That there was never any intent to repeal Obamacare becomes patently obvious as establishment Republicans are still without agreement on a repeal plan.
Strictly in policy terms, though, it was less important than the media briefing that Paul Ryan, the House Speaker, and other House Republican leaders held, also on Thursday, about their plans to abolish Obamacare and replace it with some version of what we might call Trumpcare, or maybe Trump/Ryancare.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), chairman of the 40-member House Freedom Caucus, said the replacement proposal will fix a shattered healthcare system. McConnell stressed that the Affordable Care.
Simply put, for a "death spiral" to be existent, data would have to show declining participation in the exchanges as premiums increase - since healthy people would be more likely to drop out and simply pay the fine rather than get coverage.
The administration and Republican leaders yesterday said they plan to issue a full proposal after the Presidents Day break ends February 27.
Here's what we do know: During Thursday's meeting, House Republican leaders circulated a briefing paper outlining the GOP strategy for health care reform.
"There will be some new things, but for the most part it's going to be finding ways to make more functional that which we had before the ACA or that we have after", Leavitt said. But while Obamacare's credits are based on income, meaning poorer people get more help, the Republican plan would base them on age. Although people are still required to have coverage, the IRS will stop its plans to reject tax returns if people did not say whether they had coverage.
Large insurance companies are still making decisions about whether to stay in state marketplaces, where many of them are losing money.
The 19-page memo describes a repeal-and-replace bill in largely broad terms, leaving out specifics that will be required in final legislation. The law also changed expectations about what health insurance should do and who it's for ― especially when it comes to guaranteeing access to coverage for people who have pre-existing conditions that would have locked them out of of the insurance market before the law.
States that did not elect to expand Medicaid would receive additional resources to make states more equal. It also stresses that the Medicaid expansion, which loosened program eligibility requirements, would also be undone.
Not all Republican-run states spurned the expansion.
Secret recordings of the Republican meeting in Philadelphia last month revealed at least some members of Congress panicked that they will be blamed for millions of Americans losing their health care.
Except, no one can say what the Republican ACA replacement, if there is one, would look like.
Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nevada, noting that expansion has swollen the Medicaid rolls in his state from 350,000 to more than 600,000, asked point blank whether Verma supported block grants.
Republicans have been debating whether to continue the Medicaid expansion coverage with some form of block grants, end it suddenly or phase it out over time.