Future Of Bipartisan Health Deal Already Shaky As Trump Reverses Course On Support
As news of a deal first broke Tuesday, President Donald Trump initially signaled support for the efforts. But after other Republicans panned the measure he seemed to change his mind. And although Sens. Lamar Alexander and Patty Murray expressed confidence in their plan, it will be a tough slog for them to get it through both chambers.
The New York Times:
2 Senators Strike Deal On Health Subsidies That Trump Cut Off
Two leading senators, hoping to stabilize teetering health insurance markets under the Affordable Care Act, reached a bipartisan deal on Tuesday to fund critical subsidies to insurers that President Trump moved just days ago to cut off. The plan by the senators, Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, and Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, would fund the subsidies for two years, a step that would provide at least short-term certainty to insurers. The subsidies, known as cost-sharing reduction payments, reimburse insurance companies for lowering deductibles, co-payments and other out-of-pocket costs for low-income customers.
(Kaplan and Pear, 10/17)
The Associated Press:
Senate Health Care Deal In Doubt As Trump Says He's Opposed
A bipartisan Senate deal to curb the growth of health insurance premiums is reeling after President Donald Trump reversed course and opposed the agreement and top congressional Republicans and conservatives gave it a frosty reception. ... In remarks Tuesday in the Rose Garden, Trump called the deal "a very good solution" that would calm insurance markets, giving him time to pursue his goal of scrapping Obama's 2010 Affordable Care Act, the target of Republican derision since it was signed into law. Although top Democrats and some Republicans praised the Alexander-Murray compromise agreement, Trump backed off after a day of criticism from many in the GOP. (Fram and Werner, 10/18)
The Washington Post:
Another Last-Ditch Effort To Tackle Obamacare Stalls Within Hours Of Its Release
The measure presented congressional Republicans with an uncomfortable choice between helping sustain coverage for many Americans and making good on a long-standing campaign promise — and paying the consequences — by allowing the ACA to falter. Senate Republican leaders did not immediately endorse the proposal. Influential House Republicans panned the blueprint, and Trump offered conflicting reviews. The discord swiftly cast the plan’s viability into serious doubt. (Sullivan, Eilperin and Goldstein, 10/17)
The Wall Street Journal:
What Democrats And GOP Get In Bipartisan Health-Care Deal
The Alexander-Murray deal addresses the Democrats’ most immediate concern: subsidies known as cost-sharing reduction payments, billions of dollars paid to insurers to limit out-of-pocket costs for low-income consumers. These payments had never been approved by Congress, and President Donald Trump announced last week he would discontinue making them. Democrats and health analysts feared cutting off the payments would send costs soaring in the ACA market and might prompt some insurers to exit. A two-year guarantee will lend the law some measure of stability at a time when Democrats are attempting to ward off repeated GOP efforts to roll it back. ... What do Republicans get? Mr. Alexander, the lead GOP negotiator, said that the deal expands the usefulness of ACA waivers that allow states to sidestep certain ACA rules to remold some aspects of the law, such as how premium subsidies are distributed or how much insurers can be permitted to charge their oldest customers. (Hackman and Wilde Mathews, 10/17)
Politico:
Trump Would Have To Broker Obamacare Truce
[G]etting the deal though would require a sustained, focused lobbying effort on Capitol Hill, where Republicans are facing a biting political calculus. They’re still stinging from spending all of this year in a draining but fruitless effort to repeal and replace Obamacare — the law that congressional Republicans have been trying to uproot for seven years. Now, they would have to decide whether the state flexibility concessions Alexander got are enough. (Haberkorn and Cancryn, 10/17)