Winter Weather Advisory issued February 24 at 4:29AM MST expiring February 24 at 11:00AM MST in effect for: Yuma
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 24 at 4:29AM MST expiring February 24 at 11:00AM MST in effect for: Cheyenne, Kit Carson
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 24 at 4:03AM MST expiring February 24 at 9:00AM MST in effect for: Phillips, Sedgwick, Washington
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 24 at 4:01AM MST expiring February 24 at 12:00PM MST in effect for: Eagle, Garfield, Pitkin
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 24 at 4:01AM MST expiring February 24 at 12:00PM MST in effect for: Gunnison, Montrose
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 24 at 4:01AM MST expiring February 24 at 12:00PM MST in effect for: Delta, Eagle, Garfield, Mesa, Moffat, Rio Blanco, Routt
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 24 at 4:01AM MST expiring February 24 at 12:00PM MST in effect for: Archuleta, Delta, Dolores, Gunnison, Hinsdale, La Plata, Montezuma, Montrose, Ouray, San Juan, San Miguel
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 24 at 12:00AM MST expiring February 24 at 12:00PM MST in effect for: Delta, Eagle, Garfield, Mesa, Moffat, Montrose, Ouray, Rio Blanco, Routt, San Miguel
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 23 at 2:56PM MST expiring February 24 at 9:00AM MST in effect for: Larimer, Weld
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 23 at 2:56PM MST expiring February 24 at 9:00AM MST in effect for: Morgan
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 23 at 2:56PM MST expiring February 24 at 9:00AM MST in effect for: Logan, Phillips, Sedgwick, Washington
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 23 at 12:42PM MST expiring February 24 at 11:00AM MST in effect for: Cheyenne
Winter Weather Advisory issued February 23 at 12:42PM MST expiring February 24 at 11:00AM MST in effect for: Kit Carson
Winter Storm Watch issued February 22 at 10:32PM MST expiring February 24 at 11:00AM MST in effect for: Logan, Phillips, Sedgwick, Washington
Winter Storm Watch issued February 22 at 9:50PM MST expiring February 24 at 5:00PM MST in effect for: Yuma
DENVER – U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman is leaning toward voting for a revived Republican plan to replace Obamacare, but says he wants to see more protection for pre-existing conditions or he’ll vote against sending the bill to the Senate.
President Donald Trump and several other House Republicans have again been trying to shore up votes this week in their ongoing effort to replace the Affordable Care Act.
Wednesday morning, those efforts grew further legs when Republican House members Fred Upton and Billy Long said they had flipped from “no” to “yes” on their plans to vote for the bill after the president accepted an amendment to the bill from Upton the Michigan Republican says will allay concerns over pre-existing condition coverage.
Moderate and ultra-conservative Republicans, as well as Democrats, have voiced concern over the reinstatement of high-risk pools for pre-existing condition coverage under the AHCA – something Obamacare eliminated.
Last week, Coffman and his team said that the AHCA and MacArthur amendment that was added in recent weeks contained coverage for all pre-existing conditions, something House Speaker Paul Ryan reiterated, as did the president himself.
But some of the writers of Obamacare, as well as some in the health care and retirement industries, have said that even with the MacArthur amendment, people with pre-existing conditions could face not being able to afford coverage because companies and states would make it too expensive.
“The current bill has a lot of strong elements – giving the states more flexibility is sound public policy…But we need to tighten some protections for those with preexisting conditions,” Coffman said in a back-and-forth statement Wednesday.
While saying there needed to be better protections for people with pre-existing conditions, he said that critics of the AHCA were being “totally disingenuous” about the reality of the bill’s language on them.
“I worry that, under the current language, a small percentage of those with preexisting conditions may not be adequately protected,” he said.
But the biggest sign that he was leaning toward a “yes” vote came with the final on-the-fence portion of Coffman’s statement:
“If House Leadership will work to tighten protections for those with preexisting conditions, I’m a yes on sending this bill to the Senate for further consideration. If not, I’m a no, and we’ll go back to the drawing board.”
Ken Buck, a Colorado Republican who is a member of the conservative Freedom Caucus, will support the bill, according to several whip counts, and other Freedom Caucus members who had been on the fence were moving toward supporting the bill Wednesday, according to reports.
And the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Diabetes Association and American Lung Association, among others, all came out Wednesday in opposition to the AHCA as it stands -- even with the MacArthur and Upton amendments.
"This bill, including the MacArthur and Upton Amendments, would undermine that vital safeguard [protecting against higher charges for pre-existing conditions]," their combined statement said. "The various patches offered by lawmakers -- including high-risk pools and financial assistance with premiums -- do not in any way offer the same level of protection provided in current law."
BREAKING: New statement from American Cancer Society, Heart Assn, Diabetes Assn, Lung Assn., etc. opposing MacArthur & Upton amendment. pic.twitter.com/20xkEaKxdu
The American Medical Association on Wednesday also said the changes to the AHCA do not adequately cover people with pre-existing conditions.
“None of the legislative tweaks under consideration changes the serious harm to patients and the health care delivery system if AHCA passes,” said AMA President Andrew W. Gurman, M.D. “High-risk pools are not a new idea. Prior to the enactment of the Affordable Care Act, 35 states operated high-risk pools, and they were not a panacea for Americans with pre-existing medical conditions. The history of high-risk pools demonstrates that Americans with pre-existing conditions will be stuck in second-class health care coverage – if they are able to obtain coverage at all.”
Colorado was one of 35 states that offered high-risk pools, which are plans that cover people who can’t typically get health insurance – many of them because of their pre-existing conditions.
The state covers much of the funds for the pools through various fees, but insurance companies can raise prices so that state coverage won’t cover care beyond premiums. Federal subsidies also contributed to Colorado’s high-risk pools when they were in place under CoverColorado, the state high-risk pool program.
By the end of 2011, however, the number of Coloradans covered under high-risk pools was close to 14,000 – the sixth-most populous high-risk pool in the country. That accounted for 3.5 percent of the non-group market enrollment that year in the state.
Though many states’ high-risk pools excluded coverage for pre-existing condition for people otherwise eligible for coverage for between 6 and 12 months, Colorado was one of two states that only excluded coverage for the first three months.
And before the ACA effectively eliminated high-risk pools by forcing insurers to exempt pre-existing conditions when considering coverage, the list of pre-existing conditions that would not be covered in Colorado was extensive.
The Congressional Budget Office has yet to score the revised AHCA, but said in its original analysis that 24 million fewer people would be insured in the next decade than would have been under Obamacare. It also said that the AHCA would have devastating effects on Medicaid across the country.
The Colorado Consumer Health Initiative blasted the revised AHCA Wednesday.
“Coloradans have experience with high-risk pools from before the Affordable Care Act, and it doesn’t work,” said the organization’s spokesman, Adam Fox, saying Coffman has “flipflopped” on his stance to protect Coloradans with pre-existing conditions.
“An additional $8 billion doesn’t magically make high-risk pools work, and Coffman, as a fiscal conservative, should know better than to throw money at a failed idea,” Fox continued. “This isn’t what people in America or Colorado want. It is time for the GOP to drop this crazed fixation on repeal -- and move on.”
Late Wednesday, Ryan said the full House would vote on the AHCA on Thursday.