The Sentinel-Record

Plan for health deal announced

- ERICA WERNER ALAN FRAM

WASHINGTON — Republican and Democratic senators joined in announcing a plan Tuesday aimed at stabilizin­g America’s health insurance markets in the wake of President Donald Trump’s order to terminate “Obamacare” subsidies. Trump himself spoke approvingl­y of the deal, but some conservati­ves denounced it as an insurance company bailout, making its future uncertain.

The agreement followed weeks of negotiatio­ns between Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington that sought to address health insurance markets that have been in limbo following GOP failures to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. The talks took on added urgency when Trump announced last week that he would end monthly “cost sharing reduction” payments the government makes to help insurance companies reduce costs for lower-income people.

Without that money, premiums for some people buying individual health plans would spike, and some insurers would flee the markets, industry officials warn.

The Alexander-Murray deal would continue the insurer payments for two years, while establishi­ng new flexibilit­y for states under former President Barack Obama’s law.

“This would allow the Senate to continue its debate about the long term of health care, but over the next two years I think Americans won’t have to worry about the possibilit­y of being able to buy insurance in counties where they live,” Alexander said in announcing the deal after a closed-door lunch where he presented it to GOP senators.

“This agreement avoids chaos. I don’t know a Republican or Democrat who benefits from chaos,” he said.

Alexander said the president had encouraged his efforts in phone calls over the past two weeks. And at the White House, Trump responded positively, expressing optimism that Republican­s would ultimately succeed in repealing Obamacare, but until then, “For one year, two years, we’re going to have a very good solution.”

Trump’s position may seem contradict­ory in that he himself ordered an end to the payments, calling them a bailout, but is now encouragin­g legislatio­n to reinstitut­e them. Indeed White House officials had said they would want more in exchange than the additional state flexibilit­y offered in the Alexander-Murray agreement.

Just minutes before Alexander announced the deal, White House legislativ­e director Marc Short emerged from the Senate GOP lunch saying that “a starting point” in exchange for restoring the cost-sharing payments “is eliminatin­g the individual mandate and employer mandate” — the central pillars of Obamacare.

That suggested some disagreeme­nt within the administra­tion on the issue. If so, it does not bode well for ultimate passage of Alexander-Murray, since the president’s full support will be crucial in persuading Republican­s to get on board.

Initially as president, Trump continued making the payments though resisting, but he declared last week he would pull the plug. The payments, which cost around $7 billion this year, lower expenses like co-payments and deductible­s for more than 6 million people. But discontinu­ing them would actually cost the government more money under Obamacare’s complicate­d structure, because some people facing higher premiums would end up getting bigger tax subsidies to help pay for them.

The Alexander-Murray deal does include a host of provisions allowing states faster and easier access to waivers that would allow them to shape their own marketplac­e plans under Obamacare. It also would provide for a new low-cost catastroph­ic coverage insurance option for all consumers.

Reaction from the GOP was decidedly mixed. For many conservati­ves it’s practicall­y unthinkabl­e to sign off on federal payments that would arguably prop up a law they’ve been vowing for seven years to destroy.

Alexander said he and allies including Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., would spend the next several days trying to build up support with the goal of formally introducin­g legislatio­n later this week. If the legislatio­n does pass, it would almost certainly be as part of a larger package including must-pass spending or disaster relief bills and that might not be until the end of the year.

Even more than other aspects of the law, the cost-sharing payments have been in dispute ever since the Affordable Care Act became law. House Republican­s sued in 2014 to block the payments, arguing they were illegal because Congress, which has power over government spending under the Constituti­on, had never specifical­ly authorized them. The Obama administra­tion tried unsuccessf­ully to get the GOP lawsuit dismissed, but the Republican­s won favorable rulings from lower-court judges, putting the payments in legal jeopardy even before Trump won the White House.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States