Congress
GOP leaders map out potential Obamacare extension as hard-liners warm to health talks
Republican leaders on Capitol Hill are quietly ramping up talks within their senior ranks and with White House officials over how to structure and advance a potential extension of key Affordable Care Act insurance subsidies before the end of the year, according to three people granted anonymity to describe the conversations.
One option under serious consideration is, once the government shutdown ends, attaching a revamped subsidy framework to a small bipartisan package of full-year funding bills or a long-term stopgap running through early next year, the people said. GOP leaders have been encouraged as some of their party’s most conservative members warm up to potentially passing an extension — albeit with major provisos.
Key Republicans have floated a list of possible ways to curb the subsidies without eliminating them entirely when they expire on Dec. 31. Those include imposing an income cap for beneficiaries, forcing some individuals to pay a minimum out-of-pocket premium or grandfathering in current enrollees while cutting off new enrollment.
The expiring health insurance subsidies are at the heart of Democrats’ shutdown demands, and extending them will require a bipartisan deal to get them enacted in Congress. But while some Republicans are quietly talking about options across party lines, GOP leaders are publicly insisting they will only seriously discuss an extension deal after Democrats agree to reopen the government.
Still, it’s significant that those leaders are sketching out what a deal might look like and how it might move through the House and Senate once agencies reopen. While the three people said the conversations remain high-level at this point, one option under early consideration is to pair a two-year extension of scaled-back subsidies with some other conservative health care policy provisions, then attach it to some of the annual spending bills that have so far been stuck in partisan limbo.
Passing that package through the House would be tricky for Speaker Mike Johnson, who would likely face opposition from hard-liners firmly opposed to any extension of the Democratic health law known as Obamacare. The three people said the plan would involve advancing it through the chamber under “suspension of the rules,” a procedure that would sidestep a tricky party-line procedural vote but would require a two-thirds bipartisan majority to pass.
Doing so, the people said, would require a public endorsement from President Donald Trump in order to build GOP support for the package.
White House officials have been involved in the internal discussions about structuring the extension of the subsidies and about what other GOP health policy priorities might be included alongside it.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise has been publicly pushing to add provisions that could build more conservative support, including expanding association health plans and encouraging the use of tax-free Health Savings Accounts.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune also made clear in an interview last week he is seeking new restrictions on the subsidies as part of any extension — and possibly other conservative health policies as well.
Building GOP support in the House, where a major swath of Republicans oppose any ACA extension, is a huge task. But even some prominent hard-liners are now publicly saying they could possibly support a larger health care package — so long as any extension of the subsidies includes significant changes.
They’ve been privately signaling as much for weeks now and are eager to steer the talks to add more conservative policy items, especially as Trump himself has said he’s open to negotiating a larger health care deal after the shutdown ends.
They’re also hoping to shape how the deal moves through Congress. Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), chair of the House Freedom Caucus, said in an interview Monday that while leadership could move a health care package attached to a bundle of funding bills, he said he would prefer “a standalone bill.”
The spending bills, Harris said, “should be kept as clean as possible.” And he added that his support for the health care piece “depends on what the whole package is” and that he wants the ACA credits to be eventually sunsetted completely in any deal.
“If you had tremendous savings over 10 years and you were able to wind down the Covid-era enhancements — yeah, I mean, we’ll look at anything,” he added.
Rank-and-file Democrats have been warming to income caps and other new restrictions for the ACA subsidies themselves, but it’s not at all clear they would be willing to accept a total phase-out of the subsidies — let alone other GOP health policies.
In other words, finding middle ground with Republicans who want a more serious overhaul of the health care system could be impossible. But for now, GOP members such as Texas Rep. Chip Roy are sounding an upbeat note.
“If we have health care reforms on the table that protect and provide greater freedom and independence for patients and doctors, then I’m on board with things that would help build a package,” Roy, a Freedom Caucus member, said in an interview Monday.
He, too, said his support would depend on how quickly the expanded subsidies are phased out and the larger scope of health policy proposals — listing provisions that would boost “direct primary care, Health Savings Accounts” as items conservatives are interested in.
“You wrap that in then with whatever it takes to get the votes,” he said. “I’m always open to that.”
Benjamin Guggenheim contributed to this report.
The House Rules Committee advanced a procedural measure aimed at breaking an intra-Republican deadlock Monday night. But GOP leaders are still facing a major battle Tuesday to regain control of the House floor.
The panel approved on party lines a measure to set up Republicans’ $1.1 trillion defense policy bill, a government funding bill and other GOP bills for floor debate. It would then combine the Pentagon bill, once passed, with the contentious elections overhaul known as the SAVE America Act and send it to the Senate as one piece of legislation.
That maneuver, telegraphed by Speaker Mike Johnson earlier Monday, is aimed at appeasing House GOP hard-liners who have blockaded the floor, demanding the Senate pass the elections bill that has languished there for months.
However, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, the Republican leading the blockade, said in an interview Monday before the Rules Committee acted that Johnson’s plan is not sufficient — raising the possibility she and allies could vote down the measure on the floor. Other House GOP hard-liners say there are other outstanding issues to battle over Tuesday.
Rep. James McGovern of Massachusetts, the top Rules Democrat, called the merger move “a big waste of time.” The panel voted down a motion by McGovern to remove the provision to combine the two bills in a party-line vote.
The Senate is set to debate its own version of the defense bill next month, and it is likely that the elections overhaul will be removed in negotiations between the two chambers — as McGovern acknowledged Monday and House GOP leaders privately concede.
“The Senate will just strip the SAVE Act out,” he said at the meeting. “There is a zero percent chance SAVE ends up in the [Pentagon bill] because of this rule today.”
The defense bill faces a tight vote if Republicans can pass the procedural measure. Most Democrats are expected to oppose the measure over its massive price tag, which they contend is wasteful.
The panel is set up debate on 312 amendments to the bill. The slate includes GOP measures to codify a Trump executive order to block transgender people from serving in the military, prohibit coverage of gender-affirming care, block aid to arm Ukraine and strip Democratic-backed protections for collective bargaining for Pentagon civilian workers.
The committee also voted down Democratic proposals to slash $150 billion from the bill’s topline and limit the war against Iran.
Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.
Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday he plans to deploy an unusual procedural maneuver in a bid to unfreeze the House floor this week, seeking to send the annual Pentagon policy bill and the GOP elections bill known as the SAVE America Act to the Senate in a single package.
That is likely a recipe for a continued standoff between the two chambers over the SAVE America Act, which has stalled in the Senate for months due to internal GOP divides. Under Johnson’s plan, the annual defense policy bill, which typically passes every year with large bipartisan majorities, could become a collateral victim of the impasse.
Asked in brief interview if he had talked to Senate Majority Leader John Thune about his plans, Johnson replied, “I have to do my job in the House, and they’ve got to do their job in the Senate, so we’ll see what happens.”
Johnson is seeking to placate House conservative hard-liners, led by Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, who have threatened to oppose the procedural measures that give Republicans control of the floor unless they agree to tougher tactics meant to force the Senate into passing the elections bill.
House GOP leaders discussed the plan to merge the two bills over the weekend as Luna pushed to amend the defense bill directly.
She did not say in an interview Monday whether Johnson’s gambit would suffice: “We want it baked together, not able to be stripped out,” she said.
But the Senate is free to work its own will, and members of that chamber are likely to reject any defense bill that has the partisan elections bill attached. That would set the stage for GOP leaders to strip it out when the House and Senate hash out the differences between their competing Pentagon bills later this year.
Johnson, meanwhile, is pushing a separate plan to pass a slimmed-down version of the SAVE America Act through the party-line budget reconciliation process — an option hard-liners have all but rejected.
“I don’t think that that can be done,” Luna told reporters Monday.
He’s also facing another complication: The version of the SAVE America Act he is proposing to attach to the Pentagon bill doesn’t include the latest demands for the bill from President Donald Trump — including a near-total ban on mail voting that is opposed by many Republicans.
Jennifer Scholtes contributed to this report.
Lawmakers of both parties questioned Secretary of State Marco Rubio and top Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff Monday in the first broad congressional briefings on President Donald Trump’s Iran deal.
While Democrats asked some of the sharpest questions, participants in an afternoon conference call with House members said, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) at one point pressed the administration officials on the fate of Iran’s stockpile of near-bomb-grade uranium.
According to two people granted anonymity to disclose the private remarks, Witkoff and Rubio repeated assurances the administration has privately made to select lawmakers in prior briefings — that the goal is to negotiate a final deal that would prohibit Iran from keeping its highly enriched uranium.
The memorandum of understanding Trump signed earlier this month, they said, was meant to launch those negotiations. Witkoff, the people said, added that the technical team involved in that part of the talks was traveling from Switzerland to Qatar, where talks between the U.S. and Iran are set to happen Tuesday.
Democrats, meanwhile, pushed the administration for more details on what financial benefits Iran could reap under the memorandum — including proceeds from previously sanctioned oil sales.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) went back and forth with Rubio and Witkoff over the lifting of the oil sanctions, two other people granted anonymity on the House call said. The officials eventually cut off the conversation and ended the call.
At another point, Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) raised concerns about Witkoff’s business interests in the Middle East as he’s negotiating with Iran, prompting a sharp defense from Rubio, those people said.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer asked Rubio and Witkoff about the oil sanctions during a separate all-senators call Monday, saying in a statement afterward that they “confirmed to me that Iran will reap billions in oil revenue while retaining dangerous leverage over the Strait of Hormuz.”
“If this is the administration’s defense behind closed doors, Secretary Rubio should make it under oath, in public, before the Foreign Relations Committee,” Schumer added, calling the briefing “delayed, deficient, and devoid of details.”
An administration official granted anonymity to speak candidly countered on Schumer’s characterization, noting that he had previously gotten a briefing of the deal as part of a group of top leaders engaged on national security matters. Schumer, the official said, had the opportunity to ask multiple follow-up questions on the Senate call.
A separate group of White House officials briefed top congressional leaders and key committee chairs in a classified briefing in the Capitol later Monday.
The administration has faced bipartisan skepticism over multiple provisions of the memorandum of understanding — particularly the lifting of oil sanctions and a $300 billion reconstruction fund that many Senate Republicans fear will help fuel Iran’s military and regional proxies.
Rubio and Witkoff sought to ease concerns about the slow reopening of the Strait of Hormuz — the critical trade route whose closure has sparked higher fuel and fertilizer costs. Both officials said more mine removal is required, and Witkoff indicated that Iran broke the terms of the Trump-signed deal by launching a drone attack on a passing ship over the weekend.
They also sought to assure lawmakers that Iran has received no money under the memorandum — especially not directly from American sources. Administration officials have previously pledged in smaller briefings that the reconstruction fund won’t include U.S. funds.
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) called the Senate briefing a “productive conversation” but said “much of what I heard today is similar to what I heard last week” during a dinner at Vice President JD Vance’s residence.
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words