The Republican Health Care Bill Is Carefully Crafted to Solve a Specific Problem

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


In my post this morning about the Republican health care bill, I was going to make a snarky comment about its weakness being driven partly by the Republican desire to avoid anything like the “2,700 page” ACA, which they’ve been griping about for years. But I desisted. There’s no need to get sarcastic when there are plenty of substantive criticisms to make. But then we get this:

These guys never give up. But just for the record, it takes a lot of pages to set up a healthcare system. It takes one sentence to repeal it. That’s why the Republican bill is so short.

And as long as we’re on the subject, Ezra Klein says this today:

The GOP health bill doesn’t know what problem it’s trying to solve

Ezra makes a bunch of good points, and his piece is worth reading. But I disagree with him. There’s no way to say this without sounding hopelessly partisan, so I’ll just say it: Republicans knew exactly what problem they were trying to solve. Their preference has always been to repeal Obamacare and do nothing in its place, but they don’t have the votes to overcome a Democratic filibuster, so they can’t do that. They also realize that the optics of baldly ripping away health coverage from 20 million people would be mildly troublesome.

So their goal was simple: do what they could to destroy Obamacare and take away as much health coverage as they could, without making it look like they weren’t offering a replacement. The result is a plan that offers the trappings of health care—subsidies, pre-existing conditions, etc.—but which is all but useless to the people who actually need it. It’s too stingy for poor people, and mostly unnecessary for middle-class folks who already get health insurance from their employers. It will cost very little because virtually nobody will use it.

The part they apparently didn’t realize is that keeping the pre-existing conditions clause—which is both popular and impossible to repeal—while tearing down the rest of Obamacare is likely to destroy the individual insurance market. At least, I assume they didn’t realize that, since this would be bad news even by Republican standards. I don’t know what, if anything, they plan to do about that. Maybe nothing. Maybe they’re just counting on their repeal bill failing in the Senate, so nothing bad will happen and they can get back to complaining about Obamacare.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest