PD Editorial: Senate’s unseemly rush to vote on health bill

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell released his health care bill to a mix of indecision and opposition.

And that was from his fellow Republicans.

The bill, drafted behind closed doors by a small group of senators and staff members, would eliminate health insurance mandates; slash funding for Medicaid, a program that covers tens of millions of poor and working-class Americans; scale back premium subsidies for people who purchase individual policies and deliver substantial tax cuts to the wealthy, pharmaceutical companies and makers of medical devices.

President Donald Trump, according to news accounts, described the health care bill passed last month by the House as “mean.” The Senate version doesn’t appear to be much nicer.

Yet McConnell plans to bring his bill to the floor without so much as a public hearing - and under rules that limit debate and prohibit a filibuster.

Obamacare, by comparison, was developed over the course of months, including 60 hours of hearings in the Senate health committee, bipartisan negotiations in the finance committee, which held its longest markup session in two decades, and 25 days of debate before a floor vote. Three House committees held more than a dozen public hearings before the Affordable Care Act came up for a floor vote. Senators and House members also hosted scores of town hall meetings over the summer and fall of 2009.

McConnell wants a vote before his members head home to face their constituents over Congress’ Fourth of July recess - maybe even before they have a chance to fully digest the bill, which would shake up an industry that comprises one-sixth of the U.S. economy and safeguards the health and well-being of more than 300 million Americans.

Acting on such sweeping legislation without a thorough public vetting is, at best, an abuse of congressional power.

But if the initial GOP reaction to McConnell’s bill is any indication, he may be forced to slow down.

Four of the Senate’s most conservative members immediately complained that the bill didn’t go far enough. Several senators whose states embraced the Obamacare expansion of Medicaid expressed concerns that the bill may go too far.

With Democrats and independents unified in opposition, McConnell can only afford to lose two of the 52 GOP votes in the Senate.

The full impact of McConnell’s bill won’t be clear until the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office completes its analysis next week. But it’s likely to track with the House bill, which, according to the CBO, would leave 14 million more people without health insurance next year, compared to Obamacare, and 23 million more by 2026.?Tax cuts under the House bill would total $765 billion over?10 years, with most of the benefits flowing to people earning more than $250,000 a year.

As we have said before, Obamacare isn’t sacrosanct. But any replacement should cover more people, not fewer. And health insurance, like auto insurance, should be mandatory, with basic coverage including maternity care and mental health. To accomplish that, subsidies for lower- and even many middle-income Americans are necessary and must be paid for.

It wasn’t easy to craft a plan that met those benchmarks. McConnell’s bill almost certainly will not, which may explain his haste. He wants a vote before people realize his bill is hazardous to their health.