Tag: medicaid
Surrender Caucus: Enough Senate Democrats Cave To End Shutdown

Surrender Caucus: Enough Senate Democrats Cave To End Shutdown

Senate Democrats are caving on the shutdown.

The broad framework for agreement, which was negotiated in part by Sens. Angus King, Jeanne Shaheen, and Maggie Hassan, as well as GOP senators, has “more than enough” members of the Senate Democratic Caucus to advance, according to two people granted anonymity to disclose the terms,” Politico reported.

In exchange for their votes, these handful of “moderate” Democrats—which notably does not include Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer—are getting nothing.

Well, that’s not true.

They’re getting a promise of a vote on ACA subsidies in the Senate, which will easily go down in defeat. Not to mention, Speaker Mike Johnson has said he’ll never even bring the matter up for a vote in the House.The deal also fully funds the Veterans Administration and Department of Agriculture, and the operations of Congress, of course, because they have to take care of themselves.

Nothing in that is a victory for Democrats.The surrender is perplexing given how clearly the shutdown was hurting Republicans, so much so that President Donald Trump specifically cited it as one reason for why Republicans got their asses kicked in last Tuesday’s off-year elections.

But instead of letting Trump figure out a way out of his own mess, Democrats inexplicably threw him a life vest on Sunday night.There is one silver lining—this deal will eventually haunt Republicans. Had Democrats succeeded in saving ACA healthcare subsidies, clueless voters would never have known of the Democrats’ role in safeguarding their insurance.

When Republicans vote down Democratic efforts to save health care for millions of Americans, the blame will be crystal clear.

​Johnson Retreads His Unpopular, Previously Rejected 'Ideas' For Health Care Reform

​Johnson Retreads His Unpopular, Previously Rejected 'Ideas' For Health Care Reform

House Speaker Mike Johnson on Monday suggested that the "ideas" Republicans are kicking around for how to make health insurance more affordable is basically just the Obamacare-repeal plan that the GOP tried and failed to pass in 2017, during Donald Trump’s first term.

“When I say that the Republicans have been working on a fix for health care, we’ve been doing this for years,” Johnson said Monday at a news conference on Capitol Hill after he was asked how Republicans were planning on addressing the expiration of enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies that, if not extended, will soon cause massive premium increases for millions of Americans.Johnson specifically pointed to the health care proposal he released when he was chair of the Republican Study Committee—a caucus of right-wing House Republicans.

"These ideas have been on paper for a long time," Johnson said. “There’s volumes of this stuff. Volumes of it.”

Of course, the reason they have been on paper but never passed is because the ideas in the RSC health care proposal are overwhelmingly unpopular.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think tank, reviewed a newer version of that RSC health care proposal found in the committee’s proposed budget. That review found the plan would weaken protections for preexisting conditions, cut the tax subsidies millions of Americans receive to make their ACA premiums lower, and "would slash $4.5 trillion in federal investment in Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and marketplace coverage"—all moves that would likely cause millions to lose their insurance.

“These proposals would create an environment where people with health conditions would pay higher premiums and out-of-pocket costs for less substantial coverage than is currently available,” the CBPP report says. “Given the increase in costs, more people would enroll in subpar plans that leave them exposed to high costs if they get sick.”

That sounds a whole lot like the Obamacare repeal that Republicans attempted to pass in 2017. That bill failed spectacularly amid public outcry because it would have kicked millions off their insurance and weakened protections to cover preexisting conditions.

In fact, the repeal effort was such an unpopular boondoggle that it helped to sink the GOP in the 2018 midterm elections.

If this is the plan Republicans will try to pass again, it’ll likely be an equally unpopular mess for the GOP.

Polling shows that the ACA is popular, with 64 percent of Americans viewing it favorably, according to a KFF tracking poll.

Democrats Must Address Looming Cost Spike In Private Health Insurance

Democrats Must Address Looming Cost Spike In Private Health Insurance

Here’s the good news. The Democratic Party’s demand that Congress extend the Affordable Care Act premium subsidies in exchange for helping end the government shutdown is fracturing the GOP monolith.

In recent social media posts, Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) articulated what every legislator on the GOP side of the aisle knows but won’t admit. Out-of-pocket costs for ACA plans will skyrocket next year if the enhanced subsidies passed by the Biden administration during the pandemic are allowed to expire.

“This is a major crisis in America,” she said this week on NewsNation, a conservative cable news network. “We’re looking at a massive spike in health premiums. It’s going to crush people. They’re going to have to drop their health insurance. That will put a lot of people in danger of becoming bankrupt with health care bills, with hospital bills,” she said.

Even Donald Trump, ever the prevaricator, has begun toying publicly with opening negotiations with Democrats after Greene made her comments.

But she went further. It is not just the 24 million people on ACA plans who will get hit hard with average premiums more than doubling to more than $1900 a month (before subsidies) without the enhanced premium subsidies. “People with regular or private plans, their premiums are looking to go up a median of 18 percent. That’s brutal,” she said.

Always fast and loose with her facts, Greene’s claim that private health plan premiums will rise 18% is more than double what employer benefits consultants are predicting. But there’s no doubt huge spikes in employer premiums and employee co-premiums are coming. Both will likely to see near double-digit increases.

That’s the issue I want to address in today’s post because it represents a messaging minefield for Democrats, even if they win an extension of the ACA plan subsidies.

Where’s the rest of us?

During September, there was an interesting debate within the Democratic Party about what to demand from the GOP majority before giving them the votes needed to keep the government running beyond September 30th. Progressives wanted to focus on limiting the Trump regime’s flagrant violations of the law and constitution. Centrists, led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), preferred putting health care — usually a winning issue for Democrats — front and center. The centrist majority won the day.

The political wisdom of the leaders’ decision now seems vindicated. As Jonathan Cohn wrote yesterday in The Bulwark (his post was headlined “The Democrats Are Winning the Shutdown Fight”):

“A big premium spike can be a political nightmare for the party in charge, as anybody who lived through the Obamacare rollout can attest. That’s the whole reason Republicans seem so uncertain about their current position—and why now even MAGA stalwarts like Greene are suggesting Republicans sign on to an extension. If nothing else, that would seem to give Democrats leverage to demand even more…
“Democrats actually do care passionately about making health care more affordable. If the subsidy boost lapses, the higher costs will mean real hardship for many millions, and 4 million more Americans with no insurance at all. Extending the subsidy boost would prevent most or all of that from happening. And insofar as Republicans are bound to support some kind of extension eventually—precisely because the blowback to the spike could be so strong—forcing a deal now, in this high-profile debate, would allow Democrats to claim (legitimately) it was their doing.”

Nowhere in his lengthy article did Cohn discuss the employer-based insurance market, which covers 164 million working Americans and their families. If the Democrats say nothing about their looming health care cost increases, it will be a huge mistake.

Should Democrats win on the ACA issue, it will no doubt be great news for the 24 million Americans whose health insurance comes through plans sold on the exchanges. Just seven percent or about 1.7 million purchasers pay the full cost of their plans. The rest receive subsidies based on income that limit their out-of-pocket premiums. The lowest wage workers pay nothing at all.

For most, the total cost of the plan is irrelevant. The federal government picks up most if not all of any increase in the total cost of the plan.

But that won’t be true for the far larger employer-based insurance market — the half of all Americans whose health plans come through an employer, group or union. Their plans receive no direct subsidy. The employer share — on average about 75 percent of a family plan — is tax deductible as is any employee premium, usually deducted from paychecks. But the employee share paid through co-pays and deductibles is not unless their medical expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income; they itemize deductions; and their total deductions exceed the standard deduction. Even then, the deduction is only the amount over 7.5 percent of AGI.

Both employers and employees will bear the full upfront cost of the expected large increases in premiums on tap for next year. A month ago, Mercer, a leading benefits consulting firm, projected average employer premiums could rise nine percent next year based on preliminary results from its annual survey of nearly 2,000 employers. It predicted actual increases would be closer to 6.5 percent because of steps employers will take to hold those costs in check. That’s still twice the overall inflation rate.

Smaller employers will be hit hardest of all. A recent issue brief from the Kaiser Family Foundation found the median proposed premium increase for 318 small group insurers who offer ACA-compliant plans was 11 percent.

What’s behind rising costs?

Mercer health research director Beth Umland cited the usual suspects for the biggest increase in health care costs since 2010: The high cost of cancer treatments and weight-loss drugs; higher-than-usual price increases enabled by provider consolidation; higher health care worker wages driven by rising inflation in the general economy; and the “buildout of AI-based platforms that help providers optimize billing.”

The KFF brief echoed that analysis. It cited higher prescription drug costs and utilization, rising labor expenses, and overall economic inflation. “Some insurers also note declining enrollment and worsening risk pool morbidity as factors leading to higher projected costs next year,” the brief said.

The daily news in the health care trade press is filled with stories of insurers and providers battling over who should be forced to absorb some of those rising costs. Insurers are increasingly resorting to the “just say no” form of prior authorization and receiving pushback from both providers and patients. Modern Healthcare (where I used to be editor) reported this morning that insurers Aetna and Cigna are imposing their own version of the two-midnight rule (don’t ask) by forcing hospitals to accept out-patient rates for emergency room visits deemed routine care, no matter how long they stay in the hospital.

There’s going to be a lot more of those ER visits next year should the ACA subsidies not be extended, since an estimated four million people are expected to drop coverage. That will force many folks to use hospital ERs instead of primary care physician practices for their routine care. And, given that those dropping coverage will be fairly low income, most will postpone or fail to pay those ER bills, which leads to higher prices for everyone else who uses hospital services. Hospitals invariably raise prices to make up for uncompensated care.

And how will employers mitigate some of those rising costs (thus whittling the expected nine percent increase down to 6.5 percent), according to Mercer? “The survey found that 59 percent of employers will make cost-cutting changes to their plans in 2026 — up from 48 percent making changes in 2025 and 44 percent in 2024,” Umland wrote. “Generally, these involve raising deductibles and other cost-sharing provisions, which can lead to higher out-of-pocket costs for plan members when they seek care.”

In other words, workers will see their out-of-pocket co-pays and deductibles rise sharply in addition to a 6.5% average increase in their co-premiums, which are taken directly out of their paychecks. Workers with chronic health care needs could see their annual medical expenses rise at three times the overall inflation rate — perhaps even into double digits.

Only a tiny share of those increased costs will be mitigated by a Democratic win on ACA subsidies. Nor will a win do anything to help the millions of people who will be thrown off Medicaid, whose uncompensated expenses when they also show up in ERs for routine care will also be reflected in higher private employer/employee insurance bills.

For a majority of Americans, any Democratic Party claim that they “saved” health care by their strong stance during the shutdown negotiations will ring hollow in the face of their still rising out-of-pocket expenses.

Merrill Goozner, the former editor of Modern Healthcare, writes about health care and politics at GoozNews.substack.com, where this column first appeared. Please consider subscribing to support his work.

Reprinted with permission from Gooz News

What Will GOP Do For Missouri's Poorest County? Kill Their Hospital

What Will GOP Do For Missouri's Poorest County? Kill Their Hospital

Pemiscot County, Missouri, lost its Walmart. Now it may lose its only hospital.

This deeply conservative corner of rural America is getting a front-row education in what it means when Republicans say they want to “run government like a business.”

Businesses exist to make money. And they don’t waste their time in poverty-stricken Pemiscot County, home to less than 16,000 residents who have a median household income that barely clears $40,000. It’s Missouri’s poorest county. Why would any profit-driven, efficiency-minded system waste a dime here?

The Guardian paints a grim picture: “Three stories of brown brick just off Interstate 55 in the town of Hayti, the 115-bed hospital has kept its doors open even after the county’s only Walmart closed, the ranks of boarded-up gas stations along the freeway exit grew, and the population of the surrounding towns dwindled, thanks in no small part to the destruction done by tornadoes.”

This is one of those rural counties I’ve written about: dependent on the federal government they hate.

Now, thanks to President Donald Trump and his Medicaid-gutting budget law, Pemiscot Memorial Hospital is hanging by a thread.

“If Medicaid drops, are we going to be even collecting what we’re collecting now?” Jonna Green, the chair of the hospital’s board, asked the Guardian. With roughly 80 percent of the hospital’s revenue coming from Medicaid and Medicare, any cuts to a hospital already on the edge of insolvency is a death sentence. “We need some hope,” she added.

She doesn’t need hope. She and her neighbors need to stop voting for Republicans.

Trump won 74 percent of the vote in the county last year. Rep. Jason Smith, their Republican congressman, did even better, winning with 76 percent of the vote. And Smith was thrilled to support the law that could shutter this hospital, saying in a statement, “The One, Big, Beautiful Bill is nothing short of the greatest piece of working-class tax relief in a generation. President Trump didn’t just sign a bill into law—he unleashed America’s Golden Age.”

Sure. If “Golden Age” means no hospital.

Republican Sen. Josh Hawley won 73 percent of the county. He had warned that Trump’s tax bill would devastate rural hospitals—and then he voted for it anyway.

However, just days after that vote, he tried to reverse course, introducing a bill to “protect” the same rural-hospital funding he had just voted to gut.

“I’m completely opposed to cutting rural hospitals period,” Hawley told NBC News. “I haven’t changed my view on that one iota.”

Except … he already had.

Last week at an Axios forum, Hawley doubled down, warning against “experiment[ing]” with the “vitally important” federal funding that keeps rural hospitals afloat.

But when it mattered—when it came time to vote on a major bill—he chose instead to cut rich people’s taxes. He had a choice between Missouri hospitals and billionaire handouts, and he picked the billionaires.

And here’s the kicker: that vitally important funding he says he wants to protect? It doesn’t even come from Missouri. Missouri is a moocher state, propped up by federal dollars primarily from blue states like California, Illinois, and New York. Hawley’s constituents hate the federal government, but they sure love its money.

As for Pemiscot County, they wanted a smaller government to cut waste, fraud, and abuse. In fact, many voices quoted in that Guardian story insisted what Republicans did was okay because they knew that one guy. Not even kidding—check out this passage:

“We got a guy around here, I guess he’s still around. He’s legally blind but he goes deer hunting every year,” Baughn Merideth, a county commissioner, told The Guardian. “There’s just so much fraud … it sounds like we’re right in the middle of it.”

So this one “guy” in Pemiscot County—if he’s “still around”—is so full of fraud that it’s acceptable for the county to lose its only hospital. (Also, “legally blind” doesn’t mean can’t-see-anything blind. In fact, Iowa’s Department for the Blind says that only about 18% of legally blind people are totally blind.)

Trump supporters will bend themselves into knots to avoid blaming those enabling the crises they face.

Whatever fraud may exist in Pemiscot County, it pales in comparison to the waste of maintaining a critical medical facility in a county where the population has plunged from nearly 47,000 in the 1940s to under 16,000 today. When the hospital closes, more people will leave. The area’s death spiral will accelerate.

“This is our home, born and raised, and you would never want to leave it. But I have a nine-year-old with cardiac problems. I would not feel safe living here without a hospital that I could take her to know if something happened,” Brittany Osborne, Pemiscot Memorial’s interim CEO, told The Guardian.

Meanwhile, Green—the hospital board chair worried about cuts—follows a Facebook group that recently posted a meme of Trump with the caption “Isn’t it great having a real president again?”

She says she needs “some hope”?

Hard to think of a worse place to go looking for it.

Markos Moulitsas is founder and editor of the blogging website Daily Kos and author of three books.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World