GOP’s Latest Anti-Obamacare Bill Could Leave 21 Million More People Uninsured

Within a decade, a new study estimates, that number could reach 32 million.

Sen. Lindsey Graham speaks to reporters outside the US Senate chamber.Ron Sachs/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Surprise! If it manages to pass despite Sen. John McCain’s defection, the latest GOP effort to repeal Obamacare would likely result in an additional 21 million Americans without health insurance. That’s according to a new study by the Brookings Institution. And within a few years, the study found, the coverage gap would grow to more than 30 million people.

The latest health bill, which, for procedural reasons, Senate Republicans have to pass by September 30, would convert the subsidies Obamacare provides to help low- and middle-income families buy insurance into block grants that states can use however they want—although the amounts the states receive would eventually be far less than what was expended under Obamacare.

The so-called Graham-Cassidy bill, named after the two Republican senators who introduced it, would also end Obamacare’s expansion of Medicaid to millions of low-income families. In addition, Graham-Cassidy would place a per-capita cap on traditional Medicaid, greatly reducing federal health care expenditures. According to health industry analysts, the bill would create chaos, as each state attempted to set up its own complex insurance market, and to do so with far less money available to help struggling people get coverage.

Normally, Congress would delay voting on such a package until after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is able to “score” the legislation—analyze it and report back on the bill’s likely human and economic impacts. Whether by design or accident, in this case the authors waited until the last minute to release the text of the proposed legislation. The CBO says it will only have time to assess the bill’s budgetary impacts before the September 30 deadline, but won’t be able to reach a firm conclusion on how the bill will affect the number of people with insurance. This lack of clarity has allowed the bill’s authors to make the media rounds and flat-out lie about the bill’s likely effects.

Without the CBO score, Americans are left to rely on outside analysis such as the new Brookings study. But as Brookings notes in its report, there’s lots of information to be gleaned from past CBO reports, since much of Graham-Cassidy bill is a patchwork of other proposals put forth by Republicans this year. Taking away the individual mandate would quickly result in 15 million fewer people being insured. By 2020, Brookings estimates, roughly 21 million fewer people would have insurance if Graham-Cassidy passes. “These estimates are, of course, subject to considerable uncertainty, most importantly because predicting how states would respond to the dramatic changes in the policy environment under the Graham-Cassidy proposal is very challenging,” the report notes. “What is clear, however, is that the legislation would result in very large reductions in insurance coverage.”

Things get even more dire after 2026. That’s when Graham-Cassidy eliminates the block grants to states, leaving them to fend for themselves if they want to help low- and middle-income families keep their coverage. Brookings used the CBO’s prior assessment of the impact of repealing Obamacare as the basis for its post-2026 estimate: Swapping Obamacare for Graham-Cassidy would leave 32 million more people without insurance.

But all of this number-crunching may not matter in the end. On Friday afternoon, McCain announced he could not “in good conscience” vote for the new bill, despite his close friendship with one of its authors. McCain’s opposition means Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will be hard pressed to find the votes he needs to get Graham-Cassidy through the Senate.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate