During Donald Trumps first address to a joint session of Congress ( three weeks or a lifetime ago ), the president promised the American people that he was going to invest his term awarding hopes, like a carrot-colored genie. During that address, seeming just like a chairperson, Trump promised that hed invest in womens health. It was the first and simply moment in his careening administration that pundits concurred was presidential . It was also untrue.
On Monday, the long-awaited Congressional Budget Office analysis of the proposed GOP Obamacare replacement came down the pike. Like many on both sides of the aisle expected, it was an avalanche of bad news for Republicans who belief the American Health Care Act would be an easy sell to their constituents. It was also bad news for President Trump, who will have a hard time peddling a kneecapping of health-care coverage for low-income and older girls as some sort of investment.
The report threw actual numbers on how many people would be left uninsured by the ACA rollback2 4 million kicked off insurance and an additional $880 billion gouged from Medicaid, all in the name of a measly 1 percent reduction in the deficit.
The numbers dont adequately convey the scope of humanity they devalue. Overall premiums decrease under the program, but thats simply because a large number of people are being kicked off, and older Americans will face a debilitating spike in premiums. Slashing the Medicaid expansion means that low-income families will see reduced access to health care. Letting premiums for older people to shoot skyward means that a 64 -year-old constructing $24,000 per year “il be seeing” half of their income go toward the cost of covering medical insurance.
Further, the language some analysts read, at first glance, as a one-year defunding of Planned Parenthood and other health centers was actually speech that exclusively applied to Planned Parenthood. One of the nations largest womens health-care providers and a point of entry for many women with limited means was being cut off without even being directly named. Death by shade.
Advocates in the case of women health contend that if the AHCA were to be legislated as-is, Trumps promised investment in womens health would be a comical deception.
[ Republicans] are doing nothing to invest in womens health, Jamila Taylor, senior chap at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, tells The Daily Beast.
Taylor is particularly concerned with the one-two punch the AHCA commits low-income women and women of coloring. Whats going to happen to the 2.4 million women who are folks that are accessing their health care through Planned Parenthood clinics? Taylor says. Planned Parenthood is the enter level or access points to health care particularly for low-income girls. This is not just about Planned Parenthood as a provider. “Its about” taking services and health care away from people who really need it.
Taylor is skeptical that the GOPs proposed ACA replacement is even fiscally conservative. In the long term, it does nothing to help women be more economically secure, she says. Were just pushing people further down into the hole of poverty. And thats unacceptable.
The bill doesnt have many fans on the left side of the political spectrum. Sen. Patty Murray, ranking Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor& Pensions committee, released a statement condemning the bill again in the aftermath of the CBO report. She called the bill a broken promise to every patient and family who listened when President Trump and Republicans said that their reckless, mean-spirited bill would somehow offer better coveragefor everyoneat lower cost. Additionally, she cited the gutting of Planned Parenthood and Medicaidtwo programs many girls rely onas a reason the legislation didnt merit her support.
Conservative Republicans are balking at Trumpcare, too. The partys libertarian wing has long called for a full repeal of the Affordable Care Act, which would ostensibly leave many more than 24 million Americans without insurance. At least theyd be morally consistent, though. Right?
Paul Ryan and Trump, for their portions, have divergent opinions on the CBO assessment. President Trump, in the past a fan of quoting the CBOs analysis as evidence that then-President Obama was a failure, is suddenly skeptical of the CBOs findings. House Speaker Ryan took a different tack. He concluded that the CBO report upheld him, operating in a universe with different math from the one that was used in the report.
Can the program be both both good and bad for Americans? Can it still be awful for half the population if its middling for the other half? Does it matter as long as it was a Republicans idea?
Read more here: http :// www.thedailybeast.com