Political battles are usually won based on appealing to emotion, not to facts, policy or logic.
However, you should still have those facts at your disposal for two reasons: First, they still help you craft appeals to emotion. Second, they also help you craft the actual policy. Besides, I'm a data guy; my primary job is to help put facts & policy into easily-understandable context.
Senate GOP tax bill would hit politically explosive Medicaid provision
The Finance Committee is due to brief members on its megabill draft text Monday night.
Senate Republicans are seeking to ratchet up savings from a politically explosive policy within Medicaid to pay for their megabill, and it’s already setting off shockwaves through Capitol Hill.
The Senate Finance Committee’s forthcoming portion of the party-line tax and spending package would lower the Medicaid provider tax to 3.5 percent, according to three people with direct knowledge of the legislation who were granted anonymity to discuss it.
With the pending dire threat to several of these programs (primarily Medicaid & the ACA) from the House Republican Budget Proposal which recently passed, I'm going a step further and am generating pie charts which visualize just how much of every Congressional District's total population is at risk of losing healthcare coverage.
USE THE DROP-DOWN MENU ABOVE TO FIND YOUR STATE & DISTRICT.
Governor Kathy Hochul today released new data showing the massive impact the GOP’s ‘Big Ugly’ Reconciliation Bill would have on New York families. The latest bill threatens to severely disrupt health coverage for millions of New Yorkers. In addition to increasing the number of uninsured by 1.5 million and stripping $13.5 billion in annual funding from New York’s healthcare system, the bill would trigger steep increases in private health insurance premiums for vulnerable New Yorkers and impose excessive burdens on consumers enrolling through NY State of Health, the State’s official health plan marketplace.
But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
There was a lot to unpack there, all of it pretty horrible...but I felt one provision in particular was worth its own separate post:
Funding Cost-Sharing Reductions.
Enacting section 44202 would affect the cost-sharing reductions that the ACA requires insurers to offer to eligible people who purchase silver plans through the marketplaces. Those reductions increase the actuarial value—the average share of covered medical expenses paid by the insurer—above the amount in other silver plans, resulting in lower out-of-pocket costs for eligible enrollees. To be eligible for cost-sharing reductions an enrollee’s income must generally fall between 100 percent and 250 percent of the FPL; the subsidy varies with income.
The Congressional Budget Office has published several projections about how many people would lose healthcare coverage and/or become uninsured (these aren't the same thing) under various versions of the #OneBigUglyBill Act passed by House Republicans, which is currently beginning its next phase over on the Senate side of the Capitol.
Their most recent projection put the total at around 11.7 million when you include some technical weirdness which I'm a little vague about...plus another 3.8 million if you include their projection from December 2024 regarding the impact of the upgraded ACA subsidies included in the Inflation Reduction Act being allowed to expire at the end of this year. This placed the grand total at around 15.5 million...except they more recently sent a letter to the House Energy & Commerce Committee which bumped this estimate up a bit more, putting the combined total at 15.9 million.
Governor Kathy Hochul today was joined by the Democratic Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives Congressman Hakeem Jeffries and leaders in the health care and labor sectors to sound the alarm on the detrimental effects of several healthcare provisions already passed by the House of Representatives in the Republican budget reconciliation bill. These provisions collectively amount to an annual loss of nearly $13.5 billion for New Yorkers and our healthcare sector, jeopardizing healthcare access for millions of New Yorkers and threatening the state’s hospitals and healthcare providers.
“Republicans in Washington have made it abundantly clear that they are determined to dismantle the social safety net that millions of New Yorkers rely on to secure their basic necessities,” Governor Hochul said. “They are specifically targeting essential and life-saving programs such as Medicaid and food stamps with the consequence that everyday Americans will bear the brunt of this attack. I am committed to utilizing litigation and other appropriate tools to safeguard and protect New Yorkers.”
Over the past month or so, as Congressional Republicans have pulled out all the stops in their attempt to ram through their budget bill which would gut Medicaid and ACA exchange enrollment (along with SNAP and numerous other desperately-needed social aid programs), you may have noticed that they keep using an oddly specific talking point:
Mike Johnson: Medicaid Is Not for 29-Year-Old Males Sitting on Their Couches Playing Video Games
Mike Johnson on Medicaid: "What we've talked about is returning work requirements ... you return the dignity of work to young men who need to be out working instead of playing video games all day. We have a lot of fraud, waste, and abuse in Medicaid."
Welp. House Republicans did indeed follow through with passing their horrific (and disgustingly-titled) "One Big Beautiful Bill" Act which will effectively repeal the bulk of the ACA without officially repealing it, and that's just for starters.
The final vote was 215 - 214, with every Republican except a handful voting for it (and the two who voted against it openly admitted to the NY Times that they would have voted for it if their votes had been needed), and every Democrat voting against it. There were 2 Republican "no" votes...but both of those were only because they wanted the final bill to be even more draconian.
There's so many awful things included in the bill, many of which are of course healthcare-related, and it would take hundreds of blog entries to discuss them all...but I want to focus on one in particular.
