Commentary: Revised health-care law will harm older citizens

Published 1:30 am Wednesday, May 17, 2017

By Martha Peppones

Homage Senior Services

Reaction to the passage of the American Health Care Act by the House of Representatives has been fierce.

Many national aging and health-care advocacy organizations, including the National Council on Aging and the National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services Providers, along with scores of health-care providers and institutions, have expressed strong opposition to this harmful legislation, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives on May 4.

Specific provisions of this bill that will hurt older Americans and their families are:

Age-rating limits, which are increased to charge older adults higher premiums, causing undue burden on pre-Medicare adults age 50-64.

Proposed tax credits that will not offset the difference in premiums, leaving some older adults unable to afford insurance at all.

Latitude for states to waive essential health benefits, increase premiums for those with pre-existing conditions and allow annual and lifetime caps on coverage amounts.

Elimination of the Prevention and Public Health Funds, which supports cost-effective prevention and home-care programs. Included in these are programs for elder abuse prevention, falls preventions and chronic illness management.

The dismantling of Medicaid expansion, which has helped many older adults. Thirty-two states, including Washington, expanded Medicaid to help their most vulnerable citizens. Many of the new enrollees as a result of this expansion were 50 to 64 years old.

The elimination of certain taxes could hasten the insolvency of the Medicare Trust Fund.

Disturbingly, the vote of this revised bill was made without an official assessment of its cost or how many Americans could lose insurance. Some sources estimate the number of Americans with health insurance would be reduced by 17.5 million to 24 million as a result of this bill. (Source: Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Congressional Budget Office.)

The bill now heads to the Senate for consideration, which is expected to be a much longer progress. Fortunately, Senate budget rules require a score from the Congressional Budget Office, giving senators information about how much the legislation would cost and how many people stand to lose coverage.

Sen. Patty Murray and Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington need to hear from their constituents as they consider this legislation. Personal stories about the impact of reduced or absent health-care coverage will provide them with the real life impact and concerns they need as they fight for health care for all Washingtonians.

We believe health care should be a right for every American, and that the health of Americans should improve as a result of health-policy choices.

Martha Peppones is director of public advocacy with Homage Senior Services.