“Different members have different concerns, so I think it will be something that appeases some but not others,” said HFC member Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.). | Getty Conservative demands threaten to derail Obamacare repeal President Trump has welcomed changes to the measure — but the conservative wish list could sap moderate GOP support.

Hill conservatives were just handed the opening they’ve been waiting for: An invitation from President Donald Trump to “negotiate” on an Obamacare replacement.

There’s just one big problem: They’re all over the place on what they want.


The discord on the far-right is becoming a real problem for Republicans. Allies of GOP leadership say Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and his team can’t assemble a bill that can pass the House if conservatives keep moving the goal posts on what exactly it will take to secure their votes.

In the end, they might end up getting nothing at all because of the disunity, some GOP lawmakers speculated. And several even believe conservatives will vote for the bill despite their complaints and demands for change this week.

“You only get something if you coalesce around it and pledge your vote if you get it,” said one senior Republican lawmaker close with leadership. What’s happening now, the source continued, is “why they are so unsuccessful.”

Talks of amending Speaker Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) Obamacare replacement come as Trump told conservative groups Wednesday night that he might be open to changes. On Thursday, Trump met with House Freedom Caucus chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and vice chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), and Vice President Mike Pence has been in touch with Republican Study Committee leader Mark Walker (R-N.C.)

On Capitol Hill, discussions between conservatives and leaders about what might be changed are ongoing — but it's far from clear where those early negotiations will end up.

That's because conservatives appear to want different things. On Wednesday night, Rep. Walker told reporters that he could get to 'yes' on the bill if leadership accepted two changes: One that would phase-out the current Medicaid expansion this year or the next instead of on Dec. 31, 2019; and another that would alter the structure of health care tax credits created in the bill.

The next morning, the RSC group as a whole asked for another change: the addition of work requirements for non-disabled adults receiving Medicaid. The press release announcing the request also mentioned the group's support for phasing out the Medicaid expansion sooner, but gone was the mention of tax credits, which are still a big issue for the Freedom Caucus.

“We’re a ‘yes’ if we get both of them and we are ‘lean-yes’ if we get one of them,” Walker told reporters Thursday afternoon of the Medicaid changes. “We’ve got to remember that these programs should be measured by how many people we’re transferring off — not how many people we’re transferring on.”

Members of the arch-conservative Freedom Caucus, however, said those changes don’t go far enough to win the group’s backing.

“Different members have different concerns, so I think it will be something that appeases some but not others,” said HFC member Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.).

Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), another Freedom Caucus member who authored the work-requirement amendment the RSC is backing, agreed that his amendment alone wouldn’t be enough to win over the caucus.

“I think it’s a lump of sugar for a three-lump coffee drinker,” he said. “I don’t know if it’s going to be two, three, four or one member” who votes for the bill because of his amendment, he added.

GOP leadership is in a tricky spot. Each time they offer a concession to the right, they lose some moderate Republicans in the center. They can only afford to lose 21 Republican votes and still pass the bill — given that no Democrats will support it — so each proposed change must answer one question: Does it help or hurt the count?

Meanwhile, some conservatives still aren't sure what they need to get to yes. Outside the chamber Thursday afternoon, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), the newest Freedom Caucus member, complained that the House replacement includes a backdoor version of Obamacare’s despised mandate to obtain insurance: a 30 percent premium surcharge for people who go without health insurance for two months.

“I don’t want another mandate, and there is a 30 percent penalty!” he railed.

Asked if a change to that particular measure would mean he’d vote for the bill, he balked: “No, because there are a number of things that just aren’t appropriate.”

Meeting with Trump Thursday afternoon, HFC leaders Meadows and Jordan floated another potential compromise: blowing up Senate rules. The conservatives argued that GOP leadership was being too cautious when it comes to rules governing the Senate’s fast-tracking procedure. So-called reconciliation, which allows the Senate to pass bills by simple majority instead of the typical 60-vote threshold, is only allowed for provisions that produce significant cost savings.

But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) could get around that, they told Trump, allowing leadership to load up the bill with provisions that might not score as big savers but Republicans believe grow the economy. The Senate could vote by simple majority to bypass the chamber's parliamentarian ruling against a provision deemed to have no change on spending, they noted.

Many senators have long argued against such a strategy, warning it would blow up the very foundation of their chamber, which the founders intended to be a slower, more deliberative body.

“I think everyone’s got a list of things they’d like to see in this bill,” said HFC member Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) when exiting a caucus meeting Wednesday night.