That is one side of the debate over health-care reform in the United States; a side that, it seems safe to say, is meant to run at odds with the current plan offered by congressional Republicans. What, by contrast, is the rhetoric clincher on the Republican side, the side that’s calling to overhaul the Affordable Care Act? Here’s the GOP’s explanation of how their legislation, the American Health Care Act, will improve health care.

AD

AD

What we’re proposing will decrease premiums and expand and enhance health care options so Americans can find a plan that’s right for them. We also make sure Americans can save and spend their health care dollars the way they want and need — not the way Washington prescribes.

It’s worth reiterating that one way the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office foresees premiums falling is by pricing out of the market those at higher risk of health issues, like older Americans.

The Republican website promoting their plan — from which the text above was taken — hasn’t been updated since the proposal of an amendment that has revived the party’s hopes of passage.

“Americans should never be denied coverage or charged more because of a preexisting condition,” the site reads. The amendment from Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.), however, would allow insures to do just that: charge more if there’s a lapse in coverage.

Taken by itself, “take control away from Washington” is a tough sell against “my kid would die if I can’t afford this.”

AD

The wan outreach to the public at large hasn’t spurred broad support for the bill; a Quinnipiac University poll found that only 17 percent of Americans backed the proposal — and that was before preexisting conditions were put at risk. Support for mandating coverage of preexisting conditions is broad, with even more than half of Trump voters backing a requirement that such conditions be covered. Republican lawmakers have repeatedly been confronted with angry constituents at town hall meetings; before the initial vote on the American Health Care Act was postponed, calls to members of Congress ran 50-to-1 in opposition to the measure.

AD

So what’s the motivating argument being offered by Republican leaders to their members in support of their proposal? Arguments about government control are no doubt more effective on Capitol Hill than outside the Beltway, with 57 percent of the country now saying that the government should do more, versus 39 percent who say it’s doing too much. Arguments about reducing taxes are also resonant, though the effects of that tax reduction will heavily fall on wealthier Americans. An estimated 40 percent of the benefit will go to the 1 percent of America at the top of the income ladder.

In effect, the argument seems to come mostly down to partisanship: Do this because the party said we would. Do this because we want to show that we can govern, now that we have control over Capitol Hill and the White House. Do this because President Trump wants a win.

That last point seems to loom large. The reason the push for reform was renewed when it did was, in no small part, because Trump was nearing his 100-day-in-office mark and he was looking for a success to which he could point. Trump’s arm-twisting during the first push on the bill was rarely nuanced, often coming down to “you need to do this.” It even going so far as to threaten Republican members with primary challenges if they balked.

AD

AD

They balked anyway. Why wouldn’t they? Republican voters — and Democratic voters — are certainly motivated by partisanship at the ballot box, meaning that standing in opposition to the party might hold electoral risks. But what’s the alternative? How do you ask someone to stand by a president who’s repeatedly expressed indifference about — or unfamiliarity with — the contents of the bill and who displays loyalty to neither its focus or its proponents?

Why, if you’re a Republican member of the House, would you stand behind a president who is both inconsistent and unpopular? He can’t be trusted to have your back and, even if he does, it’s not clear it would do you much good. Trump is popular with Republicans now, but unusually unpopular with both independents and the opposition. If you’re in a district that’s anywhere close to competitive, you’re no doubt very aware of that fact.

There’s an outside chance, floating on the distant horizon, that Trump’s unpopularity and disinterest in partisan loyalty might actually break down some of the partisan unanimity that’s guided Washington in recent years. A far outside chance, mind you, but Trump’s political fumbling may make choices easier for a number of Republicans in the House.

AD

AD

What’s the better bet for a moderate Republican: Buck the party and its leader or go along with a House bill that faces huge hurdles in the Senate?

When next year’s campaign rolls around, which ad would you like to see run in your district: one with Jimmy Kimmel crying as a narrator explains that you voted to weaken preexisting conditions, or one that shows a frustrated Trump railing against your opposition to the bill he decided to champion?