Graham-Cassidy Bill: By The Numbers
Join the 75,148 people who've taken action on Countable this week
by Countable | 9.20.17
What's the story?
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has said it’s aiming to provide a "preliminary assessment of the Graham-Cassidy bill by early next week," but it will unable to provide “point estimates of the effects on the deficit, health insurance coverage, or premiums for at least several weeks.”
Republicans, however, only have until September 30th to pass the bill using the reconciliation process; after that, health-care legislation will require 60 votes to clear the Senate.
Graham-Cassidy essentially gives states control of the health-care markets. So rather than the federal government funding Medicaid and providing subsidies, the money would be given to states in the form of a block grant. States could then use these funds to develop any health-care system they choose.
While we won’t know the preliminary CBO assessment until early next week, there are some figures we do know.
Here’s the latest GOP health-care repeal and replace bill by the numbers:
50 - number of votes needed for the bill to pass the Senate before Sept. 30
1 – number of votes the previous "skinny repeal" bill failed by (Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and John McCain of Arizona voted "no”)
15 million – number of Americans the CBO estimated would lose health coverage under the similar "skinny repeal"
$1 trillion – dollars the Graham-Cassidy bill would send to states in the form of block grants from 2020 to 2026
1/3 –percentage of Medicaid expansion and subsidy funding cut by 2026
$0 – amount the federal government will pay in block grants in 2027
34 – number of states that would receive reduced funding (states that expanded Medicaid would be hardest hit by Graham-Cassidy; according the bill’s estimates, California would lose $800 billion)
$35 billion – amount Texas would gain from 2020 through 2026 (as the Chicago Tribune noted, "States with relatively low medical costs, skimpy Medicaid benefits and no program expansion would win out.")
$0 – amount individuals and employers would be fined for not having health care (i.e., the individual and employer mandate are eliminated)
0% – amount medical device manufacturers would be taxed
$6,650 and $13,300 – the maximum contributions to individual and family health savings accounts—nearly double what it is currently
$0 – amount of federal funding Planned Parenthood would receive (the bill strips funding for one year)
15 - number of Republican governors who signed a letter endorsing the bill
10 – number of governors who signed a letter opposing Graham-Cassidy
What do you think? Do the numbers sway you? Are there other numbers that matter more? Hit the Take Action button, tell your reps how to vote on Graham-Cassidy, then comment below.
(Photo Credit: CarlosLijo / iStockphoto)
House to Vote on Bipartisan Bill to Address Maintenance Backlog at National Parks & Public Lands Next WeekWhat’s the story? House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) has scheduled a vote next week on the Great American Outdoors Act,
by Countable | 7.16.20
The DC: McConnell says next COVID bill must focus on 'kids, jobs, and healthcare,' and... 🚸 Should K-12 students return to classrooms?Welcome to Thursday, July 16th, ups and downs... Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said Senate Republicans will
by Countable | 7.16.20
California Voters May Reinstate ‘Affirmative Action’ - Should State Institutions Prioritize Minority Groups in Employment & College Admissions?What’s the story? California’s legislature in June voted to set up a November referendum that will allow the Golden State’s
by Countable | 7.15.20