WASHINGTON (AP) — A new analysis by Congress’ nonpartisan budget scorekeepers undermines claims by House Republicans that their health legislation protects people with pre-existing conditions.
Instead, the Congressional Budget Office “score” of the bill passed earlier this month says that in some cases, people with pre-existing conditions would not be able to purchase comprehensive health insurance at premiums comparable to those under current law, “if they could purchase it at all.”
The finding is a blow to arguments from House GOP leaders who managed to get their bill over the finish line by arguing that a last-minute addition of $8 billion would bolster protections for those with pre-existing conditions.
The CBO specifies that these people would have difficulty getting affordable coverage “despite the additional funding that would be available.”
The Congressional Budget Office says an estimated 51 million people under age 65 would be uninsured in 2026 under the latest version of the House Republican health care bill.
That compares with 28 million under age 65 who would lack insurance that year under the current health law signed by President Barack Obama.
And it’s only a tiny improvement from the original version of the House bill, which would have resulted in an estimated 52 million people under 65 uninsured by 2026, according to the nonpartisan budget office.
The information is in the so-called “score” released Wednesday of the legislation the House passed earlier this month. It’s been eagerly awaited but shows little change on insurance coverage compared with the earlier version of the health bill, which collapsed.
Health care legislation passed by House Republicans earlier this month would reduce the federal deficit by $119 billion over the next 10 years.
That’s according to a new estimate released Wednesday by the Congressional Budget Office.
GOP leaders were quick to point to the deficit reduction figure as good news for their legislation — even though an earlier version of the bill, rejected by the House, would have reduced the deficit by more than twice as much.