Less than two days before an expected Thursday vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on a Republican national health care plan, Congressman Mo Brooks made clear his opposition.

"I'll vote no," Brooks tweeted on Tuesday night.

Brooks has long opposed the bill put together by House GOP leaders, saying it doesn't go far enough to repeal the Affordable Care Act passed during the Obama presidency.

In his tweet - shorthanded to squeeze into Twitter's 140 characters - Brooks said his opposition to the bill is because "it doesn't deliver on the promise I made" to his north Alabama constituents "to fully repeal Obamacare."

I'll vote NO on #AHCA b/c it doesn't deliver on the promise I made to #AL05 to fully repeal ObamaCare. https://t.co/99WkL5tBuw — Mo Brooks (@RepMoBrooks) March 21, 2017

And during an appearance on CNBC on Tuesday night, Brooks said he believed there were enough House conservatives to vote down the bill.

Brooks is a member of the House Freedom Caucus, a conservative wing of House Republicans who have largely spoken against the bill. Another caucus member, U.S. Rep. Gary Palmer, R-Hoover, changed his mind and said Friday he would support the bill.

U.S. Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Haleyville, has also said he will support the bill.

"In this instance, I believe the legislation is bad in a number of different ways," Brooks said during an appearance Tuesday on CNBC. "Primarily, that it creates a huge new welfare program where taxpayer dollars are being used to subsidize insurance companies.

"And over the long haul, that's going to result in either higher premiums or higher taxes or greater deficit and higher debt that's going to burden our economy for years, maybe decades to come. So I'm looking at the big picture long term."

Brooks also said the bill "will do great damage to our country."

"What I think we ought to do is repeal Obamacare," Brooks said. "That's something we committed to doing. That's something that we had the votes to do in the House and the Senate just a couple of years ago. Then we can have a vigorous debate over what interjections of the federal government into the nation's health care system we should have. We certainly should interject competitive efforts so that insurance companies have to compete so that health care providers and insurance carriers are not exempt from anti-trust laws.

"And as much as possible, shift this health care issue to the 50 different states. For one reason, if nothing else, the states are more solvent than the federal government."