https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52752
CBO analysis for the revised AHCA bill is out.
CBO and JCT estimate that, in 2018, 14 million more people would be uninsured under H.R. 1628 than under current law. The increase in the number of uninsured people relative to the number projected under current law would reach 19 million in 2020 and 23 million in 2026. In 2026, an estimated 51 million people under age 65 would be uninsured, compared with 28 million who would lack insurance that year under current law. Under the legislation, a few million of those people would use tax credits to purchase policies that would not cover major medical risks.
Republicans kind of got handed an out with the last line there, as they can spin "major medical risks" as being maternity care for a 55 year old man or whatever. It's stupid, but their base is also stupid, so it'll probably work. CBO did say that this is only "a few million" of the total though.
Another interesting bit here:
Finally, about one-sixth of the population resides in states that would obtain waivers involving both the EHBs and community rating and that would allow premiums to be set on the basis of an individual’s health status in a substantial portion of the nongroup market, CBO and JCT anticipate. As in other states, average premiums would be lower than under current law because a younger and healthier population would be purchasing the insurance and because large changes to the EHB requirements would cause plans to a cover a smaller percentage of expected health care costs. In addition, premiums would vary significantly according to health status and the types of benefits provided, and less healthy people would face extremely high premiums, despite the additional funding that would be available under H.R. 1628 to help reduce premiums. Over time, it would become more difficult for less healthy people (including people with preexisting medical conditions) in those states to purchase insurance because their premiums would continue to increase rapidly. As a result of the narrower scope of covered benefits and the difficulty less healthy people would face purchasing insurance, average premiums for people who did purchase insurance would generally be lower than in other states—but the variation around that average would be very large. CBO and JCT do not have an estimate of how much lower those premiums would be.
Nah, there is no out. This is a bag of shit all around.
Even the people that are getting insurance, who would see lower premiums, it is largely because you are getting fewer benefits or stuck with higher deductibles.
There are no free lunches and at its root this is a bill that is just enormous tax cuts for the rich, reduced subsidies and inadequate cost sharing plans for basically everyone else. The poor, the old, the sick are all fucked under this thing. Red states will get hit hardest. The mandate is still shit and IMO is going to encourage young people to forgo insurance knowing they are only subject to a 30% one year increase when they do need it. Those that do get it will be shocked that it is largely unusable due to high deductibles. I might be slipping a bit but I think the amendments even open the door to lifetime limits again and capping out-of-pocket expenses the insurer will pay.
If I am also not mistaken, it even reduces the deficit LESS then the last CBO estimate.
I am also interested in if the CBO touched on how the opt-out clause could affect employer insurance. Since theoretically a state that opts out could be the state a company insures all their employees from and so by extension, you could reduce the benefits for employees in states that didn't opt out. Drop coverage for employees in states that chose to opt out and are no longer required to do so.
