Tag Archives: aca

Senate Health Care Debate Timeline

As a follow-up to my August 2017 IM column on health care, this details recent actions on Capitol Hill. The House completed its work and passed a repeal and replacement for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) health care bill. The 2017 House American Health Care Act (AHC) was then forwarded to the US Senate for consideration. Upon receipt, the Senate determined that it needed to compile its own proposal. Hence, Senate majority members went into closed session to draft a new proposal.

The Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017 (BCRA) was introduced as the vehicle used by Senate leadership to start the repeal and replace process. The following timeline provides a sense of Senate action, along with a glimpse at the procedural difficulty encountered after the seven-year attempt to totally eliminate the ACA. Though this process goes back seven years, we begin in 2017 with the 115th Congress, where a single party controls the House, Senate, and White House.

Health Care Timeline

May 4: House passes its version of health care reform, the American Health Care Act of 2017.

May 24: Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports House bill (American Health Care Act) increases federal deficit by $119 billion; over 10 years 23 million would lose health care.

June 13: President Donald Trump weighs in with Senators at a White House lunch to “make the [House] bill more generous.”

June 22: Senate releases its Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017.

June 26: CBO reviews draft Senate bill.

June 27: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell delays vote; not enough votes for his Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA).

July 13: Republicans present updated version; moderates say new version will hurt those with pre-existing conditions.

July 15: Procedural vote delayed because of Senator McCain’s surgery.

July 17: Senators Mike Lee and Jerry Moran kill the bill by announcing they would vote against it.

July 25: Senator John McCain votes for a motion to proceed.

July 25: Senator Ted Cruz introduces a health care bill amendment to allow insurers to sell low cost health
insurance; bill is rejected by the Senate.

July 27: McConnell announces plans for his Health Care Freedom Act, or as his colleagues call it, “skinny repeal” bill; will not replace the ACA for two years or have a two-year transition period. It is supported by the White House, but Senators oppose the tactic.

July 28: ACA repeal vote takes place, defeated by all Democrats, and Republicans John McCain, Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins; bill would leave 16 million more people uninsured than ACA. After the vote, Trump continues to push for a health care resolution, while McConnell insists on moving on to tax reform and the debt ceiling.

July 28: House on August recess while Senate remains in pro forma session with no changes to the Affordable Care Act. (The pro forma session prevents President Trump from making recess appointments.)

For AFM members subject to requirements outlined under ACA, you should know that no additional work on health care has been scheduled. We expect more information after the August recess.

Health Care

Deciphering Health Care

Since the start of the 115th Congress, both the executive and legislative branches of government have been under single party control. The US House of Representatives, under the leadership of Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), and the Senate, under the leadership of Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), with the backing of the Republican White House, have been fully engaged in repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Once the process began in earnest, principal concerns came from Republicans who believed that the new health care bill should include provisions 1) to provide coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, 2) for those with employer-based health insurance, and 3) for cuts to Planned Parenthood. Democrats flatly rejected the bill saying that, in particular, its Medicaid cutback provisions would hurt too many elderly and poor Americans by eliminating Medicaid expansion eligibility included in the ACA. Democrats also complain the bill may cause unnecessary spikes in premiums for low-income families, older Americans, and those with pre-existing conditions.

The Medicaid Debate

Chief among concerns is the gradual elimination of the ACA Medicaid Expansion Program eligibility written into the new Republican House and Senate Bills. Both the Senate and House bills phase out extra money that the federal government has provided to states under ACA as an incentive to expand eligibility for Medicaid. More importantly, this means that seniors would receive fewer health care benefits under the new Senate and House bills.

What is Medicaid (not to be confused with Medicare)? It is a government funded health care program that provides health insurance to people with disabilities, the elderly, low-income seniors, and families with children and pregnant women. It helps pay medical expenses for those who cannot afford comprehensive medical coverage. Medicaid is financed by both federal and state governments. However, each state manages its own Medicaid program and decides its own rules for participation.   

What is Medicaid Expansion? The federal government website Medicaid.gov defines the program as expanded eligibility coverage under ACA for the poorest Americans. ACA created an opportunity for states to provide Medicaid eligibility, effective January 1, 2014, for individuals under 65 years of age with incomes up to 133% of the federal poverty level (FPL). For the first time (under ACA), states could provide Medicaid coverage for low-income adults without children with guaranteed coverage through Medicaid in every state without need for a waiver.

House Deliberations 

After a month of wrangling, the new health care bill was withdrawn from consideration due to moderate and conservative Republicans who threatened not to vote for it until outstanding issues were resolved.

In the House, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score was not released until after the bill passed. The eventual nonpartisan score showed that 15-23 million Americans could lose their health care benefits by 2026, more than if Obamacare remained intact. The new American Healthcare Act (HR 1628) passed the House May 4 by a vote of 217 to 213.

After House passage, the bill moved to the Senate. Senators agreed to disagree with significant elements of the House bill and decided to totally rewrite it. As the House moved expeditiously to put a bill in place, the Senate worked behind closed doors with 13 Republican Senators drafting a revised bill. There was major concern over the bill being drafted without a CBO score analyzing its cost. The Senate decided to delay releasing its bill until all the pieces are in place.

Democratic Senators protested because the bill was not subject to committee hearings or debate on the floor. Now, Republican senators who heard from angry constituents at town hall meetings during their recess are carefully considering their options. Meanwhile, political pundits continue to calculate the impact of possible losses of Republican seats if the bill is signed into law without the support of voters.

The Senate bill was recently released with deep cuts to Medicaid and ending the ACA mandates for purchasing insurance, maternity care provisions, emergency services, and mental health treatment.

Now that the July 4 holiday recess has ended, the Senate is moving toward a full vote in the chamber. As of this writing, four Republican Senators will oppose it: Rand Paul (KY), Ted Cruz (TX), Mike Lee (UT), and Ron Johnson (WI). Cruz has introduced his own amendment that is now under consideration. Vice President Mike Pence, President Donald Trump, and Mitch McConnell are negotiating hard with reluctant Senate members to move the bill forward as opposition voices continue to grow from Members like Susan Collins (R-ME). Further complicating forward progress on the vote is the absence of Senator John McCain who recently had eye surgery and will be away from Washington for approximately two weeks. Failure to hold a vote could mean that no bill would pass this year, leaving the ACA as the “law of the land.”

The White House continues to weigh in with uncommitted Republicans suggesting that Trump would like to see the outstanding issues resolved and have a bill in place and ready for his signature before congress takes its August recess. At this writing, less than three weeks before August 1, few members of Congress have hope that an agreement can be reached in time. Some in leadership are beginning to believe that the best chance they have for passage of the Senate bill is to reach out across the aisle and include Democrats in the negotiations. Trump has now suggested that the Senate consider first repealing the ACA and then replacing it. Not all members of Congress support that solution.

Trump Administration

What the Trump Administration Means for Musicians

by John Acosta, AFM International Executive Board Member and President of Local 47 (Los Angeles, CA)

With many voters, pundits, and pollsters still recovering from the unexpected results of our last presidential election, I find that it is critical for us to focus on what this means for our union and how it may impact our members. There is no doubt in my mind that the focus by the trump administration to gut the Affordable Care Act (ACA, aka Obamacare) will leave many musicians exposed to the whims of an avaricious health care industry and without the safety net provided by the ACA.

While the ACA was far from perfect, it did expand health care coverage for millions of Americans who would not otherwise be covered. In California, we are not taking the attacks on the ACA lightly. AFM locals in California are working with labor and community coalitions to not only protect our health care—but to go one step further—by expanding health care into a single-payer model or universal health care, much like we find in most of the first world.

With a new administration in Washington, DC, we can also expect attacks on labor itself with a less friendly, if not overtly hostile, National Labor Relations Board and legislation that seeks to gut a union’s ability to collect dues by enacting a national “right to work” law.

Now, you may ask, how does this affect me? Well, if you’re in a symphony, you may see more aggressive acts by management to violate your CBA. If members of your symphony orchestra are no longer required to pay their dues, you will have a less effective union with a weakened ability to represent you at the bargaining table or in grievance and arbitration proceedings. Recording musicians may see employers reinterpreting the agreements under which you work and dispensing with age-old practices that were unwritten but accepted industry wide.

Now don’t get me wrong, we should approach the new administration in Washington, DC, to find common ground. President Trump has stated that he wants to help American workers keep their jobs in the US. This is a concept we can get behind. We have already begun discussions about how we can best support this initiative as it relates to runaway scoring and recording.

The idea of placing tariffs on intellectual property produced outside of the US, making it less desirable for companies to outsource musician jobs, is something we hope to urge the administration to incorporate into Trump’s job creation program. Whether we will be received positively by the Trump Administration is still an open question, and whether there is enough common ground to make the next four years productive is yet to be seen.

As our former President Obama stated in the waning days of his presidency, “The best days are still ahead.” I believe this. We must continue to organize internally and externally, while we remain vigilant in the fight for better wages, working conditions, and dignity on the job.

One Million Workers Could Lose Health Care

A Republican bill (H.R. 30) passed by the House could strip health care coverage for one million workers, plus add some $53.2 billion to the federal deficit over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), large employers must provide health care coverage to employees who work 30 or more hours a week or face a penalty. H.R. 30 would require employees to work 40 hours a week to qualify for compulsory care. Health care experts say that it’s an incentive for employers to drop workers down to the 39 hours to avoid the responsibility. One study from the US Berkeley Labor Center estimated that 6.5 million people may risk having their hours cut back under the Republican bill, nearly three times the number (2.3 million) that are vulnerable to losing hours under the current 30-hour threshold.

The AFL-CIO and other groups support strengthening employer responsibility rules in the ACA, rather than weakening them. Since ACA became law, the number of Americans with health insurance has increased 10 million (mostly from employer-provided plans), while the percentage of uninsured Americans has dropped from 17.1% to 12.9%.

Other Interesting News

Instrument Carry-on Rule for Flights Pleases Musicians 

DOT Harmonizes Rules for Musical Instruments on Flights 

Musicians Get Approval to Carry on Instruments When Flying 

DOT Final Rule on Musical Instruments in the Cabin 

DOT Updates Rules for Musical Instruments on Planes 

U.S. DoT Issues Final Rule – Air Travel with Musical Instruments 

Hey, Rockstars, You Can Now Legally Bring Your Instrument as a Carry On