�鶹Ů��

Republican governors complain that a GOP proposal to replace former President Barack Obama’s health care law would force millions of lower-income earners off insurance rolls or stick states with the cost of keeping them covered. Governors, especially those from political battleground states, were generally cool to the bill put forth in the Republican-controlled U.S. House. Some signaled that they would continue working on their own legislation to compete with the measure introduced Monday. (Beaumont and Noon, 3/7)

Ohio Gov. John Kasich on Tuesday became the latest GOP leader to oppose his party's bill in the U.S. House of Representatives to repeal and replace Obamacare. In theory, Kasich wants to repeal former President Barack Obama's health care law. But he said Tuesday he doesn't like the House Republicans' alternative plan. (Thompson, 3/7)

The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the House bill would shift $370 billion in Medicaid costs from the federal government to states over a decade. Of that total, $253 billion would result from states losing the higher federal contribution for Medicaid expansion enrollees, since enrollment in the enhanced-funding program would be frozen in 2020. The shift to per-capita caps would cut federal Medicaid payments to the states by an additional $116 billion, because the per-capita growth rate based on M-CPI would lag behind actual Medicaid costs, said Edwin Park, vice president for health policy at CBPP. (Meyer, 3/7)

The state and federally funded health plan for the poor and those with disabilities has repeatedly expanded its coverage and services to accommodate those struggling with HIV and AIDS, the opioid epidemic, high infant mortality rates, Zika and other public health scourges. But 70 percent of Medicaid’s spending growth is due to increased enrollment. In their new legislation to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, congressional Republicans would slash federal Medicaid spending by capping it at a predetermined amount per beneficiary beginning in 2019. (Pugh, 3/7)

[D]uring Trump’s first address to Congress on Tuesday, he pledged to give states more flexibility with Medicaid when he repeals and replaces Obamacare. This means that red states may finally be able to follow through with their goals that the Obama administration rejected or made more difficult to achieve. In addition, blue states may also use the added authority to enact more left-leaning policies without having to get federal approval. ... So here’s a look at what to expect if that promise becomes a reality. (Quinn, 3/6)

At least in the short term, a new health care bill from U.S. House Republicans contains some good news for the 375,000 Oregonians and 40,000 Lane County ­residents who became eligible and signed up for ­Medicaid health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Amid fears that a repeal of Obamacare would mean an immediate or rapid rollback of its expanded eligibility for Medicaid, the Republicans’ bill would, in fact, preserve coverage for those people, unless they no longer needed the help, until 2020. (Hubbard, 3/8)

Florida stands to lose more than it gains under the bill unveiled this week by House Republicans to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act — especially when it comes to the 4.3 million state residents who rely on Medicaid, advocacy groups reviewing the new legislation said Tuesday. The House bill, called the American Health Care Act, calls for, among other things, a spending limit — known as “per capita caps” — for each person enrolled in Medicaid beginning in 2019, with annual adjustments for medical inflation. Any amount spent above the cap would be at the state’s expense. (Chang and Pugh, 3/7)

Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and three other Republican senators warned Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell this week that they will not support a replacement of the Affordable Care Act if it does not protect people who gained insurance coverage under the law’s Medicaid expansion provision. ... Murkowski, in previously unpublished comments from a Feb. 4 interview with the News-Miner, noted Medicaid expansion has been positive for Alaska. She made the comment while explaining the status of the health care debate in the House and the Senate. “Medicaid is something, obviously; you have those states that have moved forward with expansion and we’ve clearly seen the benefit of that here,” she said. (Boyce, 3/8)