Loebsack a ?no;? Blum a ?maybe? on House GOP health plan

By James Q. Lynch, The Gazette

WASHINGTON, D.C. ? Eastern Iowa?s two congressmen are a hard ?no? and a ?maybe? on the latest version of the House GOP?s plan to replace Obamacare.

First District Republican Rep. Rod Blum is undecided, but can see himself getting to ?yes? depending on the final draft of the bill. With GOP leaders showing a willingness to make changes ?to get the ?no?s? to ?yes,?? Blum is withholding judgment.

?It?s never over until it?s over, especially on this bill,? Blum said Wednesday during a break between Capitol Hill committee meetings.

Second District Democratic Rep. Dave Loebsack isn?t having any trouble making up his mind to oppose the Republican majority?s attempt to replace the Affordable Care Act.

?It?s a terrible bill and it?s going to hurt far too many people,? he said during an interview in his Rayburn House Office Building Wednesday.

A factor in getting Blum on board is the same component of the AHCA that Loebsack said would cause tens of thousands of Iowans to potentially lose coverage. That?s the GOP plan to cover pre-existing conditions by having the federal government subsidize high-risk pools.

For Blum, that means people with pre-existing conditions will have access to affordable coverage. After a meeting with President Donald Trump, one Republican ?no? vote flipped when $8 billion over five years was added to funding for states that obtains waivers to lower costs for sick people and those with pre-existing conditions whom insurance companies could charge higher premiums under the measure. That was on top of the $15 billion in the GOP plan.

?That to me is a beautiful thing,? Blum said, explaining that has been successful in Maine. Not only would it lower premiums for people with pre-existing conditions, but it would mitigate one of the big drivers of health insurance premium increases, Blum said.

?It?s all speculative,? Loebsack said about the pre-existing coverage plan. ?Whatever the other side says, there will be no guarantees any longer that those who have pre-existing conditions are necessarily going to be covered.

?No matter what they claim they are going to have to try to deal with that issue, it opens a door that should never be opened,? the Iowa City Democrat said. ?As far as I?m concerned, it was slammed shut by the ACA and should stay shut.?

Loebsack insists he?s not opposed to tweaking the ACA.

?I?ve voted for some of the changes,? Loebsack said, explaining he?s heard from people who think that in some cases premiums and deductibles are too high. ?Not everyone is as happy as they should be ? but I don?t want to repeal the ACA because the replacement they?re talking about is far inferior.?

In addition to covering pre-existing conditions, Blum wants to make sure the AHCA lowers premium costs or the 176 million Americans who get health care coverage through their employers.

?I want to make sure that we do things to get rid of some of these insane mandates and the crazy rules and regulations on insurance companies, so the premiums for people who work can come down,? he said.

Although there is speculation the AHCA could come up for a floor vote Thursday, Blum is not convinced. Speaker Paul Ryan told him over lunch Tuesday that he was close to having the votes he needed, ?But he wouldn?t say how close.?

Fourth District Republican Rep. Steve King was a ?yes? but has moved himself to ?lean yes? because of changes made as the result of negotiations between Republican leadership with the Freedom Caucus and others GOP groups.

?My agreement directly with the president was that they would bring an amendment in the Senate to strike the essential health benefits and let the states run it the way it should,? King said before addressing the Siouxland Chamber of Commerce at a Capitol Hill reception.

He?s been in conversation with House leaders, with the president and vice president, and Trump strategist Steve Bannon.

?If nothing changes to move this thing to the left, I?m likely to be a ?yes? in the end,? King said.

Republicans, who have a 238-193 majority, can afford to lose just 22 votes and still pass the bill. About a dozen Republicans, like Blum, are undecided.