Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal David Mc Intosh Discusses Conservative Opposition to GOP...  CSPAN  March 13, 2017 3:02am-3:29am EDT

3:02 am
>> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 19 some the nine, c-span was created as a public service by america's -- in 19 some nine, c-span was graded as a public service by america's cable providers. >> joining us now is former congressman and president of club for growth, david mcintosh. begin with the open-ended question. what do you think of the repeal and replacement plan for the affordable care act? guest: that's been the question f the week for us. we think this version -- and i refer to it as ryan care, coming out of the house --
3:03 am
fails to repeal obamacare. , leaves big sections of it it leaves all of that in place. and we're very concerned that if they pass that version they'll fail to have an opportunity to really put into place free market health care that will lower the cost for the average american. host: let me get your reaction to speaker ryan had this to say last week about what the republican agenda is all about and why it needs to happen now. >> what people are talking about, there's a lot of frustration and confusion out there among conservative groups and even among members is reconciliation has certain limits. so there are folks who would love to see us put in this bill all these other ideas. one conservative group is saying you had better put shopping across state lines or we're not going to spurpt it. if we do that we wouldn't be able to pass this bill.
3:04 am
it would be filibustered in the senate. so the last thing we want to do is prevent our ability to actually get law made. so it really is a conversation about the third prong approach. the other bills are going to pass outside of reconciliation, which in the house we're a majority body we can pass, that go to the senate. so much of the conversations are about moving this other agenda on the same track around the same time to get these things done. host: he was directly referring to club for growth. guest: yes, he was. and the speaker has never served in the senate, so i understand where he hasn't maybe looked at those reconciliation rules over there. i have talked to some authorities on it and they say the parliamentarian can recommend that but the speaker maybe the vice president pence can make the decision. in this case, i think it is an easy argument to say if you compete across state lines, insurance premiums will go down, they're subsidizing
3:05 am
premiums so the federal dollars will go down as well. huge budget impact potential, and therefore would actually be able to survive reconciliation rules. host: let me get your reaction to a headline that we talked about in the first hour. steve bannon the former editor now senior adviser to president trump. seven reasons why obamacare is all the guarantee to impose crushing costs on voters, hurt trump's base, and hand power back to the democrats. your reaction. guest: i think it is a bill -- i haven't looked at all seven of their reasons. i've got five or six things that i would change in it to fulfill the promises that president trump made in the campaign trail. we had a very good meeting with him, by the way. the house and the speaker were saying it's this bill and nothing else. and the president and his staff sate, no, we're still negotiating this. so we urged him to keep the promises that he made. we'll support him.
3:06 am
we want a good bill to pass. and then he can fulfill that and americans will be better off. their insurance premiums will go down. host: how will insurance premiums go down? guest: one is that competition across state lines. another is to remove the regulations that obamacare puts on insurance industries that says they can't tailer fit their premiums or products to what americans need. the great analogy i heard someone made this week was the whole commercial you see about car insurance with flo where we can custom fit the the policy you need for your family. that's not allowed under obamacare for health insurance. remove those restrictions and you'll see the premiums go down. people who have preexisting conditions will have a better chance of getting coverage. host: will they be guaranteed coverage? guest: it depends on which way they go. if you pick up senator rands' version of that, yes.
3:07 am
because the the states will be able to create these pools where they can go and get guaranteed coverage there. host: but how do you create the incentive? a lot of criticism with the affordable care act but one of the fundamental issues was you have to have health insurance so you're not using an emergency room as your primary care physician. so what incentive is there if not a tax or regulation or lower prices to get that insurance? guest: the incentive will be, if you go to the hospital you're not going to be charged hundreds of thousands of dollars. that's a sufficient incentive for most people to want to buy insurance. but why should somebody who is young be buying an insurance that a 60-year-old retired person is getting? they don't need the same product. they need one that is a catastrophic care insurance policy. something that helps them if they're in a car accident and find themselves in a hospital. or get a rare disease. people in mid life need other products when they're starting to have children.
3:08 am
but they don't need that when they're in retirement. so somebody retired and not going to have children doesn't need to have a whole bunch of coverage for prenatal care. the current obamacare version says everybody has to buy the same basically very expensive product. and that doesn't make sense. if you let the marketplace take care of this, more people will be happy. almost everybody will be able to get it. and those who can't will have a robust safety net. host: mike sense seceded you in the house of representatives. you know him well. he spoke about the health care law yesterday in kentucky. let's watch. >> humana headquartered right here in louisville is pulling out of kentucky's obamacare exchange. today one third of the state is on medicaid. and as your governor has said over and over again, it's unsustainable and medicaid here in kentucky is threatening to bankrupt this state. folks, this just can't
3:09 am
continue. and i promise you, it won't. [applause] since the day that kentucky entrusted the trump administration has worked to make progress. the house rereesed its bill on monday and it passed with unanimous support from two committees in the congress one of which congressman guthrie sits on, and congressman i just want to thank you for your strong support to repeal and replace obamacare. host: vice president mike pence. he pointed unanimous support. unanimous republican support. no democrats support this bill right now. what is going to happen with this piece of legislation? what is your reaction? guest: we agree with his goals completely. and when we met with him and president trump, we said we want to be able to support you 100% in getting this done.
3:10 am
but you really have to repeal it. and the version that the house passed frankly doesn't. it leaves the tax increases in place, it leaves the expansion of medicaid in place. it fails to create competition in the insurance market. and it leaves all those regulations in place. now, the president and the vice president have a plan for the regulations to do those through secretary price and writing their own regulations. but there's still all the requirements for very expensive plans that only can be removed by statute. they talk about a stage three. and the speaker mentioned that. but that requires 60 votes. and as you pointed out, democrats are not working with republicans on this. part of the constraint here is that it has to be a bill that almost all republicans agree to because none of the democratic colleagues are going to help them get this through. they want to support and protect obamacare. republicans want to say we've repealed it. so my prognosis is if the it
3:11 am
continues the way it is now, it will likely not make it through the house because i think there are enough conservative republicans who have said we can't vote for this. and there are threats. maybe they'll go and try to threaten a primary. but these men and women on the conservative side are very principled individuals. i think they're going to say, unless you make some significant changings, we can't be for this bill. we want to be for a true repeal and replace of obamacare, but this isn't it. but if it got through the house, then you've run into problems over in the senate as well where they can only lose three votes. and at this point i've heard complaints of three or four moderates that don't like it and three or four conservatives who said i can't vote for this. so i predict at that point they'll start over and write their own bill. they had one about two years ago in 2015 that they did get through with all but one of the republican senators voting for it. and that may be the best place for them to start.
3:12 am
host: our conversation with david mcintosh, a graduate of yale and earned his law degree from the university of chicago law school, spent two terms in the house of representatives representing indiana. he is a republican and his website is club for get more information. jane on the republican line from cincinnati. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm just wondering, they keep talking about medicaid. what about medicare? what is it going to do to my medicare and my social security? guest: very good question. very important question. i can reassure you that it doesn't do anything that will affect medicare or social security. neither the republicans in the house and senate nor president trump want to do that. in fact, president trump has reet reiterated his position from the campaign, we're not going to cut medicare, we're not going to cut social security.
3:13 am
host: this is a tweet from a iewer. guest: great question, steve. the real answer there back to those regulations. they required everybody to join, which should have created a bigger pool, and the the theory was that will lower costs because more people are involved in the insurance pool. but then they turned around and said but you can only offer very expensionive versions of your health care premium. one of the big drivers is the preexisting conditions problem. and that's basically -- says that if you're sick you can still go get insurance. part of the problem there is it's cheaper for somebody who is young to pay the fee that they have to pay and skip out on the insurance industry. then if they become sick, go sign up for insurance and their health care is taken care of. that type of regulation where
3:14 am
you require coverage of preexisting conditions but you don't effectively require people to get insurance doesn't work. i've heard of other solutions that make a lot more sense, where they say you can take advantage of the lower cost insurance, but if you wait to sign up until you're sick then you're going to have to pay like a 30% premium. sort of as a penalty, for waiting. i think if they set up the structure that way, people will learn, we've got to get insurance now, in case we have a catastrophic accident or cancer or something terrible. host: our guest was the executive director of president bush's council on competitiveness. barny joining us from florida. good morning. caller: host: we'll move on to kathy from michigan. good morning. caller: good morning.
3:15 am
your statement skipped out on the insurance industry i find very, very frightening. i've been working in health care on and off the last 27 years, i currently do. you have no idea, it's quite plain, along with mr. ryan and a lot of people, what really goes on in hospitals. you have no idea. can i ask you this. what was your premium when you were in the house of representatives? do you still have coverage through your tenure working for the government? and if you do, what's the cost of it? and when you were in the house -- i don't know if you have children. but if you do, were your children covered under that? host: we'll get a response. thank you. guest: from 1995 to 2001.
3:16 am
to be honest with you, i do not remember what our premiums were. the government plan then required us to pay 20% but they were very good plans. part of the reason they were good and inexpensive plans was they created this pool that insurance companies would compete for to sign up government employees. and i think one of the points was wanting to make was average citizens don't have the benefit of that same government approach to health care that benefited me. to answer the rest of your question, today i'm part of our group coverage as the club for brotesdz, and i believe it's a very good plan for the employees because the group pays for 100% of the premiums. i believe it's about 15-16,000 for family of four. i've got two kids on it. so it's an expensive policy.
3:17 am
it's continued to go up every year as the club bought insurance under the obamacare. we've had to make changes and have a higher deductible, which is unfortunate. but that was the only way we can continue to afford to pay 100% of the premiums. ost: michael has this tweet. guest: very good question. those are those reconciliation rules that speaker ryan was talking about. in order to get to 50 votes and not have a filibuster, you have to first pass a budget and the said then in this case rewrite medicaid and other entitlements and tax provisions and you can only spend so much money. that instruction now will go to the finance committee and to the health committee there. they have to write a bill under those overarching rules. if they don't, then somebody
3:18 am
can make a point of order. this gets complicated. but basically you're back to 60 votes with the point of order. so the committees will work very hard because they know they don't have any support from the democrats to write a bill that fills those rules. one of the main rules that has been in place for probably 40 years now is called the byrd rule. it's actually written into the budget act where it says in order to get -- take advantage of this 50 rule procedure limiting debate, it only can be for provisions that have an impact on the budget. so if your purpose for this is purely to write new policy, say pass a new law that anything but didn't have to do with the federal budget, maybe it's a new criminal proceeding, maybe it's a new health care program that doesn't have to do with spending, those aren't allowed because then everybody would use this bill to get around the
3:19 am
60 rule debate rule. so that's the struggle. some of the things are harder to do under that. some of them, like the one i mentioned having the insurance industry compete across state lines i think you can very much argue it has an impact on the federal budget. other people are saying, no, we don't think it does. we think it's more like a law that just passes a regulation. host: this really gets into the weeds. but when it goes through that reconciliation process and they review senator byrd and the rule they call it the byrd bath. guest: exactly because it strips away some of the provisions. now, in the house of representatives they don't have that same rule. so speaker ryan's bill could do 100% of these things. and then they could negotiate with the senate. host: but let me ask you about senator cruzes comments this past week. his belief is if your friend the vice president mike pence is the presiding officer, he can interpret the rules and of
3:20 am
course he is going to have an interest in making sure this thing passes the senate. could that happen? guest: what senator cruz is referring to is how do you enforce the byrd rule? the way that happens in the senate, the speaker of the senate, the -- the president of the senate, in this case vice president pence or some senator if he is not there, he makes the ruling. the parliamentarian actually has no role written into the law. he's like a staffer who is advising the vice president what to do. but then the vice president can choose. this one survives the byrd rule and we're going to keep the 50 vote debate rule. when that happens, if the members disagree -- the democrats say we don't agree with that, we think you've got it wrong -- they can object to the ruling of the chair. but the consideration of h.j. res. 57, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5 united states code and so forth.
3:21 am
the presiding officer: question is on the motion. even very likely that that ruling n will be sustained. so if they decide -- and it's -- vice president pence works with mitch mcconnell in making those rulings because mitch runs the day-to-day senate. but if they decided we think this fits under the byrd rule, they will under the process be able to have that sustained. host: sounds like must-see tv. of course c-span 2 will have live coverage if it makes the it to the senate, c-span covering the house. thank you for waiting. good morning. caller: good morning, steve. i agree with your guest, david. i believe that you have to get rid of the tax increase. you have to open up competition. and i think that paul ryan i believe that representative ryan, he is running scared and two steps to play
3:22 am
ahead. he should just worry about getting the best bill for the american people. the republicans have a great window of opportunity to get this right. then they need to get this done. d trying to hold off a filibuster about something that what might or might not happen, i don't think representative ryan should be worried about that. he should be making sure that the american people get the best product possible because if they mess this up, then it's going to really just open up the doors for the democrats and say i told you so. i told you so. and then move on with their continued i guess demonization of the republicans. so i would suggest that representative ryan work with this guest of yours, take the good ideas and move forward for the -- for the american people and do what's best.
3:23 am
host: thank you for the call. let me take ken's comment but also to respond to this tweet. guest: so let me step back and say i do think this is an historic time. republicans have promised now for four elections they would repeal obamacare. and because paul ryan is stepping back, he's taking a bill from the insurance industry, he's saying i'm constrained by the senate rules, they're failing to really repeal obamacare. and i think the political consequences of that will be very unfavorable for republicans. but the consequences for the american people is their insurance premiums will not go down under this bill. they will continue to be high and start going up again in a year or so. so it will be a failure in trying to actually accomplish the goal of repealing obamacare and lowering the insurance
3:24 am
premiums. in terms of coverage, under their provisions of the bill because of the refundable tax credit and the fact that they've kept the preexisting conditions rule, no one will lose their coverage. i mean, that's my prediction. but reading it right now i think everybody will continue to get coverage. the problem is it will continue to be very expensive and unaffordable insurance. host: let's go to elizabeth. independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i have one question and one comment. the comment is people keep saying that young people don't get insurance. i know a lot of people and they are very into preventative care because they don't want to get old and be very sick. so they do want insurance. looking for jobs one of the things that they're looking for is what is the insurance coverage. so i wish people would stop pretending that young people aren't aware of the need for
3:25 am
having health insurance. whether they can afford it or not is a totally different story. but my question. someone asked you a question, didn't answer so i called in to repeat the question. i was a fiscal director when the aca came out and i was the one responsible for telling the employees that they weren't going to get a raise this year because the insurance premiums went up again. for years they were going up at double digits. that's before the aca. every year they went up double digits and the coverage went down. talk about competition. that meant we had to go out and find out which company could give us a lower premium. but along with those lower premiums came lower coverage. host: we'll get a response. guest: first, i think you've stated it correctly. when people say young people don't want to get insurance, what they really mean is they can't afford it. my niece was just telling me she's going to skip out buying insurance because all of the options are incredibly expensive for her.
3:26 am
they're over $1,000 a month. and she doesn't make enough money to be able to pay for that. so she makes the choice not to get insurance not because she wants to. she would like to be insured. she knows the importance of it. one of her siblings has had a lot of health care issues. she knows what it costs but she just simply can't afford it. and so thank you for correcting that, because it's an important difference in the way we think about the what young people are doing. to your second point. again, a valid point. competition didn't exist before obamacare and so there were huge increases then. and it didn't increase -- obamacare did nothing to create competition. in fact, what it did was subsidize the insurance industries both directly and indirectly through the medicaid program. but didn't require them to compete. so the premiums kept going up but then they started making profits because they could get all of this very subsidized
3:27 am
payments for managing the medicaid program. so the insurance industry loved it because it was better than before, they got subsidies. but people weren't better off because there was no competition. so your point is really valid. the problem of high insurance costs has been there before obamacare. obamacare didn't solve it and it's continuing to get worse. now the republicans, if the we fail to see a bill come out of the house that really deals with that, they'll leave that problem in place and two years from now you and i will be complaining that once again our insurance premiums are going up. that's one of the reaso "washington journal," live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up this morning, the former acting administrator for the centers for medicare and medicaid services discusses
3:28 am
republican efforts to repeal the affordable care act and proposed changes to medicare and medicaid. then, grace marie turner talks about the gop plan to replace the health care law. seniorhington examiner writer jamie mcintyre will discuss the terminal high altitude defense missile system and its ability to keep warheads from striking the u.s. the system was recently sent to south korea in light of north korean missile launches. watch "washington journal," coming up at 7:00 a.m. this morning. join the discussion. next, a health oversight hearing on the circumstances surrounding the death of an immigration and customs enforcement agent and operations at the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives. officials from the agency were invited to testify at this hearing, but did not appear. those that did sho


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on