Congressman Dan Donovan (R-South Brooklyn, Staten Island) announced today he intends to vote “no” on the Republican-led American Health Care Act (AHCA) as currently drafted.
Donovan, a longtime critic of former President Obama’s signature Affordable Healthcare Act because of its’ huge increases of premiums and deductibles on the middle-class and small businesses, singled out this week’s Medicaid amendment as one of the reasons for his decision.
Under the amendment in the proposed AHCA, every county in New York with the exception of New York City would shift their share of Medicaid costs to the state. Donovan’s constituents would, in essence, be paying for tax breaks for other New Yorkers.
“Obamacare has burdened New York families with unaffordable premiums, rendered some insurance plans unusable because of high deductibles, and caused people to lose their doctors. But recognizing that the status quo is failing isn’t, on its own, a compelling reason to vote ‘yes’ on the current replacement plan,” said Donovan.
“The provision excludes New York City, putting an unfair and disproportionate burden on City residents to cover the state’s exorbitant Medicaid expenses. We need healthcare reform – including promised Medicaid reform in New York where we spend more than Texas, Florida and Pennsylvania combined – but it shouldn’t be done on the backs of already overburdened City residents who will undoubtedly have a tax increase forced on them to pay for this eminently unfair policy.”
Donovan first made his decision to cross party lines and vote ‘No’ on the AHCA in an op-ed for the Staten Island Advance.
In the op-ed, he noted the amendment, combined with other cuts in the bill, would especially harm local hospitals – the biggest employers in this district. Under the proposed plan, Staten Island and Brooklyn hospitals could lose more than $77 million.
“The legislation would also have a harmful impact on senior citizens. The bill permits insurers to charge older Americans up to five times as much as younger individuals, as opposed to the three-to-one ratio that exists now. The non-partisan CBO projects the AHCA would increase premiums for a 64-year old by 25 percent. In one startling example, a 64-year old earning $26,500 could pay $14,600 per year for an insurance policy,” Donovan wrote.
“A recent study found that charging older Americans five times more for insurance than younger people would cause about 400,000 seniors to lose their ability to afford insurance. Seniors on fixed incomes would likely see a big jump in their healthcare expenses without a near-term reduction in premiums. We can’t burden seniors who deserve better from us!
“Of particular concern, New Yorkers wouldn’t be able to take advantage of tax credits that are meant to help families pay for private insurance. New York State requires insurers to cover medically necessary abortions and contraception, but under the AHCA tax credits can only be used to buy insurance that does not include abortion coverage. This would render this aid useless to our residents.
“The AHCA doesn’t address two of the biggest drivers of skyrocketing health costs: pharmaceutical prices and medical malpractice suits. Consumers around the world pay a fraction of the price that Americans pay for drugs, and our own government doesn’t even negotiate prices for Medicare beneficiaries. Also, local doctors have told me that they intentionally order tests so they can have a better defense if a patient sues them. That tells me something is wrong.
“What’s more, the bill is unable to permit competition across state lines, a key method to reduce premiums and something which I have long advocated. When insurance companies can compete for consumers across the country, costs will come down. In fact, another provision of the bill, the so-called “Cadillac Tax,” which penalizes the plans that give the insured better coverage, should be eliminated.
Donovan did give President Trump and Congressional Republicans an ‘A’ for effort on their commitment to fix the healthcare system and his engagement with Congress throughout this process where he has demonstrated he has an open door and an open mind.
“This bill was a starting point, and while it is not the version I can support, I remain steadfastly committed to replacing Obamacare with a plan that truly works for the people. Our aim should be to help those who were harmed by Obamacare without harming those who were helped by it. I look forward to working with the President and my colleagues to get this done right. I believe we can,” he wrote.
