Morning Joe Charts: AHCA Hurts the Poor and Helps the Rich

Time may not be Trumpcare’s friend. With every passing day, new analyses are released showing the significant financial cost to average Americans of repealing Obamacare.

Note: for the related Morning Joe video, click here.













Mark Meadows, the head of the Freedom Caucus, said that he could not support the AHCA because it did not reduce premium costs enough. That is certainly true – it would increase all health care costs substantially. This chart shows the impact of the AHCA on the average American: $2,200 less in tax credits and subsidies, $2,400 more in net premiums and $1,200 in higher out-of-pocket costs for deductibles, co-pays and the like. That’s a total of a $3,600 increase in the financial burden for the typical person (including net premiums, deductibles, co-pays and coinsurance). No surprise, then, that the Congressional Budget Office calculates that 24 million fewer people will have health insurance under this proposal.













Those additional burdens are hardly shared equitably. Analysis by the Urban Institute shows that Americans earning less than $50,000 per year would be losers, with those at the lowest point on the income scale losing the most. Conversely, those earning more than $50,000 a year would be winners, with those with incomes above $200,000, gaining the most. (This includes all the aspects of the changes – cutting tax credits, repealing taxes, cutting Medicaid funding, etc.)

This is not how it’s supposed to work!













Even more surprising – at least from a political standpoint – is the extent to which the losers under the Republican party are weighted toward Trump voters while the winners are tilted in favor of Clinton supporters. Americans who stand to lose the most (more than $7,500 per person per year) favored Trump by a margin of 19 percentage points; those who would lose between $5,000 and $7,500 per year supported Trump by a margin of 25 percentage points. In contrast, a plurality of all the winners and those who would lose less than $1,000 annually voted for Clinton.