December 12, 2025 • 17 mins
Senior Reporter for The Hill, Mike Lillis, breaks down the politics of the dueling Senate health care plans that failed to pass and previews what the House will do next week. Plus, Health Reporter for The Hill, Nathaniel Weixel, compares the Democratic & GOP health care plans.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Let's go to the highline and bring in senior reporter
for The Hill. Mike Lillis is back with us. You
can find all of his work at the Hill dot com,
and you can follow him on x for more at
Real Mike Lillis. So, Mike, both of the proposals for
healthcare reform in the Senate, the Democratic proposal and the
GOP proposal failed yesterday, not a surprise, but tell us
(00:23):
about the dynamics there, the votes themselves, and where it
could potentially go from here in that chamber.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Yeah, that's right, Ryan, you know, big big set of
votes yesterday. As you said, no surprise, But what this
does it kind of it kind of brings us to
the next step. Everybody had been waiting and saying, well,
we don't want to say what we're going to do
until those Senate votes happen. Now that they've happened, Now
that they've failed again, not a surprise, everybody knew was
going to happen. But now let's see what happens next.
(00:53):
And what we saw yesterday was two competing bills, both
of them partisan. The Republican bill was going to shift
these Obama care subsidies into individual private health savings accounts.
This has been a Republican you know push for many
many years. They've wanted to take a lot of these subsidies,
you know, in Medicare and Medicaid and in all of
(01:14):
these federal health care programs and put them into individual accounts.
Democrats are opposed to that idea for a number of reasons,
but they just think it favors the wealthy over low
income people generally. The Democrats encountered with a three year
extension of the subsidies as they exist, so just a
(01:34):
clean three year extension. Both of them failed. Both of
them got fifty one votes. Both votes were bipartisan, but
it failed to reach the reach the sixty vote threshold,
which of course you need in the Senate to defeat
a filibuster, you need a supermajority. There so not even
close votes. Everybody knew was going to happen, but there
(01:54):
were some. The Democrats vote did get four Republicans, which
was interesting. A couple of them are for re election,
a couple of them are just centrists who tend to
buck their leadership frequently. But it was a kind of
a good sign for the Democrats, even though they came
nowhere close to winning it. So now you know the
million dollar question is, well, what happens next? And the
(02:16):
answer is the focus now moves to the House. And
in the House you have four competing plans. As if
things weren't complicated enough when plans for so next week
we're going to see a vote. My speaker Mike Johnson
has introduced a sort of a concept of a plan
and a package to bills. It's not yet in legislative language,
(02:38):
but they promise this it'll be ready by next week.
This is another Republican kind of wish list, more health
savings account stuff, some pharmacy benefit manager stuff. What it
does not have, notably, is an extension of the Obamacare
subsidies that are going to expire. And so Democrats, of
course are screaming from the rafters and saying this is
(02:59):
not a solution at all, and they have some very
important support in that claim from a lot of centrist
Republicans who kind of revolted earlier in the week after
the after Mike Johnson introduced that bill and they said, hey,
wait a minute, this isn't a fix at all. We
have to extend these these Obamacare subsidies. We might hate
(03:21):
the law. We've been trying to repeal it for years,
but we've got to do it because we can't let
these costs skyrocket on what is expected to be twenty
two million people who currently benefit from the program. So
a big vote next week on that. Again, it could
pass in the House, we just don't know, but it's
(03:41):
not going anywhere in the Senate. So again, it is
not the solution that some of these people are looking for,
and it kind of takes us back to square one,
and then we can talk a little bit more about
the other bills if you'd like.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
Yeah, we're joined right now. My senior report for the Hill,
Mike Lillis, Again he could find all of his reports
at the Hill dot com. What about this push by
some of those centrist Republicans in the House along with Democrats,
to execute another discharge petition. We're hearing lots about discharge
petitions lately. Of course, this came up with the push
(04:18):
to release the Epstein files. That discharge petition ended up
being successful, But it seems like there's a lot of
frustration with House Speaker Mike Johnson, and you've got members
of Congress trying to go around him. Here.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Yeah, that's right. You know, distart traditions. We've been up
here for twenty years, and they very very very rarely succeed.
I mean, you could count on one hand the number
of discard petitions that had succeeded in the first two
decades that I was up here. Now you just seeing
them every other day, and some of them are succeeded.
You know, Jeffrey Epstein succeeded at a labor relations bill
(04:56):
that passed earlier in the week on a discard petition.
And as you said, this is a sign that it's
because the disart petition is not just for the minority,
it's for the rank and file. And to get two
hundred and eighteen votes, of course, you need members of
the majority, the speakers party, to sign onto this stuff,
which is an extraordinary demonstration of unrest and you know,
(05:19):
kind of disgruntlement on the side of the majority. And
so after the Republicans introduced their healthcare care plan this
week and it did not address the Obamacare subsidies, the
centers said, okay, wait a minute, that's not going to fly.
So they immediately introduced two disc art petitions on the
healthcare subsidies specifically, they are a little bit different plans.
(05:42):
One of them is a two year extension, one of
them is a one year extension. The first one has
the kind of strict eligibility reforms in terms of how
much income you can make before you can benefit from
the from the subsidies. The other one is a little
bit less strict. So there are differences in the bills,
but the concept is the same, and that they both
would extend the subsidies at least for a year. So
(06:05):
that's the bridge that a lot of these centrist Republicans
are looking for, and then they say, we can come
back and we can work on it like long term
reforms later. There is a third bill, democratic only, that's
the three year extension, but that just failed in the Senate.
No one thinks that's going anywhere anyway. So now the
million dollar question is the Democrats bill partisan bill goes nowhere.
(06:28):
The Republicans partisan bill goes nowhere. But you got these
two bipartisan bills sitting in the middle. They've got a
bunch of signatures on them already, a bunch of Republican
signatures on them already. And so the question now is
for Democrats, is for Hakim Jeffries, the House Minority Leader. Yes,
you're pushing this three year extension, but it's going nowhere.
(06:50):
So now are you going to back a bipartisan bill
that includes a few reforms that you don't like, but
it's going to extend these subsidies and for relief for
millions of Americans, the same issue that you've been screaming
about for funds, the same issue that you sut down
the government over. It really would be a bad look
if they didn't sign on to something that solves this problem.
(07:12):
And so their face you look for, you know, over
the next couple of days, look for Jeffries and the
Democrats to have to say something about these about these
discharge petitions, because they've already got some of their own
members on them, and it does provide the relief that
they've been screaming about. So not just a dilemma anymore
for the for the GOP who you know, who've been
(07:33):
trying to repeal Obamacare for years and now they would
be on record supporting it, So that dilemma is real.
But the Democrats also faced one, yeah in the in
the question of do they do they sign on to
these dischard petitions, and and that's that's really the crux
of all this. And then I should mention that even
if it did pass, even if it does get to
(07:53):
eighteen in the House, there's a question of is their time.
There's there's only five legislated days left, including today Friday,
before they leave for the holidays. Would there be time
to bring that to the floor under House rules? The
Parliamentary is going to have to weigh in on that.
With Mike Johnson Blockett, is this going to get kicked
(08:14):
into January? Many are saying yes, it's going to get
kicked into January, in which case is probably going to
get wrapped up into the debate over federal spending, which
is the deadline of January thirtieth. So are we having
another shutdown over healthcare? Very possible. But in the meantime,
these discard petitions are are front and center, and everyone's
(08:34):
waiting to see who's going to sign on and how
this plays out before the holidays.
Speaker 1 (08:39):
Senior reporter for The Hill, Mike Lillis with some great
information for us. Again, you can check out all of
his reporting at the Hill dot com and you can
follow him on exp for more at Real Mike Lilis
Mike really appreciate timon insight.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Thanks so much, Brian, thank you anytime. Appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
Well, let's go to the hotline and bring in health
reporter for The Hill. Nathaniel Wexel is back with us.
You can find all work at the Hill dot com
and you can follow him on x for more at
Nate Wexel. So Nathaniel. The dueling Senate healthcare plans both
failed yesterday, but I want to dive in to what
(09:14):
exactly they aimed to do, and let's start with the
plan proposed by the Democrats. What were they trying to do?
Speaker 2 (09:23):
Yeah, that plan was.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
Pretty much it's a straight clean extension of the expiring
Affordable Care Act and hand subsidies. So it really just
would have said for the next three years, the subsidies
that are set to expire in December thirty first are
just going to be extended for three years, and that's it,
(09:46):
no more, no less, just for three years, no reform,
no changes, that keeps this out of quo going for
three more years. The Samian spike that people say is
coming if and when these subsidies expire, people's streaming costs
are going to go up that are on the Affordable
Care Act plans, So this plan would have subverted that
(10:09):
if it had passed.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
All right, let's focus in on what the Republican plan entailed.
What was that one aiming to do?
Speaker 3 (10:18):
If that one would it was a lot more complicated.
It would have let the enhanced subsidies expire and essentially
taken the money that the federal government was going to
spend on the subsidies and turn it into health savings accounts,
(10:39):
and it would fund help savings account for everyone who
is on certain high deductible Affordable Care Act plans. You'd
either get one thousand dollars or fifteen hundred dollars, depending
on your age and your income. And the point was
that money would be put forward your premium or you're deductible,
(11:06):
so like a certain amount would be able to be
used to defray them healthcare costs. That didn't pass either.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Let me ask you a little bit more about that
plan a couple of questions. First of all, that thousand
to fifteen hundred dollars number, is that every month or
is that just over the course of a year. And
it essentially sounds like it would have been a very
roundabout way of getting the money to the health insurance
(11:39):
companies just sending it to people through those HSA accounts.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
First, Yeah, I mean that's not what the Republicans say
would happen. You know, it sort of incentivizes the people
to use the money however they want to use the money.
So you have the thousand dollars or fifteen hundred dollars
that you get one time, it's not every month. It's
(12:07):
it's a one time funding of the account, but you
get to choose how you want.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
To use it.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
Whereas I guess the argument is with these subsidies, their
their tax credits that go to help defray the cost
of your health incurrent so you don't necessarily have to
use the help savings account for your health insurance premium.
So it would help if you are a younger, healthier
(12:41):
person who doesn't have a lot of expenses, you know,
this money would would help you for that, but not
necessarily if you are you know, have answer and you're
facing you know, thirty thousand dollars statements. Fifteen hundred dollars
isn't going to go very far.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
We're joined now by Nathaniel Wexel, health reporter for the Hill.
You can find his work at the hill dot com.
So let's switch over to the other chamber of the House.
There's some different plans floating around there. What do they
aim to do?
Speaker 3 (13:14):
Yeah, I mean, I guess. The first thing to note
is that all of these there are a handful of
bipartisan plans in the House, none of them are set
to get a vote next week. If and when House
Republican leaders unveil their package, what they are going to
(13:36):
do is sort of a grab bag of proposals that
have Republican support but don't really do anything to address
the looming premium fight. So that's number one. And the
second part is all of these bipartisan plans do temporarily
(13:56):
extend the expiring subsidies for one year or two years,
and they're all paired with some sorts of reforms to
address broad in the exchanges, to deal with you know,
sometimes they eliminate zero dollar premium plans, they put an
(14:18):
income cap on. So there are you know, these are
things that the conservatives have been saying, you know, we
want to see reforms in the marketplace. These are the
reforms that we want to see. So there's there are
two right now, that are moving forward through the process
of a discard difference, which would eventually go around leadership
(14:43):
to try to bring them to the floor for a
vote if leadership doesn't do it on our own.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
Let me ask you what you're hearing from those who
follow this very closely and are really experts in healthcare
and the system that we're dealing with, costs, insurance, all
of that. It sounds to me like a lot of
what's being proposed by Congress, whether it's on the Republican
(15:08):
side of the Democratic side, is essentially putting a band
aid over a gunshot wound. Is that kind of what
you're hearing? Like, we're talking about, you know, paying for
premiums and you know, a little money and health savings
accounts and things like that, but there's nothing comprehensive to
address all the inefficiencies and complexities and issues that have
(15:33):
led to the increase in underlying costs that we've experienced
in recent decades.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
Yeah, I mean that that kind of gets the nail
on my head. You know, this is sort of dealing
with one small aspect of a much larger system than
the aspect is the enhanced subsidies of the Affordable Care Act.
You know, if you talk to the Republicans, they say, well,
(16:02):
the reason healthcare is so offensive, and the reason caustur
rising is because of Obamacare, because of the Affordable Fair Acts.
So all of life evil can sort of be breaked
back to this law. And if we can reform this
law or change this law and put our uncroposals into place,
possible go down health care. It is complicated, It's more
(16:26):
complicated than just using the law. So yet Republicans say
they are looking for bigger proposals. Democrats are open to
do something, but they want to address the firing cities
first and foremost, because that is going to hit people
(16:49):
within a couple of weeks.
Speaker 1 (16:52):
Nathaniel Wexel health reporter for The Hill. You can find
his work and a whole lot more at the Hill
dot com and you can follow him on at Nate Wexel.
Nathaniel always appreciate the time and insight. Thanks so much
for coming back on.
Speaker 3 (17:05):
Thanks for having me The Ryan Gorman Show on NewsRadio WFLA.
Speaker 1 (17:11):
Follow us on Facebook and Instagram at Ryan Gorman Show,
and find us online at Ryangormanshow dot com.
Let's go to the highline and bring in senior reporter
for The Hill. Mike Lillis is back with us. You
can find all of his work at the Hill dot com,
and you can follow him on x for more at
Real Mike Lillis. So, Mike, both of the proposals for
healthcare reform in the Senate, the Democratic proposal and the
GOP proposal failed yesterday, not a surprise, but tell us
(00:23):
about the dynamics there, the votes themselves, and where it
could potentially go from here in that chamber.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Yeah, that's right, Ryan, you know, big big set of
votes yesterday. As you said, no surprise, But what this
does it kind of it kind of brings us to
the next step. Everybody had been waiting and saying, well,
we don't want to say what we're going to do
until those Senate votes happen. Now that they've happened, Now
that they've failed again, not a surprise, everybody knew was
going to happen. But now let's see what happens next.
(00:53):
And what we saw yesterday was two competing bills, both
of them partisan. The Republican bill was going to shift
these Obama care subsidies into individual private health savings accounts.
This has been a Republican you know push for many
many years. They've wanted to take a lot of these subsidies,
you know, in Medicare and Medicaid and in all of
(01:14):
these federal health care programs and put them into individual accounts.
Democrats are opposed to that idea for a number of reasons,
but they just think it favors the wealthy over low
income people generally. The Democrats encountered with a three year
extension of the subsidies as they exist, so just a
(01:34):
clean three year extension. Both of them failed. Both of
them got fifty one votes. Both votes were bipartisan, but
it failed to reach the reach the sixty vote threshold,
which of course you need in the Senate to defeat
a filibuster, you need a supermajority. There so not even
close votes. Everybody knew was going to happen, but there
(01:54):
were some. The Democrats vote did get four Republicans, which
was interesting. A couple of them are for re election,
a couple of them are just centrists who tend to
buck their leadership frequently. But it was a kind of
a good sign for the Democrats, even though they came
nowhere close to winning it. So now you know the
million dollar question is, well, what happens next? And the
(02:16):
answer is the focus now moves to the House. And
in the House you have four competing plans. As if
things weren't complicated enough when plans for so next week
we're going to see a vote. My speaker Mike Johnson
has introduced a sort of a concept of a plan
and a package to bills. It's not yet in legislative language,
(02:38):
but they promise this it'll be ready by next week.
This is another Republican kind of wish list, more health
savings account stuff, some pharmacy benefit manager stuff. What it
does not have, notably, is an extension of the Obamacare
subsidies that are going to expire. And so Democrats, of
course are screaming from the rafters and saying this is
(02:59):
not a solution at all, and they have some very
important support in that claim from a lot of centrist
Republicans who kind of revolted earlier in the week after
the after Mike Johnson introduced that bill and they said, hey,
wait a minute, this isn't a fix at all. We
have to extend these these Obamacare subsidies. We might hate
(03:21):
the law. We've been trying to repeal it for years,
but we've got to do it because we can't let
these costs skyrocket on what is expected to be twenty
two million people who currently benefit from the program. So
a big vote next week on that. Again, it could
pass in the House, we just don't know, but it's
(03:41):
not going anywhere in the Senate. So again, it is
not the solution that some of these people are looking for,
and it kind of takes us back to square one,
and then we can talk a little bit more about
the other bills if you'd like.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
Yeah, we're joined right now. My senior report for the Hill,
Mike Lillis, Again he could find all of his reports
at the Hill dot com. What about this push by
some of those centrist Republicans in the House along with Democrats,
to execute another discharge petition. We're hearing lots about discharge
petitions lately. Of course, this came up with the push
(04:18):
to release the Epstein files. That discharge petition ended up
being successful, But it seems like there's a lot of
frustration with House Speaker Mike Johnson, and you've got members
of Congress trying to go around him. Here.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Yeah, that's right. You know, distart traditions. We've been up
here for twenty years, and they very very very rarely succeed.
I mean, you could count on one hand the number
of discard petitions that had succeeded in the first two
decades that I was up here. Now you just seeing
them every other day, and some of them are succeeded.
You know, Jeffrey Epstein succeeded at a labor relations bill
(04:56):
that passed earlier in the week on a discard petition.
And as you said, this is a sign that it's
because the disart petition is not just for the minority,
it's for the rank and file. And to get two
hundred and eighteen votes, of course, you need members of
the majority, the speakers party, to sign onto this stuff,
which is an extraordinary demonstration of unrest and you know,
(05:19):
kind of disgruntlement on the side of the majority. And
so after the Republicans introduced their healthcare care plan this
week and it did not address the Obamacare subsidies, the
centers said, okay, wait a minute, that's not going to fly.
So they immediately introduced two disc art petitions on the
healthcare subsidies specifically, they are a little bit different plans.
(05:42):
One of them is a two year extension, one of
them is a one year extension. The first one has
the kind of strict eligibility reforms in terms of how
much income you can make before you can benefit from
the from the subsidies. The other one is a little
bit less strict. So there are differences in the bills,
but the concept is the same, and that they both
would extend the subsidies at least for a year. So
(06:05):
that's the bridge that a lot of these centrist Republicans
are looking for, and then they say, we can come
back and we can work on it like long term
reforms later. There is a third bill, democratic only, that's
the three year extension, but that just failed in the Senate.
No one thinks that's going anywhere anyway. So now the
million dollar question is the Democrats bill partisan bill goes nowhere.
(06:28):
The Republicans partisan bill goes nowhere. But you got these
two bipartisan bills sitting in the middle. They've got a
bunch of signatures on them already, a bunch of Republican
signatures on them already. And so the question now is
for Democrats, is for Hakim Jeffries, the House Minority Leader. Yes,
you're pushing this three year extension, but it's going nowhere.
(06:50):
So now are you going to back a bipartisan bill
that includes a few reforms that you don't like, but
it's going to extend these subsidies and for relief for
millions of Americans, the same issue that you've been screaming
about for funds, the same issue that you sut down
the government over. It really would be a bad look
if they didn't sign on to something that solves this problem.
(07:12):
And so their face you look for, you know, over
the next couple of days, look for Jeffries and the
Democrats to have to say something about these about these
discharge petitions, because they've already got some of their own
members on them, and it does provide the relief that
they've been screaming about. So not just a dilemma anymore
for the for the GOP who you know, who've been
(07:33):
trying to repeal Obamacare for years and now they would
be on record supporting it, So that dilemma is real.
But the Democrats also faced one, yeah in the in
the question of do they do they sign on to
these dischard petitions, and and that's that's really the crux
of all this. And then I should mention that even
if it did pass, even if it does get to
(07:53):
eighteen in the House, there's a question of is their time.
There's there's only five legislated days left, including today Friday,
before they leave for the holidays. Would there be time
to bring that to the floor under House rules? The
Parliamentary is going to have to weigh in on that.
With Mike Johnson Blockett, is this going to get kicked
(08:14):
into January? Many are saying yes, it's going to get
kicked into January, in which case is probably going to
get wrapped up into the debate over federal spending, which
is the deadline of January thirtieth. So are we having
another shutdown over healthcare? Very possible. But in the meantime,
these discard petitions are are front and center, and everyone's
(08:34):
waiting to see who's going to sign on and how
this plays out before the holidays.
Speaker 1 (08:39):
Senior reporter for The Hill, Mike Lillis with some great
information for us. Again, you can check out all of
his reporting at the Hill dot com and you can
follow him on exp for more at Real Mike Lilis
Mike really appreciate timon insight.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Thanks so much, Brian, thank you anytime. Appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
Well, let's go to the hotline and bring in health
reporter for The Hill. Nathaniel Wexel is back with us.
You can find all work at the Hill dot com
and you can follow him on x for more at
Nate Wexel. So Nathaniel. The dueling Senate healthcare plans both
failed yesterday, but I want to dive in to what
(09:14):
exactly they aimed to do, and let's start with the
plan proposed by the Democrats. What were they trying to do?
Speaker 2 (09:23):
Yeah, that plan was.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
Pretty much it's a straight clean extension of the expiring
Affordable Care Act and hand subsidies. So it really just
would have said for the next three years, the subsidies
that are set to expire in December thirty first are
just going to be extended for three years, and that's it,
(09:46):
no more, no less, just for three years, no reform,
no changes, that keeps this out of quo going for
three more years. The Samian spike that people say is
coming if and when these subsidies expire, people's streaming costs
are going to go up that are on the Affordable
Care Act plans, So this plan would have subverted that
(10:09):
if it had passed.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
All right, let's focus in on what the Republican plan entailed.
What was that one aiming to do?
Speaker 3 (10:18):
If that one would it was a lot more complicated.
It would have let the enhanced subsidies expire and essentially
taken the money that the federal government was going to
spend on the subsidies and turn it into health savings accounts,
(10:39):
and it would fund help savings account for everyone who
is on certain high deductible Affordable Care Act plans. You'd
either get one thousand dollars or fifteen hundred dollars, depending
on your age and your income. And the point was
that money would be put forward your premium or you're deductible,
(11:06):
so like a certain amount would be able to be
used to defray them healthcare costs. That didn't pass either.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Let me ask you a little bit more about that
plan a couple of questions. First of all, that thousand
to fifteen hundred dollars number, is that every month or
is that just over the course of a year. And
it essentially sounds like it would have been a very
roundabout way of getting the money to the health insurance
(11:39):
companies just sending it to people through those HSA accounts.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
First, Yeah, I mean that's not what the Republicans say
would happen. You know, it sort of incentivizes the people
to use the money however they want to use the money.
So you have the thousand dollars or fifteen hundred dollars
that you get one time, it's not every month. It's
(12:07):
it's a one time funding of the account, but you
get to choose how you want.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
To use it.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
Whereas I guess the argument is with these subsidies, their
their tax credits that go to help defray the cost
of your health incurrent so you don't necessarily have to
use the help savings account for your health insurance premium.
So it would help if you are a younger, healthier
(12:41):
person who doesn't have a lot of expenses, you know,
this money would would help you for that, but not
necessarily if you are you know, have answer and you're
facing you know, thirty thousand dollars statements. Fifteen hundred dollars
isn't going to go very far.
Speaker 1 (13:00):
We're joined now by Nathaniel Wexel, health reporter for the Hill.
You can find his work at the hill dot com.
So let's switch over to the other chamber of the House.
There's some different plans floating around there. What do they
aim to do?
Speaker 3 (13:14):
Yeah, I mean, I guess. The first thing to note
is that all of these there are a handful of
bipartisan plans in the House, none of them are set
to get a vote next week. If and when House
Republican leaders unveil their package, what they are going to
(13:36):
do is sort of a grab bag of proposals that
have Republican support but don't really do anything to address
the looming premium fight. So that's number one. And the
second part is all of these bipartisan plans do temporarily
(13:56):
extend the expiring subsidies for one year or two years,
and they're all paired with some sorts of reforms to
address broad in the exchanges, to deal with you know,
sometimes they eliminate zero dollar premium plans, they put an
(14:18):
income cap on. So there are you know, these are
things that the conservatives have been saying, you know, we
want to see reforms in the marketplace. These are the
reforms that we want to see. So there's there are
two right now, that are moving forward through the process
of a discard difference, which would eventually go around leadership
(14:43):
to try to bring them to the floor for a
vote if leadership doesn't do it on our own.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
Let me ask you what you're hearing from those who
follow this very closely and are really experts in healthcare
and the system that we're dealing with, costs, insurance, all
of that. It sounds to me like a lot of
what's being proposed by Congress, whether it's on the Republican
(15:08):
side of the Democratic side, is essentially putting a band
aid over a gunshot wound. Is that kind of what
you're hearing? Like, we're talking about, you know, paying for
premiums and you know, a little money and health savings
accounts and things like that, but there's nothing comprehensive to
address all the inefficiencies and complexities and issues that have
(15:33):
led to the increase in underlying costs that we've experienced
in recent decades.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
Yeah, I mean that that kind of gets the nail
on my head. You know, this is sort of dealing
with one small aspect of a much larger system than
the aspect is the enhanced subsidies of the Affordable Care Act.
You know, if you talk to the Republicans, they say, well,
(16:02):
the reason healthcare is so offensive, and the reason caustur
rising is because of Obamacare, because of the Affordable Fair Acts.
So all of life evil can sort of be breaked
back to this law. And if we can reform this
law or change this law and put our uncroposals into place,
possible go down health care. It is complicated, It's more
(16:26):
complicated than just using the law. So yet Republicans say
they are looking for bigger proposals. Democrats are open to
do something, but they want to address the firing cities
first and foremost, because that is going to hit people
(16:49):
within a couple of weeks.
Speaker 1 (16:52):
Nathaniel Wexel health reporter for The Hill. You can find
his work and a whole lot more at the Hill
dot com and you can follow him on at Nate Wexel.
Nathaniel always appreciate the time and insight. Thanks so much
for coming back on.
Speaker 3 (17:05):
Thanks for having me The Ryan Gorman Show on NewsRadio WFLA.
Speaker 1 (17:11):
Follow us on Facebook and Instagram at Ryan Gorman Show,
and find us online at Ryangormanshow dot com.
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.