Repeal-And-Replace Perspectives: Tough Talk About The GOP Health Care Plan Continues

The New York Times: We All Have Pre-Existing Conditions
The Republican health care plan recently passed by the House would hollow out one of the most popular provisions of the Affordable Care Act: a prohibition on charging higher prices to people with pre-existing medical conditions. States, under the plan, could waive that rule, provided they offer publicly funded alternatives for coverage. The Republican plan raises questions, including about cost: Many experts believe the more than $100 billion earmarked for alternative programs, such as “high-risk pools,” would be inadequate. According to the Congressional Budget Office, many patients with pre-existing conditions would be priced out of the market. But the Republican proposal also raises a more basic issue: Who will decide what constitutes a pre-existing condition? (Elisabeth Rosenthal, 5/29)

USA Today: Republicans, On CBO Estimates, Be Skeptical
Obamacare is wrecking individual and small group markets. This year, premium cost increases in the individual markets are averaging 25%, and the thousands of dollars in deductibles are breathtaking. Many middle-class folks in these markets are stuck paying the equivalent of a second mortgage. (Robert E. Moffit, 5/29)

USA Today: Republican Health Care Bill Indicted, Again
Now we know why House Republicans were so quick to ram through an Obamacare repeal-and-replace bill last month, not waiting for an estimate of its impact or holding any public hearings. Now we also know why Senate staffers, who've been charged with coming up with a draft proposal for their chamber during last week's recess, plan to start from scratch. (5/24)

Axios: The Other Implication Of The CBO Report: Election-Year Pain
The new Congressional Budget Office score for the American Health Care Act showed who the winners and losers will be, and how quickly its negative consequences will take effect if the House bill is enacted into law without major changes. What it doesn't do is assess the politics. But the implications are clear: The negative effects of the AHCA, and the juicy news stories about them, will play out over each of the next two election cycles. It's the political equivalent of tearing off a bandage slowly. (Drew Altman, 5/30)

Cleveland Plain Dealer: Paul Ryan's 'Health Reform' Masks Big Tax Giveaways For The Well-Off
President Donald Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan say their target is the Affordable Care Act. But what their American Health Care Act would do is take a machete not just to Medicaid expansion but to Medicaid generally - the Medicaid that cares for lots of people in Trump's Ohio counties. The real agenda: slashing health care to help the U.S. Treasury cover the cost of sweet tax cuts for the well-off. (Thomas Suddes, 5/27)

Richmond Times-Dispatch: What Next For Republican Health-Care Efforts? 
If any slim chance remained that the Senate would pass the House version of Obamacare repeal, the release of the Congressional Budget Office’s scoring of the bill surely squashed it. Democrats and the media pounced on predictions that the House bill would leave 23 million more people uninsured a decade from now than Obamacare would, and premiums for elderly Americans and some of those with pre-existing conditions could soar. (5/27)

The Washington Post: Why Republicans Are So Bad At Health Care
Republicans have had seven years to figure out how they want to replace Obamacare, and this is what they’ve come up with: a plan that, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, would lead to 23 million more people not having insurance and, in states that wanted to, sick people being burdened with much, much higher costs. Maybe they needed eight years? (Matt O'Brien, 5/27)

Bloomberg: Hospitals Still Face An Ugly, Uncertain Future 
Trumpcare's chances of becoming law took a big hit this week. But the hospitals and Medicaid insurers directly in its path can't rest easy. Shares of such companies rose on Thursday, presumably cheering the Congressional Budget Office's score of the House-passed version of the American Health Care Act. The CBO score, released Wednesday evening, raised substantial new roadblocks to Trumpcare's passage in the Senate. It said the law would take health care from 23 million Americans, barely improving on the 24 million in the CBO's score of an earlier version of the AHCA. It also warned the law would destabilize the individual insurance market and gut pre-existing condition protections for one-sixth of Americans. (Max Nisen, 5/26)

Lincoln Journal-Star: AHCA Gouges Older Nebraskans
The recently passed American Health Care Act in the House of Representatives would give billions to big drug and insurance companies while price gouging people over age 50 and those with pre-existing conditions. Under the AHCA, insurance companies can charge older adults five times what other consumers pay for the same health insurance policy. It’s an age tax. The bill also lets Nebraska lawmakers get a waiver that would give insurance companies the power to charge older adults even more. (Connie Benjamin, 5/28)

Sacramento Bee: As Californians Lose Their Health Insurance, Republicans Should Be Held Responsible 
Twenty-three million people will lose health insurance coverage... As someone who has worked in health care for over 20 years, who has seen the amazing achievements under the Affordable Care Act, and heard the stories directly from the people whose lives are significantly better, I stand aghast at what our country is doing. And worse, what the Republicans in my own state voted for. (Carmela Castellano-Garcia, 5/28)

Montana Standard: Medicaid Cuts Could Hurt Montana's Special Ed Students
[R]ecent efforts by Congress to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act could severely alter our public schools’ ability to foster all students’ development. In Montana, roughly $55 million in Medicaid funding flows into our schools, and more than $35 million of that is federal funding. State and federal Medicaid dollars fund critical in-school programs and services for our young students. While Medicaid spending on school-based health services is a small part of Medicaid spending, it plays a significant role in our schools. (Kirk Miller, 5/30)

Denver Post: Medicaid Is Too Expensive Not To Cut And Too Critical To Decimate
It’s a harsh reality — the U.S. cannot afford to cover the current number of Medicaid recipients with the current level of benefits. ... But for those struggling families (and yes, some single childless, able-bodied adults under the Obamacare expansion), plans to gut the nation’s health insurance safety net will be devastating. ... But there is hope that Republicans in the Senate can find a middle ground if they are indeed dead-set on using their new-found majority to bring the federal budget more in line with reality on the back of health care for the neediest while increasing spending for the military. (5/29)

Los Angeles Times: 'Everyone I Know Is Worried.' Terrified Patients Await Fate Of Their Healthcare
Dr. Juan Z. Montes recalls the surge of people who came calling, beginning about two years ago. “We couldn’t handle them all,” he said, referring to the new patients who visited his four Southern California clinics after they got health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Montes, 67, who’s been doctoring in L.A. for four decades, estimated that his patient load increased about 20%. (Steve Lopez, 5/28)

The Kansas City Star: I’m A Kansas City Doctor In Australia. Trump Is Right About Australian Health Care
President Donald Trump, I heartily agree with you when you told Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, “You have better health care than we do.” You see, I have been both a patient and a doctor in the U.S. and Australia. After working and studying as a family physician in the U.S. for almost 20 years, I landed my dream job working in Australia in 2015. I love working within this excellent health care system where doctors and patients are supported by a program called Medicare. It is similar to American Medicare but covers every Australian of every age for most health care costs. (Marie Shieh, 5/27)

St. Louis Post-Dispatch: A Real Affordable Care Act
Anna, one of my patients with a progressive genetic illness, arrived in the emergency room one afternoon following many epileptic seizures. Her underlying diagnosis, abundantly documented in the hospital’s electronic medical record, was well-known to be associated with epilepsy. By the time I arrived in the emergency room, she had already been sent for an CT scan of the head. When I asked the emergency room physician the reason for the scan, in my view a clear waste of time and money, he explained that in “his clinical judgment,” the scan was necessary. (Steven Rothman, 5/30)