HAWLEY HAS BEEN SUING TO TAKE AWAY PROTECTION FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS FROM MILLIONS OF MISSOURIANS

Transcription

1 FACT CHECK: Independent Fact Checkers Have Consistently Found that Josh Hawley's Lawsuit Would Remove Protections from Missourians with Pre-Existing Conditions TITLE Pre Existing Conditions MEDIA Video 0:30 [link] DATE 9/24/18 HAWLEY HAS BEEN SUING TO TAKE AWAY PROTECTION FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS FROM MILLIONS OF MISSOURIANS Hawley joined Republican Attorney Generals in suing to hold the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional and end all its protections, including those preventing insurance companies from denying coverage to individuals with pre-existing conditions. Nearly 2.5 million Missourians live with a pre-existing condition. St. Louis American Op-Ed: With this much bipartisan support [for protecting preexisting conditions], why is the Missouri Attorney General putting Missourians like me in danger? INDEPENDENT FACT CHECKERS HAVE SAID IT S TRUE THAT HAWLEY IS TRYING TO TAKE AWAY PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS PROTECTIONS Politifact Missouri: McCaskill's Right: Hawley's Lawsuit Would End Affordable Care Act Protections. Nicholas Bagley, University of Michigan Law Professor: Sen. McCaskill is correct. The states that brought the Texas lawsuit have asked the court to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act lock, stock and barrel. Politifact Missouri: No consumer protections in the individual health market stipulated under the act would remain because the whole law would be gone. KOMU rated the claim that Hawley was ripping away frotections for people with preexisting conditions true. KOMU: By trying to strike down the Affordable Care Act, Josh Hawley would be allowing insurance companies to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. KMIZ Truth Alert: "The consumer protections [the ACA] provided will also be eliminated. Insurance companies would legally be able to deny coverage based on a person's current or pre-existing conditions." HAWLEY ALLEGED SUPPORT FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS IS A BILL THAT WOULD NOT COVER PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REPUBLICANS LIKE ROY BLUNT DON T EVEN SUPPORT Politico: The GOP s most direct attempt to address the insurance protections a recent Senate bill Republicans said would protect sick patients backfired spectacularly after it quickly became clear the measure wouldn t actually cover the pre-existing conditions it claimed to protect. The bill would force insurers to give coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, but not force them to cover the condition itself.

2 Politico: In other words, an insurer would have to sell a health plan to someone with cancer, but it wouldn t have to actually cover cancer treatment. Huffington Post: The bill would be a return to how the system worked for people who bought individual policies before the Affordable Care Act. Sen. Blunt: That bill is not going anywhere. I am not supportive of it. THE HAWLEY CAMPAIGN HAS TAKEN TENS OF THOUSANDS FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES OpenSecrets says the Hawley campaign has received $52,500 from insurance companies. The National Institute on Money in Politics says the Hawley campaign has received at least $41,500 from insurance companies. AD CLAIMS Hawley: We ve got two perfect little boys. Just ask their mama. Earlier this year, we learned our oldest has a rare chronic disease preexisting condition. We know what that s like. I m Josh Hawley. Text: Josh Hawley THE FACTS HAWLEY HAS BEEN SUING TO TAKE AWAY PROTECTION FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS FROM MILLIONS OF MISSOURIANS Hawley Joined Coalition Of Republican State Attorneys General On Court Brief That Argued ACA Individual Mandate Became Unconstitutional After Congress Eliminated Tax Penalty. Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley today joined a 19-state coalition urging a federal district court in Texas to hold the Affordable Care Act s (ACA) individual mandate unconstitutional and to enjoin the entire law. The complaint, filed late Monday, explains that the ACA, as recently amended, forces an unconstitutional regime onto the states and their citizens. In NFIB v. Sebelius, the U.S. Supreme Court narrowly upheld the core provision of the ACA the individual mandate as a tax. However, Congress has recently repealed this tax, while leaving the mandate in place. Since the Supreme Court has already held that Congress has no authority to impose the mandate on Americans unless it is a tax, the mandate is now unconstitutional and the ACA must fall. The Affordable Care Act was never constitutional, Hawley said. My Office will continue to fight to take health care choices out of the hands of DC bureaucrats and put them in the hands of families and physicians. " [MO AG Office News Release, 2/26/18] Hawley Included As Co-Counsel On Original Brief In Lawsuit Arguing ACA Protections For People With Pre- Existing Conditions Are Unconstitutional. The Trump administration on Thursday officially threw its support behind a new, seemingly far-fetched legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act, arguing that the law s protections for people with preexisting conditions are unconstitutional. The lawsuit, now before a federal district judge in Texas, comes from officials in 20 conservative states. And its prospects for success look slim. The Supreme Court has already rejected two legal challenges to the

3 law, the second on a 6-3 decision that came with a strongly worded ruling from Chief Justice John Roberts. [ ] The move could be particularly important in two key Senate races. The original brief in the lawsuit included, as co-counsel, a pair of state attorneys general: Josh Hawley of Missouri and Patrick Morrisey of West Virginia. [Huffington Post, 6/7/18] Justice Department Agreed With Hawley And Other Republican AGs That Courts Should Strike Down Provision Of ACA That Requires Insurance Companies Cover People With Pre-Existing Conditions. The Justice Department will not defend the Affordable Care Act in court, and says it believes the law's individual mandate the provision the Supreme Court upheld in 2012 has become unconstitutional. [ ] When Congress claimed it repealed the individual mandate last year, what it actually did was drop the tax penalty to $0. So the coverage requirement itself is still technically on the books. And a group of Republican attorneys general, representing states led by Texas, say it's now unconstitutional because the specific penalty the Supreme Court upheld is no longer in effect. The Justice Department agreed with that position in a brief filed Thursday night. DOJ said the courts should strike down the coverage requirement, as well as the provision of the law that forces insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions. [Axios, 6/7/18] 2,495,900 Missourians Live With A Pre-Existing Condition. About one in two Missourians, 51 percent, lives with a preexisting condition. [CAP, 4/5/17] 332,300 Missouri Children Already Have A Pre-Existing Condition. Roughly 332,000 Missourians below age 18 live with a pre-existing condition. [CAP, 4/5/17] 599,300 Older Missourians Live With A Pre-Existing Condition. 599,300 Missouri adults between the ages of 55 and 64 live with at least one pre-existing condition, meaning attacks on these protections significantly threaten Missourians approaching Medicare age. [CAP, 4/5/17] Headline: Hawley Slammed For Lawsuit That Could End Coverage For Preexisting Conditions. A coalition of health and social and economic justice groups slammed Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley on Friday, June 8 for his lawsuit that has now put millions of Missourians with preexisting conditions at risk of losing coverage. The previous night, President Trump's lawyers at the Department of Justice went to court to argue that key provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and specifically protections for people with pre-existing conditions, are unconstitutional. The move was in response to a lawsuit brought against the ACA by 20 Republican state officials,

4 including Hawley, which is now putting care for nearly 2.5 million Missourians who have a pre-existing condition at risk. [St. Louis American, 6/11/18] St. Louis American Op-Ed: Why Is Josh Hawley Putting People Like Me In Danger? Today I spent hours at physical therapy for a flare-up of a 2001 injury. I didn t worry because I have health insurance. Yet, Attorney General Josh Hawley signed Missouri onto a lawsuit to declare the Affordable Care Act (ACA) unconstitutional, and Friday, June 8, this paper reported a coalition of health and social and economic justice groups slammed Hawley for putting millions of Missourians with preexisting conditions at risk of losing coverage following President Trump's lawyers at the Department of Justice going to court and arguing key ACA provisions, specifically protections for people with pre-existing conditions, are unconstitutional. [St. Louis American Op-Ed, 6/22/18] St. Louis American Op-Ed: Elected Officials Must Stand Up For Americans Relying On ACA Protections But Instead, Hawley Is Actively Working To Strip Coverage From Missourians. This argument was in response to a lawsuit brought against the ACA by 20 Republican state officials, including Hawley, which now puts care for nearly 2.5 million Missourians who have a pre-existing condition at risk. Elected officials must stand up for Americans relying on ACA protections. Instead, Hawley is actively working to strip coverage from Missourians. [St. Louis American Op-Ed, 6/22/18] With This Much Bipartisan Support (For Pre- Existing Condition Coverage), Why Is The Missouri Attorney General Putting Missourians Like Me In Danger? Because of something out of my control someone else s car my life will never be the same, and without the protections requiring coverage of pre-existing conditions, insurance companies could refuse to cover my care or charge me far more than I could ever hope to pay. Toying with people s lives is shameful and wrong. Senators from both sides, including Senator Claire McCaskill, have spoken out in favor of keeping protections in place for people with pre-existing conditions. With this much bipartisan support, why is the Missouri attorney general putting Missourians like me in danger? [St. Louis American Op-Ed, 6/22/18] Hawley: I support forcing insurance companies to INDEPENDENT FACT CHECKERS HAVE SAID IT S TRUE THAT HAWLEY IS TRYING TO TAKE AWAY

5 cover all pre-existing conditions and Claire McCaskill knows it. You deserve a Senator who s driven to fix this mess, not one just trying to hang on to her office. And that s why I approved this message. Text: Cover All Pre-Existing Conditions PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS PROTECTIONS Politifact Missouri Headline: McCaskill's Right: Hawley's Lawsuit Would End Affordable Care Act Protections. A major talking point in Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill's reelection campaign has been a pending lawsuit by her opponent, state Attorney General Josh Hawley, to repeal parts of former President Barack Obama's health care law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. [Politifact Missouri, 9/13/18] Nicholas Bagley, University Of Michigan Law Professor: Sen. McCaskill Is Correct. The States that Brought The Texas Lawsuit Have Asked The Court To Invalidate The Entire Affordable Care Act Lock, Stock And Barrel. Sen. McCaskill is correct, said Nicholas Bagley, law professor at the University of Michigan Law School. "The states that brought the Texas lawsuit have asked the court to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act lock, stock and barrel." No consumer protections in the individual health market stipulated under the act would remain because the whole law would be gone. [Politifact Missouri, 9/13/18] Politfact Missouri: No Consumer Protections In The Individual Health Market Stipulated Under The Act Would Remain Because The Whole Law Would Be Gone. Sen. McCaskill is correct, said Nicholas Bagley, law professor at the University of Michigan Law School. "The states that brought the Texas lawsuit have asked the court to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act lock, stock and barrel." No consumer protections in the individual health market stipulated under the act would remain because the whole law would be gone. [Politifact Missouri, 9/13/18] KOMU Rated The Claim That Hawley Was Ripping Away Protections For People With Pre-Existing Conditions True. If the Texas lawsuit removes the Affordable Care Act, coverage protections for people with pre-existing conditions will go with it. Hawley's name is on page 33 of the lawsuit. Verdict: True. By trying to strike down the Affordable Care Act, Josh Hawley would be allowing insurance companies to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. [KOMU, 9/20/18] HAWLEY ALLEGED SUPPORT FOR PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS IS A BILL THAT WOULD NOT COVER PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REPUBLICANS LIKE ROY BLUNT DON T EVEN SUPPORT Hawley On GOP Pre-Existing Bill: "I Support This Legislation." "I support this legislation. We can fix the mess made by Obamacare and still cover people with pre-existing

6 should quit being partisan and support this legislation too. #MOSen" 8/24/18] COLUMN HEADLINE: GOP Claims Its Proposal Would Protect People With Preexisting Conditions. That s A Lie. [Michael Hiltzik Column, LA Times, 8/28/18] Politico: The GOP Bill Wouldn t Actually Cover The Pre- Existing Conditions It Claimed To Protect. Polling shows heightened public concern over pre-existing conditions 75 percent of voters in a recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll said it's "very important" to keep Obamacare's insurance protections and greater trust in Democrats to deal with the issue. The GOP s most direct attempt to address the insurance protections a recent Senate bill Republicans said would protect sick patients backfired spectacularly after it quickly became clear the measure wouldn t actually cover the pre-existing conditions it claimed to protect. The Trump administration's support for a lawsuit in Texas that would gut the health care law also hasn't helped the perception Republicans won't protect patients with pre-existing conditions. [Politico, 9/19/18] The Bill Would Force Insurers To Give Coverage To People With Pre-Existing Conditions, But Not Force Them To Cover The Condition Itself. Sensing their disadvantage on the issue, 10 Senate Republicans last month sponsored a bill that would force insurers, who routinely rejected patients with pre-existing conditions before Obamacare, to accept those patients. There was one major loophole, though: Insurers didn t have to cover those conditions. In other words, an insurer would have to sell a health plan to someone with cancer, but it wouldn t have to actually cover cancer treatment. [Politico, 9/19/18] Politico: In Other Words, An Insurer Would Have To Sell A Health Plan To Someone With Cancer, But It Wouldn t Have To Actually Cover Cancer Treatment. Sensing their disadvantage on the issue, 10 Senate Republicans last month sponsored a bill that would force insurers, who routinely rejected patients with pre-existing conditions before Obamacare, to accept those patients. There was one major loophole, though: Insurers didn t have to cover those conditions. In other words, an insurer would have to sell a health plan to someone with cancer, but it wouldn t have to actually cover cancer treatment. [Politico, 9/19/18] GOP Sen. Roy Blunt On GOP Pre-Existing Conditions Bill: That Bill Is Not Going Anywhere. I Am Not Supportive Of It. Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt on GOP Senate pre-existing conditions bill, That bill is not going anywhere. I am not supportive of it. #RoyBlunt #MOSEN #JoshHawley #ClaireMcCaskill #kmbc

7 9/11/18] Paid for by Josh Hawley for Senate. Approved by Josh Hawley. HAWLEY HAS TAKEN TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FROM INSURANCE COMPANIES Open Secrets Calculated That Hawley Received $52,500 From Insurance Companies. According to OpenSecrets, Hawley has received $52,500 from insurance companies. [OpenSecrets, Accessed 9/19/18] The National Institute On Money In Politics Calculated That Hawley Received At Least $41,500 From Insurance Companies. According to the National Institute on Money in Politics, Hawley has received at least $41,500 from insurance companies. [National Institute on Money in Politics, Accessed 9/19/18] Hawley Ranks 8 th Among Senate Candidates For Insurance Donations. [OpenSecrets, Accessed 9/19/18]