Evizda

Since President Donald Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) failed spectacularly last month to pass a long-promised healthcare bill that would repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA), progressive voices have urged politicians to solve the problems of rising premiums and unequal access to care with nationwide Medicare-for-All.

But the Trump administration is taking the opposite approach, as it tries to revive its dead healthcare bill with even crueler legislation: Late Monday, Vice President Mike Pence and other White House officials proposed a harsher healthcare law to the far-right Congressional Freedom Caucus, in an attempt to garner their support for a new bill.

The White House proposed allowing states to apply for waivers to jettison two core Obamacare regulations. Those regulations require insurance companies to cover essential health benefits (EHBs), which includes coverage for pre-existing conditions, and also prevent insurers from charging sick people higher premiums.

The Hill reports:

“To pass the House, any bill would need to find favor not just with the Freedom Caucus, but also with more moderate Republicans,” observes the New York Times‘ Margot Sanger-Katz. “It would also need to attract the support of nearly every Republican in the Senate to become law.”

The impasse between so-called moderate Republicans and the far-right Freedom Caucus caused the Republicans’ initial bill, the American Healthcare Act (AHCA), to implode last month in the House of Representatives without coming to a vote.

“Appeasing the most extreme members of House in order to buy votes will not help American families and other health care consumers,” argues healthcare advocacy group Families USA. “The last fight over health care repeal made it clear that people want quality, affordable health care and that the health care plans of the Trump administration and Republican House don’t fit the bill. Nothing has changed. It’s time to move on.”

Indeed, the White House proposal would be extremely unpopular with voters, observers say. Illustrating the point, Sanger-Katz points out that “[i]f both of the Obamacare provisions went away, the hypothetical cancer patient might be able to buy only a plan, without chemotherapy coverage, that costs many times more than a similar plan costs a healthy customer. Only cancer patients with extraordinary financial resources and little interest in the fine print would sign up.”