Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

What is the Trump health plan for 2020?

Robert Laszewski
Policy
December 21, 2019
148 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share

The Republicans don’t yet have a health care plan less than a year before the 2020 elections.

But based upon their 2017 Obamacare repeal and replace efforts, as well as a major document recently issued by the House Republican Study Committee, what might a Republican plan look like?

First, let’s review the plan House Republicans passed in 2017 during their failed repeal and replace efforts.

House Republicans would have repealed the Medicaid expansion and the individual market subsidies and would have repackaged them into a program that took some, but not all, of that money and sent it to the states. Each state legislature would have then taken that money and crafted a health insurance plan of their own making.

Here is the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO’s) July 2017 evaluation of that plan. The CBO calculated the Republican House plan would have spent $1.3 trillion less than Obamacare over ten years on Medicaid and insurance subsidies:

The CBO estimated that these funding cuts would have led to:

  • Nine million people leaving Medicaid by 2020 growing to 14 million in 2026 — and then having to enter the individual market as their only option for coverage unless they found their way to employer coverage.
  • The individual market shrinking by ten million in 2020 and six million by 2026.
  • The CBO, therefore, concluded that the number of people eligible for the individual market would increase dramatically as the reduced Medicaid population was forced to seek private individual coverage while the individual coverage subsidies were substantially cut.

Obamacare has suffered because a relatively small number of subsidy-eligible ever signed up for the program — about 40% at its high point. That, in turn, has led to very high premiums with an insufficient number of healthy people participating to pay for the costs of the sick.

The 2017 House Republican plan’s combination of dumping more people into the pool by shrinking Medicaid — and therefore increasing the number of people eligible for individual coverage — and cutting the subsidies in the private market, could only have had the result of making the percentage of eligible people buying a private health plan even worse. That, in turn, could only lead to even worse individual market affordability and resulting underwriting anti-selection than what we have had under Obamacare.

Republicans saw moving the design and administration of health insurance reform to the states as an opportunity to administer the program at a more efficient and place that would also have given the states the ability to innovate. Critics only saw the potential for states to go backward on Obamacare’s key market reforms, including pre-existing coverage guarantees and financial support.

While this plan passed the House, it never attracted a simple majority in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Since the Republican Senate’s inability to advance any kind of Obamacare repeal and replace bill, Republicans have not put forward any other comprehensive health insurance reform bill.

However, the House Republican Study Committee (RSC) recently issued a 58 page “Part One” health reform outline.

The RSC’s document follows the broad outline of the failed 2017 House plan — taking the existing Medicaid and individual market subsidies and repackaging them into state block grants where fifty new health insurance reform plans would be created and administered.

This time, the Republican plan spends more effort to assure consumers that their pre-existing medical conditions would be covered, “Consequently, everyone with an existing condition who is seeking coverage in the individual market would be provided a pathway to obtaining complete coverage of all their medical conditions within just 12 months.” — albeit in a system that could vary greatly from one state to another and has the potential to delay coverage for a pre-existing condition for up to a year.

The RSC outline is also vague on whether current Medicaid expansion and individual market subsidy expenditures would be cut prior to sending the money to the states in the form of block grants, saying only that “Funding for these grants would be derived from repackaging the ACAs premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion funding.”

In fact, the outline contains no spending or revenue projections.

Taken directly from the RSC document, here are the key points:

  • It is necessary to transform the individual marketplace’s current regulatory structure, unwind the ACA’s Washington-centric approach, and largely return regulatory authority to the individual states.
  • Protections pertaining to guaranteed issue and the prohibition on coverage exclusions would be retailored under the RSC plan to reward continuous coverage and promote portability in the individual marketplace.
  • Additionally, in order to provide Americans with health insurance options that fit their individualized needs and do not add unnecessary expenses, the RSC plan would undo the ACA’s regulations on essential health benefits, annual and lifetime limits, preventive care cost-sharing, dependent coverage, and actuarial value.
  • Each state would again be allowed to dictate the minimum attributes and cost-sharing parameters of plans to best meet the needs of their own citizens.
  • The ACA’s medical loss ratio, along with its competition-killing and premium-increasing effects, would be eliminated as well.
  • In no case, however, would carriers be able to rescind, increase rates, or refuse to renew one’s health insurance simply because a person developed a condition after enrollment.
  • Additionally, states—and not the federal government—would be solely empowered under the RSC plan to establish restraints on the extent to which carriers could incorporate the health risks of individuals into premiums.
  • Thus, the RSC plan would eliminate the ACA’s community rating, age banding, and single risk pool requirements.
  • However, under the RSC plan, individuals with high-risk medical conditions would have affordable access to state-run Guaranteed Coverage Pools under which their health care costs would be subsidized with federal grants and further contained by any state-enacted premium-setting restrictions.
  • Separately, the RSC plan would ensure states receive federal grants designed to assist the states in flexibly providing low-income individuals with access to affordable coverage.
  • Funding for these grants would be derived from repackaging the ACA’s premium subsidies and Medicaid expansion funding.

The Republican Study Committee is taking a very complex health insurance reform plan — Obamacare — and outlining another very complex health insurance plan to replace it with.

The RSC plan also assumes that taking this very controversial and complex health insurance reform challenge and simply delegating it to fifty state legislatures, who will then be expected to come up with fifty different decisions on how to proceed that they argue will all be better, is a risk voters will want to take.

While this RSC plan tries to directly deal with the concerns people had with the original House plan over pre-existing condition reforms, it still creates the potential for many states to offer reforms that would likely be less than the seamless pre-existing protections people have today.

The RSC only guarantees coverage for pre-existing conditions only so long as people remain continuously covered — if they do not, they could have a gap in coverage for their pre-existing conditions for up to a year.

Democrats will argue that it would be better to take the baseline that Obamacare offers and improve what is broken — particularly the insufficient middle-class subsidies — than to take the risk of wiping Obamacare off the map and taking our chances in 50 state legislatures.

My sense is that Republicans will have a huge uphill fight to win that argument– even if Republicans keep the White House, hold the Senate, and retake the House next November.

The irony is that Obamacare was built on a Republican policy chassis — the 1989 original Heritage Foundation proposal that was later adopted by the Democrats and morphed into the problematic Obamacare we have today.

Republicans just have a huge hatred for anything labeled “Obamacare” and still, appear unwilling to take that platform and overhaul it based upon Republican principles.

It is hard to see how Republicans will be the ones to drive health insurance reform until they are willing to do that.

Robert Laszewski is president, Health Policy and Strategy Associates and blogs at Health Care Policy and Marketplace Review.

Image credit: Shutterstock.com

Prev

Let's do better for patients with limited English proficiency

December 21, 2019 Kevin 2
…
Next

A psychiatrist can't help patients anymore

December 22, 2019 Kevin 0
…

Tagged as: Public Health & Policy, Washington Watch

Post navigation

< Previous Post
Let's do better for patients with limited English proficiency
Next Post >
A psychiatrist can't help patients anymore

More by Robert Laszewski

  • Inside the $1.9 trillion coronavirus stimulus bill is a political time bomb for Republicans

    Robert Laszewski
  • What does Kelly Loeffler’s health plan do to coverage for preexisting conditions?

    Robert Laszewski
  • Joe Biden won. What does that mean for health care?

    Robert Laszewski

Related Posts

  • Don’t underestimate the appeal of a Trump “health plan”

    Bob Doherty
  • What does Kelly Loeffler’s health plan do to coverage for preexisting conditions?

    Robert Laszewski
  • An analysis of Joe Biden’s health plan

    Robert Laszewski
  • Analyzing the Biden health plan. Will it work?

    Robert Laszewski
  • Are negative news cycles and social media injurious to our health?

    Rabia Jalal, MD
  • Having health coverage isn’t the same as being covered

    Peter Ubel, MD

More in Policy

  • Unveiling the intricate link between housing costs and health care

    Harvey Castro, MD, MBA
  • Uncovering the truth about racial health inequities in America: a book review

    John Paul Mikhaiel, MD
  • Why affirmative action is crucial for health equity and social justice in medicine

    Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH
  • The untold story of Hispanic/Latino health: Why subgroup data matters

    Matthew B. Alonso
  • Unmasking the brutal reality of gun violence in America: a call to action for unity and meaningful change

    Osmund Agbo, MD
  • Family physicians unite at the U.S. Capitol, seeking congressional support for Medicare reform and health care transformation

    Tochi Iroku-Malize, MD, MPH, MBA, Sterling N. Ransone, Jr., MD, and Steven P. Furr, MD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Why affirmative action is crucial for health equity and social justice in medicine

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Policy
    • The hidden factor in physician burnout: How the climate crisis is contributing to the erosion of well-being

      Elizabeth Cerceo, MD | Physician
    • The power of coaching for physicians: transforming thoughts, changing lives

      Kim Downey, PT | Conditions
    • Physician entrepreneurs offer hope for burned out doctors

      Cindy Rubin, MD | Physician
    • Why doctors aren’t to blame for the U.S. opioid crisis [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Unlocking the secrets of cancer conferences: an end-of-life counselor’s journey among pharmaceutical giants

      Althea Halchuck, EJD | Conditions
  • Past 6 Months

    • Breaking point: the 5 reasons American doctors are dreaming of walking away from medicine

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Physician
    • “Is your surgeon really skilled? The hidden threat to public safety in medicine.

      Gene Uzawa Dorio, MD | Physician
    • It’s time to replace the 0 to 10 pain intensity scale with a better measure

      Mark Sullivan, MD and Jane Ballantyne, MD | Conditions
    • Revolutionize your practice: the value-based care model that reduces physician burnout

      Chandravadan Patel, MD | Physician
    • Unveiling the hidden damage: the secretive world of medical boards

      Alan Lindemann, MD | Physician
    • Breaking the cycle of racism in health care: a call for anti-racist action

      Tomi Mitchell, MD | Policy
  • Recent Posts

    • A pediatrician’s journey into integrative medicine [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why allowing yourself to embrace discomfort is necessary for personal growth

      Jillian Rigert, MD, DMD | Physician
    • Unconventional health care, flawed studies, and biases: Navigating the complexities for optimal well-being

      Kara Wada, MD | Physician
    • Urgent innovation needed to address growing mental health crisis among children and families

      Monika Roots, MD | Conditions
    • The importance of listening in health care: a mother’s journey advocating for children with chronic Lyme disease

      Cheryl Lazarus | Conditions
    • Medical errors and the power of apologies [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

Leave a Comment

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

CME Spotlights

From MedPage Today

Latest News

  • UnitedHealthcare in the Hot Seat Over GI Procedure 'Advance Notification' Policy
  • Genetic Risk Score Predicts Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy
  • FDA Warns on Certain Forms of Compounded Semaglutide
  • Fired COVID Whistleblower Doesn't Want to Settle His Case
  • Video of ACOG Presenter Being Slapped Goes Viral

Meeting Coverage

  • TAR-200 Led to High Complete Response Rates in BCG-Unresponsive Bladder Cancer
  • More Success for CAR T-Cell Therapy in Rheumatic Disease
  • Trial Shows RA Can Be Stopped at Preclinical Stage
  • Tenapanor Improves Abdominal Symptoms in Patients With IBS-C
  • Benefits Found for Hand OA Drug Treatments
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Why affirmative action is crucial for health equity and social justice in medicine

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Policy
    • The hidden factor in physician burnout: How the climate crisis is contributing to the erosion of well-being

      Elizabeth Cerceo, MD | Physician
    • The power of coaching for physicians: transforming thoughts, changing lives

      Kim Downey, PT | Conditions
    • Physician entrepreneurs offer hope for burned out doctors

      Cindy Rubin, MD | Physician
    • Why doctors aren’t to blame for the U.S. opioid crisis [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Unlocking the secrets of cancer conferences: an end-of-life counselor’s journey among pharmaceutical giants

      Althea Halchuck, EJD | Conditions
  • Past 6 Months

    • Breaking point: the 5 reasons American doctors are dreaming of walking away from medicine

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Physician
    • “Is your surgeon really skilled? The hidden threat to public safety in medicine.

      Gene Uzawa Dorio, MD | Physician
    • It’s time to replace the 0 to 10 pain intensity scale with a better measure

      Mark Sullivan, MD and Jane Ballantyne, MD | Conditions
    • Revolutionize your practice: the value-based care model that reduces physician burnout

      Chandravadan Patel, MD | Physician
    • Unveiling the hidden damage: the secretive world of medical boards

      Alan Lindemann, MD | Physician
    • Breaking the cycle of racism in health care: a call for anti-racist action

      Tomi Mitchell, MD | Policy
  • Recent Posts

    • A pediatrician’s journey into integrative medicine [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why allowing yourself to embrace discomfort is necessary for personal growth

      Jillian Rigert, MD, DMD | Physician
    • Unconventional health care, flawed studies, and biases: Navigating the complexities for optimal well-being

      Kara Wada, MD | Physician
    • Urgent innovation needed to address growing mental health crisis among children and families

      Monika Roots, MD | Conditions
    • The importance of listening in health care: a mother’s journey advocating for children with chronic Lyme disease

      Cheryl Lazarus | Conditions
    • Medical errors and the power of apologies [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Leave a Comment

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...