee On Aging, 2/2/06]
Santorum On Medicare Part D: Playing Politics Instead Of Fixing The System “Is Below The Dignity Of This Committee.” According to Santorum’s opening statement at a Senate Special Committee on Aging hearing, “So while I commend the Chairman and suggest that there is much to be done in improving this situation, the idea that we are going to play, once again, politics with prescription drugs instead of trying to get down to the hard work of trying to fix this system and its implementation, I think is below the dignity of this committee.” [Hearing of the Senate Special Committee On Aging, 2/2/06]
Former Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN)
Frist was a member of the Senate Finance Committee during the 109th Congress.
Frist On Medicare Part D: “You Expect A Certain Amount Of Bumpiness.” According to a transcript of Sen. Bill Frist’s (R-TN) remarks at a media stakeout, Frist said, “It’s bumpy, and I understand that, and people, you know, making choices — it’s a — it’s tough. But when you’re taking 24 million people that weren’t in the program and now you’re putting them in a federal program, you expect a certain amount of bumpiness there. And it’s getting better.” [Frist Remarks, 2/28/06]
Former Sen. Bill Frist: “You Take 25 Million People, You Put Them In A New Government Program, There Are All Sorts Of Stumbles And Glitches…But The Fact That Right Now A Million Prescriptions Are Being Delivered Each Day…Is A Good Thing.” In an interview on CBS’ Face The Nation, then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) stated, “No, I didn’t say nothing went wrong. I didn’t say nothing went wrong, don’t–please don’t put words in my mouth. With that, you take 25 million people, you put them in a new government program, there are all sorts of stumbles and gliches, [sic] and there are those confusions. So, things have not been smooth, but the fact that right now a million prescriptions are being delivered each day through a program that didn’t exist where seniors no longer have to choose between food in their refrigerator and medicines which are lifesaving is a good thing. And I predict, I predict that six months from now or a year, a program that gives seniors affordable access to prescription drugs, which are lifesaving, which they didn’t have before, which on average saves some $1400, is something that those seniors will appreciate […] The fact that we are giving seniors affordable access to prescription drugs by choice, it’s voluntary, that they didn’t have before, of course, it’s not going to be a liability. I think it’ll be a huge plus.” [CBS, Face The Nation, 2/19/06]
President George W. Bush
President Bush On Part D Rollout: “Anytime Washington Passes A New Law, Sometimes The Transition Period Can Be Interesting.” According to the Washington Post, “It may rank up there as one of the greater Bush understatements of all time. Taking his talk-show-style, no-dissenters-allowed road show to upstate New York yesterday — this time to defend his administration’s Medicare prescription drug benefit — President Bush uncorked a whopper about the program’s botched rollout: ‘Anytime Washington passes a new law, sometimes the transition period can be interesting,’ he said. David E. Sanger writes in the New York Times: ‘That was something of an understatement. The White House was flooded with complaints about retirees who could not obtain their drugs at the promised discount, and [as Robert Pear reported on Monday,] independent pharmacists from Texas complained in recent days to Karl Rove, the president’s deputy chief of staff and political strategist, that they had been forced to give out millions of dollars of prescription drugs and had not been reimbursed.’” [Washington Post, 3/15/06]
Senate Republicans Have Repeatedly Tried To Obstruct, Repeal, Or Undermine The Affordable Care Act
GOP Leaders Announced Intention To Defeat Legislation As Soon As It Became Law. According to Politico, “From the moment the bill was introduced, Republican leaders in both houses of Congress announced their intention to kill it. Republican troops pressed this cause all the way to the Supreme Court — which upheld the law, but weakened a key part of it by giving states the option to reject an expansion of Medicaid. The GOP faithful then kept up their crusade past the president’s reelection, in a pattern of ‘massive resistance’ not seen since the Southern states’ defiance of the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954.” [Politico, 11/1/13]
- In 2010, “Refusing To Concede Permanent Defeat On Health Reform, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell Want[ed] To ‘Repeal The Whole Bill.’” According to Politico, “Refusing to concede permanent defeat on health reform, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell wants to ‘repeal the whole bill’ and replace it with insurance reforms and other measures that could get bipartisan agreement. […] ‘This is what’s on the minds of the American people,’ McConnell said in an interview for the POLITICO video series ‘Health Care Diagnosis.’ ‘They’ve been riveted on it like a laser for the last year, and they would like to see us make significant changes. We’d repeal the Medicare cuts; we’d repeal the tax increases.’” [Politico, 3/24/10]
- Sen. Lamar Alexander: “If There Was A Straight Bill To Repeal The Health Care Law, I Would Vote For It Because I Think It’s Such A Historic Mistake. If That Doesn’t Succeed, I Think We’ll Go Step By Step.” According to the New York Times, “Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, said: ‘If there was a straight bill to repeal the health care law, I would vote for it because I think it’s such a historic mistake. If that doesn’t succeed, I think we’ll go step by step. We can try to delay funding of some provisions and remove some of the taxes.’” [New York Times, 9/20/10]
- Sen. Mitch McConnell: “Our Goal, Number One, Is To Repeal And Replace Obamacare.” According to McConnell’s interview with National Review, “Our goal, number one, is to repeal and replace Obamacare. Number two, is to address the health care that the federal government has already got, which is in deep trouble, both Medicare and Medicaid. […] But job one is to replace Obamacare in its entirety, clean up the health care we’re already responsible for, and then we’ll see where we go from there.” [National Review, 7/3/12]
Sens. Ted Cruz And Mike Lee Led Effort To Shut Down Government Unless Health Law Was Defunded. According to Reuters, “Republican lawmakers, who staunchly oppose President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law, are considering using a fall showdown over the country’s borrowing limit as leverage to try to delay the law’s implementation. […] Republicans are weighing the tactic as an alternative to another approach that would involve denying funding for the law and threatening a possible government shutdown. The push to deny funding for Obamacare has the backing of some prominent Republican senators, including Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida.” [Reuters, 8/21/13]
- Sen. Ted Cruz Delivered “All-Night Talk-A-Thon On The Need To Defund Obamacare.” According to ABC News, Sen. Ted Cruz’s all-night talk-a-thon on the need to defund Obamacare finally ended today, clocking in at 21 hours and 19 minutes. ‘This was all about elevating the debate in the public and giving the American people the chance to speak,’ Cruz told ABC News after his marathon speech. ‘At this point, the debate is in the hands of the American people.’ […] After the House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution, which strips Obamacare of its funding last week, Cruz vowed to use every procedural measure possible, including a filibuster, to keep the Senate from restoring the funding. But Cruz’s overnight speech was technically not a filibuster and won’t do much to delay or prevent the votes.” [ABC News, 9/25/13]
- Senate Republicans Voted Against Pre-Shutdown Bill Seeking To Keep Government Open. According to the Associated Press, “The U.S. Senate passed a bill on Friday that would continue to fund the government past the end of the curent fiscal year, but would not strip funding for Obamacare. That sets up a showdown with Republicans in the House of Representatives, who passed a government funding bill that would have also defunded the president’s signature initiative, formally known as the Affordable Care Act. Conservatives have been trying to use the must-pass bill as a way to kill or weaken 2010 Obama’s health care law.” Forty-four senators, all Republicans, voted against passage. No Republicans voted in favor. [Associated Press, 9/27/13; H. J. Res. 59, Vote #209, 9/27/13]
- Finance Committee Members Crapo, Roberts, Enzi, Cornyn, and Toomey Voted To Continue Government Shutdown. According to Politico, “After two weeks of false starts and Republican infighting, Congress finally voted late Wednesday night to end the first government shutdown in 17 years and to avert a default on U.S. debt. […] The final act of the shutdown saga began in the Senate, with 81 senators voting yes, and 18 voting against the compromise negotiated by the chamber’s leaders.” Senate Finance Committee members Mike Crapo, Pat Roberts, Mike Enzi, John Cornyn, and Pat Toomey voted against the bill. [Politico, 10/16/13; H.R. 2775, Vote #219, 10/16/13]
Republicans Refuse To Pass Fixes To Health Law Because They Want To Repeal It Entirely. According to the New York Times, “Almost no law as sprawling and consequential as the Affordable Care Act has passed without changes — significant structural changes or routine tweaks known as ‘technical corrections’ — in subsequent months and years. The Children’s Health Insurance Program, for example, was fixed in the first months after its passage in 1997. But as they prowl Capitol Hill, business lobbyists like Mr. DeFife, health care providers and others seeking changes are finding, to their dismay, that in a polarized Congress, accomplishing them has become all but impossible. Republicans simply want to see the entire law go away and will not take part in adjusting it. Democrats are petrified of reopening a politically charged law that threatens to derail careers as the Republicans once again seize on it before an election year.” [New York Times, 5/26/13]
- Sen. McConnell: “I Don’t Think It Can Be Fixed.” According to the New York Times, “As a result, a landmark law that almost everyone agrees has flaws is likely to take effect unchanged. ‘I don’t think it can be fixed,’ Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said in an interview. ‘Everything is interconnected, 2,700 pages of statute, 20,000 pages of regulations so far. The only solution is to repeal it, root and branch.’” [New York Times, 5/26/13]
- Sen. Orrin Hatch: Law Can’t Be Fixed, Must Be Defunded. According to Politico, “Sen. Orrin Hatch says there are too many problems with the health care law to fix it, and he doesn’t rule out an all-out push to repeal or defund the law — as House Republicans want — even if that means defeating a long-term spending agreement to fund the government for the rest of the year. The Utah Republican, who became the ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee this year, has taken the lead in the Senate on GOP efforts to repeal the law. He thinks the courts will effectively strike down the law by declaring the individual mandate unconstitutional. But until there’s a ruling from the Supreme Court, Hatch won’t argue with the strategy of Iowa Rep. Steve King and other House Republicans to push for a cutoff of all funding for the law, even if it leads to a government shutdown.” [Politico, 3/16/11]
Sen. Tom Coburn Has Been “Involved With Amending Or Destroying Certain Provisions Of Obamacare Nine Times.” According to Tom Coburn’s website, “Dr. Coburn has always supported efforts to delay, defund, and repeal Obamacare. Dr. Coburn offered his free market alternative to Obamacare, the Patient’s Choice Act, but it was blocked by Majority Leader Harry Reid. Dr. Coburn has since conducted extensive oversight on Obamacare (See here, here, here, and here.) In fact, Dr. Coburn has been involved with amending or destroying certain provisions of Obamacare nine times.” [Tom Coburn website, 9/26/13]
Sen. McConnell Declared He Would Not Appoint Anyone To IPAB Board. According to TPM, “The top two Republicans in Congress informed President Obama on Thursday that they will refuse to fulfill their duty under the Affordable Care Act to recommend members of a new board with the power to contain Medicare spending. It’s a dramatic power-play driven by the explosive partisan politics of Obamacare and with potentially important implications for federal health care policy. In a letter to President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) noted their original opposition to Obamacare, reiterated their intent to repeal it entirely, and declared that they would not make any appointments to the Independent Payment Advisory Board.” [TPM, 5/9/13]
Sens. Cornyn And McConnell Warned Sports Leagues Not To Promote Health Reform Law. According to Roll Call, “The top two Republicans in the Senate released letters Friday urging the commissioners of the National Football League and other major sports leagues not to promote the 2010 health care overhaul law. ‘Given the divisiveness and persistent unpopularity of the bill, it is difficult to understand why an organization like yours would risk damaging its inclusive and apolitical brand by lending its name to a promotion,’ wrote Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Minority Whip John Cornyn of Texas in the letters, which were dated Thursday. The letters follows [sic] reporting of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius saying the NFL is involved in efforts to promote the health insurance exchanges established by the new law. In the letters to the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, PGA and NASCAR, the two senators also ask the leagues to notify them if anyone in the Obama administration exerts undue pressure to get them to support any pro-health care law marketing efforts.” [Roll Call, 6/28/13]
Non-Existent Special Exemption For Hill Staff Became Go-To Talking Point Of Congressional Republicans During Shutdown Debacle. According to the New Republic, “The law forced members and Hill staff to buy coverage in the exchanges, but did not lay out a way for their employer—the government—to continue paying its share of the premiums, as most other large employers do. Hill staff were going to be stuck with vastly higher health insurance costs—that is, a big pay cut. To deal with this consequence, the Obama administration devised a workaround so that the federal government would continue picking up roughly the same share of the tab for Hill employees’ coverage, while still requiring them to buy coverage on the exchanges. […] By the time the great showdown arrived last month, the Obamacare exemption was the go-to talking point of congressional Republicans. Jim Jordan, the head of the House Republican Study Committee, made clear he had not spent much time studying this, decrying the ‘special treatment of congressional staff under Obamacare.’ House leaders went along with the canard even as it emerged that Speaker John Boehner had been quietly cooperating with efforts to get the employer subsidies for staffers’ health care restored.” [The New Republic, 10/15/13]
- Before Health Care Reform Passage, Sen. Grassley Had Offered Stunt Amendment Forcing Congress Into Exchanges, Which Democrats Included In Law. According to Reuters, “More than three years ago, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa proposed an amendment to the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, requiring U.S. lawmakers and their aides to purchase insurance coverage on the new online marketplaces known as exchanges. ‘The more that Congress experiences the laws we pass, the better the laws are likely to be,’ he said at the time. Obama’s Democratic Party, which in 2009 controlled both chambers of Congress, saw it largely as a political stunt by Republicans who see the law as government overreach and have campaigned to scrap it. But Democrats included Grassley’s proposal anyway in the bill that became law in 2010.” [Reuters, 10/31/13]
- Sen. Ron Johnson Told Newsmax He Was Prepared To Sue “Lawless” Administration Over Members Of Congress’ Supposed Special Treatment Under Obamacare. According to Newsmax, “Sen. Ron Johnson tells Newsmax he is prepared to sue the ‘lawless’ Obama administration over its decision to grant members of Congress and their staff special treatment under Obamacare. The Wisconsin Republican also warns that the real concern, above and beyond the dysfunctional Obamacare website, is the damage Obamacare will do the country’s healthcare system and personal freedoms.” [Newsmax, 10/28/13]
GOP Senators Introduced A Number Of Bills Seeking To Delay, Defund, Or Repeal Obamacare
2013
Sen. Flake Introduced Legislation To Delay Obamacare. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Jeff Flake introduced S.1490, “A bill to delay the application of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” The bill has 21 cosponsors. [S.1490 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
Sen. Roberts Introduced Legislation To Eliminate Exchange In The Case Of Glitches. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Pat Roberts introduced S.1154, the Exchange Sunset Act of 2013, which would eliminate exchanges if “one or more Exchanges fails to accept applications for enrollment in qualified health plans.” The bill has 5 cosponsors. A similar bill, S.1272, was also introduced by Sen. Roberts. S.1272 has 8 cosponsors. [S.1154 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13; S.1272 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
Sen. Cornyn Introduced Legislation To Prohibit The IRS From Enforcing the Affordable Cart Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. John Cornyn sponsored S.1315, the Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act of 2013, “A bill to prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury from enforcing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.” Cornyn introduced an identical bill, S.983, which has 2 cosponsors. [S.1315 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13; S.983 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
Sen. Cornyn Introduced Legislation To Eliminate IPAB. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. John Cornyn sponsored S.1316, the Protecting Seniors’ Access to Medicare Act of 2013, “A bill to repeal the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act providing for the Independent Payment Advisory Board.” [S.1316 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
- Sen. Cornyn Introduced A Similar Bill In 2012. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. John Cornyn sponsored S.2118, the Health Care Bureaucrats Elimination Act, “A bill to remove unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats from seniors’ personal health decisions by repealing the Independent Payment Advisory Board.” The bill had 32 cosponsors. [S.668 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
Sen. Cruz Introduced Legislation To Repeal Health Care Reform. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Ted Cruz sponsored S.177, the ObamaCare Repeal Act, “A bill to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 entirely.” The bill has 41 cosponsors. [S.177 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
Sen. Cruz Introduced Legislation To Block Funding For Health Care Reform. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Ted Cruz sponsored the Defund Obamacare Act of 2013, “A bill to prohibit the funding of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” The bill has 32 cosponsors. [S. 1292 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
Sen. Coburn Introduced Legislation To Prevent Insurance Plans On Exchange From Covering Abortions. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Coburn sponsored S.154, the Preventing the Offering of Elective Coverage of Taxpayer-Funded-Abortion Act of 2013, “A bill to amend title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to ensure that the coverage offered under multi-State qualified health plans offered in Exchanges is consistent with the Federal abortion funding ban.” The bill has 16 cosponsors. [S.154 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
Sen. Vitter Introduced Amendment To Take Away Health Care Subsides From Congressional Staffers. According to Politico, “Senate Republican staffers are reaching out to Democratic aides to ensure that an amendment that would alter their health care coverage goes down in flames, Democratic sources said Friday. The amendment from Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) would cut health care subsidies for members of Congress and their staff who will be forced onto Obamacare-created exchanges. There will be heavy pressure on Republican senators to back a bill that Vitter says kills ‘a Washington exemption from Obamacare.’ But the amendment would also directly hit the pockets of members of Congress and Capitol Hill aides. Plus, few bosses want to be forced into a vote that will effectively reduce the take-home pay for their entire staff. Sources said that multiple Republican offices have reached out to Democrats to ensure that either the amendment doesn’t get a vote or that if it does, it fails.” [Politico, 9/13/13]
Sen. Lee Introduced Legislation To Overturn The Supreme Court’s Ruling On Health Reform As A Tax. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Lee sponsored S.3411, “A bill to provide that the individual mandate under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act shall not be construed as a tax.” [S.3411 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/1/13]
2012
Blunt Amendment Sought To Allow All Employers To Opt Out Of Health Law Requirements Over Moral Objections. According to the Washington Post, “The Senate Thursday rejected an effort to vastly expand conscience exemptions to the Obama administration’s new birth control coverage rule, even as Republican presidential contenders continued to tussle over the issue. The measure, an amendment proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) to a highway funding bill, would have allowed not only religious groups but any employer with moral objections to opt out of the coverage requirement. And it would have allowed such employers to do so in the case of not only contraception but any health service required by the 2010 health-care law. The 51 to 48 vote to kill the amendment was largely along party lines, although three Democrats — Robert P. Casey Jr. (Pa.), Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.) — broke ranks to support it, and Republican Olympia Snowe (Maine) opposed it.” [Washington Post, 3/1/12]
Sen. Inhofe Introduced Legislation To Repeal Health Law. According to the Library of Congress, Jim Inhofe introduced S.3473, the Sequestration Prevention Act of 2012, which, among other things, “Repeals the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), and restores or revives any provisions of law amended or repealed by it as if PPACA had not been enacted.” The bill was introduced on August 1, 2012 [S.3473 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
2011
Sen. Barrasso Introduced Legislation To Let States Opt Out Of Health Reform Provisions. According to the Library of Congress, John Barrasso introduced S.244, the State Health Care Choice Act, “A bill to enable States to opt out of certain provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” The bill had 6 cosponsors. The bill was introduced on February 1, 2011. [S.244 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Graham Introduced Legislation To Let States Opt Out Of Medicaid Expansion Provision Of Health Law. According to the Library of Congress, Lindsey Graham introduced S.1587, the Medicaid Flexibility for States Act, “A bill to enable States to opt out of the Medicaid expansion-related provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” The bill had one cosponsor. The bill was introduced on September 21, 2011. [S.1587 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Kyl Introduced Legislation To Repeal Several Provisions Of The Health Law. According to the Library of Congress, Jon Kyl introduced S.1049, Small Business Health Relief Act of 2011, “A bill to lower health premiums and increase choice for small business.” The bill had 9 cosponsors. The bill was introduced on May 23, 2011. [S.1049 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Barrasso Introduced Legislation To Allow Individuals To Get Health Care Law Waivers. According to the Library of Congress, John Barrasso introduced S.1395, the WAIVE Act, “A bill to ensure that all Americans have access to waivers from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” The bill was introduced on July 21, 2011. [S.1395 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Hutchison Introduced Legislation To Prohibit The Government From Implementing Provisions Of Health Law Until Supreme Court Had Ruled On Constitutionality. According to the Library of Congress, Kay Bailey Hutchison introduced S.281, the Save Our States Act, “A bill to delay the implementation of the health reform law in the United States until there is a final resolution in pending lawsuits.” The bill had 38 cosponsors. The bill was introduced on February 3, 2011. [S.281 via The Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. DeMint Introduced Legislation To Defund The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Jim DeMint sponsored S.178, the Spending Reduction Act of 2011, a bill that would deauthorize “appropriations to carry out the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) or the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (HCERA), or any amendments made by them.” The bill was introduced on January 25, 2011. [S.178 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. DeMint Introduced Legislation To Repeal The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Jim DeMint sponsored S.192, the Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act, a bill that would repeal the “health care provisions of the Health Care and Education and Reconciliation Act of 2010, effective as of the Act’s enactment” and would restore “provisions of law amended by the Act’s health care provisions.” The bill was introduced on January 26, 2011. [S.192 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Vitter Introduced Legislation To Repeal The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. David Vitter sponsored S.19, the Patient Choice Restoration Act, a bill that would repeal the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010” and would restore “provisions of law amended by such Acts.” The bill was introduced on January 25, 2011. [S.16 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. McCain Introduced Legislation To Repeal The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. John McCain sponsored S.1720, the Jobs Through Growth Act, a bill that would repeal the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010” and would restore “provisions of law amended by such Acts.” The bill was introduced on October 17, 2011. [S.1720 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Coburn Introduced Legislation To Repeal The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Tom Coburn sponsored S.1031, the Medicaid Improvement and State Empowerment Act, a bill that would repeal the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the health care-related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.” The bill would also restore “the provisions of law amended or repealed by such Acts as if they had not been enacted.” The bill was introduced on May 19, 2011. [S.1031 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Portman Introduced Legislation To Repeal The Individual Health Insurance Mandate Of The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Rob Portman sponsored S.12, the Job Creation Act of 2011, a bill that would “repeal provisions added by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) requiring individuals to purchase and maintain minimum essential health care coverage.” The bill was introduced on January 25, 2011. [S.12 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Hatch Introduced Legislation To Repeal The Individual Health Insurance Mandate Of The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Orrin Hatch sponsored S.19, the American Liberty Restoration Act, a bill that would repeal “provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that require individuals to maintain minimum essential health care coverage.” The bill was introduced on January 25, 2011. [S.19 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Hatch Introduced Legislation To Repeal The Employer Health Insurance Mandate Of The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Orrin Hatch sponsored S.20, the American Job Protection Act, a bill that would repeal “provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that require large employers to offer their full-time employees the opportunity to enroll in minimum essential coverage.” The bill was introduced on January 25, 2011. [S.20 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Wyden Introduced Legislation To Allow States To Opt Out Of One Or More Provisions Of The Affordable Care Act. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Ron Wyden sponsored S.248, the Empowering States to Innovate Act, a bill that would amend the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to: (1) allow states to apply for waivers of certain health insurance coverage requirements in such Act (including requirements for the establishment of qualified health plans and health insurance exchanges) for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2014 (currently, January 1, 2017), and (2) require the waiver application process to begin not later than 180 days after the enactment of this Act.” The bill was introduced on February 7, 2011. [S.248 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Cornyn Introduced Legislation To Eliminate IPAB. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. John Cornyn sponsored S.2118, the Health Care Bureaucrats Elimination Act, a bill that would amend the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to eliminate the Independent Payment Advisory Board charged with developing and submitting to the President, for Congress to consider, detailed proposals to reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending.” The bill was introduced on March 29, 2011. [S.668 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Hatch Introduced Legislation To Prohibit Federal Funds Under The Affordable Care Act From Being Used To Cover Abortion Services. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Orrin Hatch sponsored S.877, the Protect Life Act, a bill that would amend the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to prohibit federal funds from being to used to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion services. (Currently, federal funds cannot be used for abortion services and plans receiving federal funds must keep federal funds segregated from any funds for abortion services.)” The bill was introduced on May 4, 2011. [S.877 via Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
2010
Ahead Of Health Care Reconciliation, GOP Launched Stalling Tactics Including “Headline-Grabbing Amendments…And Blocking Senate Business On Issues Unrelated To Health Care.” According to CBS, “Republicans on Tuesday rolled out all of the obstructionist tactics they promised as the Senate kicked off its final health care showdown, beginning 20 hours of debate on the reconciliation bill meant to amend the comprehensive legislation signed into law on Tuesday. GOP tactics to stall the measure included introducing headline-grabbing amendments to the bill (like a proposal to prohibit Viagra coverage for sex offenders), and blocking Senate business on issues unrelated to health care.” [CBS, 3/24/10]
- An Amendment Sponsored By Sen. Coburn Would Have Prohibited Allowing Sex Offenders To Access Erectile Dysfunction Drugs And “Prohibits Coverage of Abortion Drugs.” According to the New York Times, “Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, put forward a number of amendments Tuesday to the reconciliation bill now being debated on the Senate floor. […] Here’s a list from Mr. Coburn’s office summarizing his amendments. […] No Erectile Dysfunction Drugs To Sex Offenders – This amendment would enact recommendations from the Government Accountability Office to stop fraudulent payments for prescription drugs prescribed by dead providers or to dead patients. This amendment also prohibits coverage of Viagra and other ED medications to convicted child molesters, rapists, and sex offenders, and prohibits coverage of abortion drugs.” [New York Times, 3/23/10]
TPM: GOP’s “Strategy Is Clear: With Democrats Determined To Pass A Clean Bill, Republicans Will Force Them To Vote Down Politically Juiced-Up Amendments” In Order To “Turn Those Votes Into Negative Campaign Ads Ahead Of This November’s Election.” According to Talking Points Memo, “As the Senate gets closer to voting on a health care reconciliation bill, the Republican strategy to derail the Democrats’ plans is getting creative–and dirty. Their strategy is clear: with Democrats determined to pass a clean bill, Republicans will force them to vote down politically juiced-up amendments, and likely turn them into political ads meant to characterize Dems as sympathetic to sex offenders and fraudsters. […] The goal is simple. To expedite its passage, Democrats need to keep the changes to the reconciliation bill to a minimum, and so have committed to voting down all amendments, even ones that they like. And Republicans want to turn those votes into negative campaign ads ahead of this November’s election. Once the votes are cast, the ads all but write themselves. ‘Senator X voted to preserve sex offenders’ right to Viagra.’ ‘Senator Y wants your tax dollars to go to ACORN.’” [TPM, 3/24/10]
- Sen. Gregg Admitted He Wanted To “Hopefully” Both Derail The Affordable Care Act And “Make Some Noise In The November Election.” In an interview with the Washington Post, Sen. Judd Gregg was asked, “What are your realistic hopes — to derail this bill or make some noise in the November election?” According to the Washington Post, Sen. Gregg responded, “I think hopefully both. There are a lot of people very upset, very angry out there. More importantly, they are just plain scared about what we’re passing on to our children.” [Washington Post, 3/23/10]
Sen. Vitter Introduced the “Patient Choice Restoration Act” To “Repeal The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act.” According to the library of Congress, Sen. David Vitter introduced S. 3147, the Patient Choice Restoration Act, a bill “to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” on March 22, 2010. [S. 3147 via the Library of congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. DeMint Introduced A Bill To Repeal Health Law In Its Entirety. According to the Library of Congress, Sen. Jim DeMint introduced S. 3152, a bill to “repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” on March 23, 2010. The bill had 22 cosponsors. [S. 3152 via Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Coburn Introduced Legislation To Prohibit Federal Subsidies From Being Used For Plans That Cover Abortions. According to the Library of Congress, Tom Coburn introduced S.3723, the Excluding Abortion Coverage from Health Reform Act, “A bill to prohibit taxpayer funding of insurance plans or health care programs that cover abortion.” The bill had 27 cosponsors and was introduced on August 5, 2010. [S.3723 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
Sen. Hatch Introduced Legislation To Repeal The Employer Mandate. According to the Library of Congress, Orrin Hatch introduced S.3501, the American Job Protection Act, “A bill to protect American job creation by striking the job-killing Federal employer mandate.” The bill had 14 cosponsors and was introduced on June 17, 2010. [S.3501 via the Library of Congress, Viewed 11/4/13]
If Obamacare Were Repealed, Americans Would Lose Vital Health Care Protections And Savings
Americans With Pre-Existing Conditions Would Again Be Vulnerable To Discrimination. According to PolitiFact, “Beginning on Jan. 1, 2014, the Affordable Care Act will prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to people who already have health problems, such as high blood pressure, depression or diabetes, as well as ‘conditions arising out of domestic violence.’” [PolitiFact, 10/6/13]
Insurance Companies Could Charge Women More Than Men. According to PolitiFact, “There’s no dispute that health insurers use gender as one factor in setting rates; others include age, family size, geographic region and health status. […] [Rep. Gwen] Moore cited a March 2012 report, again from the National Women’s Law Center. The center said it used the eHealthInsurance website to calculate premiums in the individual market — in other words, premiums for women who purchase health insurance themselves, rather than getting it through their employer or spouse. The individual market is a key target of the Affordable Care Act. The center said premiums were at least 50 percent higher for women than for men in a number of instances, including health plans for 25-year-olds in Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia and Wyoming; and for 40-year-olds in Alabama, Arizona, Kansas and Kentucky. Although federal anti-discrimination protections enacted prior to the Affordable Care Act generally prohibit employers from charging female employees higher premiums than male employees, businesses with predominantly female workforces are routinely charged more for group coverage, according to the law center. The reform law prohibits gender rating, beginning Jan. 1, 2014. So, there is evidence that some women buying health insurance in the individual market, a key target of Obamacare, are charged 50 percent more than men for the same coverage. Such gender rating is made illegal under the health reform law.” [PolitiFact, 10/6/13]
The Donut Hole Would Be Re-Opened. According to the Wall Street Journal, “The doughnut hole is the temporary limit on what Medicare drug plans pay after certain dollar thresholds for drugs have been met. The year starts with monthly Part D premiums and a $310 deductible. You pay 100% of drug costs until hitting the deductible. Then, out-of-pocket costs—consider those copays—drop to 25% of the price of your medications. The plan pays the rest until you reach a ceiling of $2,850 in combined payments by you and the plan. That is when you fall into the murky hole, which has forced some recipients to choose between meds and paying the rent or buying groceries. Before the ACA, better known as Obamacare, you would have to cough up the entire drug cost until reaching the yearly out-of-pocket spending limit of $4,550. Since 2010, the tab on your doughnut-hole drugs has dropped through steady discounts. Next year, expect to pay 47.5% of the price of brand-name drugs and 72% of the tab for generic drugs. By 2020, Obamacare will declare the doughnut hole closed and you will continue to cover just 25% of both brand-name and generic drug costs.” [Wall Street Journal, 10/6/13]
Millions Of Young Adults Would Be Denied Access To Their Parents’ Insurance. According to the Daily Beast, “Obamacare’s dependent-coverage provision, which allows young adults to stay on their parents’ plans until December 31 of the year in which they turn 26, was supposed to be a second option, a fallback plan for early-career turbulence. But the real unemployment rate of people ages 18–29 hovers at 16.3 percent, and a tight labor market has forced many young adults to hang onto their parents’ coverage until the last legal moment. Since March 2010 the Affordable Care Act has afforded 3.1 million young adults access to insurance they would not otherwise have. This change is a vast improvement from the pre-Obamacare days when age 19—older for full-time students—was the cutoff at which insurance companies forced children from their parents’ plans.” [The Daily Beast, 6/7/13]
Insurance Companies Would Be Allowed To Cancel Coverage For Minor, Unintentional Application Errors. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, “In the past, insurance companies could search for an error, or other technical mistake, on a customer’s application and use this error to deny payment for services when he or she got sick. The health care law makes this illegal. After media reports cited incidents of breast cancer patients losing coverage, insurance companies agreed to end this practice immediately.” [HHS.gov, Viewed 10/31/13]
Preventive Care Would No Longer Be Free. According to the Star-Ledger, “There is zero cost for preventative measures like colonoscopies and mammograms on all insurance plans, whether you purchase insurance on the exchange or receive it though your employer. Grandfathered plans are exempt.” [Star-Ledger, 9/27/13]
Contraception Would Require Copays. According to the Star-Ledger, “The Affordable Care Act counts contraception as preventative care for women and mandates its coverage without any copayment. The Obama administration exempted churches, other houses of worship and similar organizations from covering contraception on the basis of their religious objections.” [Star-Ledger, 9/27/13]
Insurance Companies Would Be Allowed To Cap Annual Health Care Coverage. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, “The law prohibits new plans and existing group plans from imposing annual dollar limits on the amount of coverage an individual may receive.” [HHS.gov, Viewed 10/31/13]
Insurance Companies Could Hike Premiums With No Oversight Or Consequences. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, “The law allows states that have, or plan to implement, measures that require insurance companies to justify their premium increases will be eligible for $250 million in new grants. Insurance companies with excessive or unjustified premium exchanges may not be able to participate in the new health insurance Exchanges in 2014.” [HHS.gov, Viewed 10/31/13]
Health Insurance Plans Would No Longer Have To Meet Minimum Standards And Could Once Again Impose Enormous Deductibles. According to the New Republic, “One of Obamacare’s primary goals is to make sure everybody has a decent health insurance policy. Under the law, every plan should include a comprehensive set of benefits and put some limits on what people pay out-of-pocket. The policies now available in the non-group market frequently don’t meet those standards. They might leave out benefits like maternity or mental health—or they might have truly exorbitant deductibles. Starting next year, insurers can’t sell new policies unless they meet Obamacare’s standards.” [The New Republic, 10/28/13]
Insurance Companies Would No Longer Be Required To Spend Most Of Their Beneficiaries’ Premiums On Care. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, “To ensure premium dollars are spent primarily on health care, the law generally requires that at least 85% of all premium dollars collected by insurance companies for large employer plans are spent on health care services and health care quality improvement. For plans sold to individuals and small employers, at least 80% of the premium must be spent on benefits and quality improvement. If insurance companies do not meet these goals, because their administrative costs or profits are too high, they must provide rebates to consumers.” [HHS.gov, Viewed 10/31/13]