Sign up for our daily briefing
Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.
Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday
Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday
Denver news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver
Des Moines news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines
Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities
Tampa Bay news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay
Charlotte news in your inbox
Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
House Republicans were excited yesterday about the new "risk-sharing" program they're adding to Trumpcare, but Bloomberg reports that an actuarial analysis revealed it would require some things Republicans don't usually like.
The analysis, released today by Milliman, shows that the program would only work if:
- It spent a lot more than the $15 billion Republicans want to spend, and:
- If it uses government-set payment rates for doctors and hospitals.
- If it doesn't do either of those things, it wouldn't reduce health insurance premiums, which is the whole point of the program.
Why it matters: It's a sign of how quickly the idea was rushed out to show progress in the Trumpcare talks. The GOP sponsors talked up the analysis yesterday as proof that their idea would work, but it's now clear that the study didn't really give them the endorsement they wanted.