FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Sept. 13, 2018
Setting the Record Straight on McCaskill’s Latest Ad
COLUMBIA, Mo. – Senator Claire McCaskill’s new ad falsely accuses Attorney General Josh Hawley of wanting to take away health care coverage for Missourians with pre-existing conditions. In addition to reiterating the need to cover these individuals in his recent op-ed in the Springfield News-Leader, Hawley issued the following statement:
“The Texas v. Azar lawsuit is about the individual mandate and Obamacare. It’s unconstitutional for the government to force us to buy something we don’t want,” said Attorney General Hawley. “Senator McCaskill would have you believe that the only way to cover pre-existing conditions is to keep all the failures of Obamacare. That’s simply not true. I’m committed to covering those with pre-existing conditions, and we don’t have to break the Constitution to do it.”
Hawley for Senate spokesperson Kelli Ford said, “Josh Hawley has always supported covering those with pre-existing conditions and Senator McCaskill knows it. Senator McCaskill twists the facts to distract Missourians from her record of casting the deciding vote for Obamacare. She should not push policies that hold sick people with pre-existing conditions hostage to protect Obama’s legacy.”
McCASKILL CLAIM VS. FACT
CLAIM: Unfortunately, Josh Hawley Filed A Lawsuit Letting The Insurance Industries Deny Coverage For Those With Pre-Existing Conditions.
FACT: Josh Hawley Has Repeatedly Said He Wants To Protect Health Care Coverage For Individuals With Pre-Existing Conditions.
- “Insurance companies should be required to cover folks with preexisting conditions, and also to allow kids to stay on their parents’ insurance up to age 26,’ Hawley said.” (Roll Call, 6/12/18)
- “‘[McCaskill] is responsible for the fact that Missouri families can’t afford their healthcare bills,” Hawley said. “… She insists we keep Obamacare if we want to keep pre-existing coverage. I think we need to cover pre-existing conditions and get rid of Obamacare. Why is she putting partisanship first?” (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 7/19/18)
- “[Hawley] argues that pre-existing conditions protections could be preserved without the Affordable Care Act.” (New York Times, 8/1/18)
- Hawley in op-ed: “Insurers should also be required to cover individuals with pre-existing conditions and young people on their parents’ insurance, up to age 26.” (Springfield News-Leader, 8/20/18)
FACT: The Lawsuit Attorney General Hawley Signed Onto Is About The Individual Mandate of Obamacare.
- “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.” (Press Release: Attorney General Josh Hawley, 2/26/18)
- Texas V. Azar Argues That The ACA Is Unconstitutional Now That The Individual Mandate Penalty Has Been Struck Down. “In summary, they argue that the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate as a tax. Now that Congress eliminated the individual mandate penalty beginning in 2019, the mandate is no longer enforceable as a tax and thus is no longer valid. They further argue that the entirety of the ACA relies on the mandate and, without the penalty, the entirety of the ACA is also unconstitutional.” (Health Affairs, 2/28/18)
FACT: The Individual Mandate Is A Way Into Single-Payer Healthcare. Claire McCaskill Supports It.
McCaskill Supports ObamaCare’s Individual Mandate
- In December 2017, McCaskill Voted Against The Final Tax Reform Bill, Which Repealed ObamaCare’s Individual Mandate. (H.R. 1, Roll Call Vote #323: Passed 51-48, 12/20/17, McCaskill Voted Nay)
- In March 2010, McCaskill Voted To Kill An Amendment That Would Have Removed The Individual Mandate From ObamaCare. “Baucus, D-Mont., motion to table (kill) the Ensign, R-Nev. amendment no. 3710 that would repeal provisions of the 2010 health care overhaul law that provide for IRS penalties for certain taxpayers that do not obtain basic health insurance coverage.” (H.R. 4872, Roll Call Vote #101: Motion To Table Agreed To 58-40, 3/25/10, McCaskill Voted Yea; CQ Summary, Accessed 1/13/16)
In July 2017, McCaskill Refused To Oppose An Amendment To Implement A $32 Trillion Government-Run, Single-Payer Health Insurance System In The U.S.
- In July 2017, McCaskill Voted Present On An Amendment To Implement A Government-Run, Single-Payer (Medicare For All) Health Care System In The U.S. “McConnell, R-Ky., for Daines, R-Mont., amendment no. 340, as modified, to McConnell substitute amendment no. 267, that would establish a universal Medicare program that would cover all people living in the United States. The amendment would require that the program to offer various health and dental benefits and would provide mandatory funding to the program through multiple new taxes.” (S. Amdt. 340 To S. Amdt. 267 To H.R. 1628, Roll Call Vote #173: Amendment Rejected 0-57, 7/27/17, McCaskill Voted Present; CQ Summary, Accessed 7/27/17)
- “Medicare For All” And “Single-Payer” Are Interchangeable. “Also called ‘single-payer’ over the years, ‘Medicare for all’ reflects a longtime wish among liberals for a government-run system that covers all Americans. With Republicans in charge of Congress and the White House, it has little chance.” (“‘Medicare For All’ Would Cost $32.6 Trillion Over 10 Years, Study Says,” Bloomberg, 7/30/18)
- Bloomberg: “‘Medicare For All’ Would Cost $32.6 Trillion Over 10 Years, Study Says” (“‘Medicare For All’ Would Cost $32.6 Trillion Over 10 Years, Study Says,” Bloomberg, 7/30/18)
McCaskill Said She Would Be Open To Considering A Single-Payer System.
- McCASKILL: “And if we can get those health care costs down through this comparison shopping. And if we can figure out a way to make sure that comparison-shopping doesn’t go away with a single-payer system, that we don’t lose the value of competition, then I think we could consider it. In the meantime, what I think that we should do is put what is a quasi-public option on the exchanges. People between the ages of 55 and 65 are the people that need health insurance the most, and in the Republican bills are going to pay the most.” (Sen. Claire McCaskill, Remarks At A Town Hall Meeting In Monroe City, MO, 7/6/17) Min. 21:05-21:38
CLAIM: The Insurance Companies Already Have Too Many Senators On Their Side.
FACT: Claire McCaskill Is The #2 Recipient In The Entire Senate Of Campaign Contributions From The Insurance Industry.
- During The 2018 Election Cycle, McCaskill Is The #2 Recipient Of Campaign Contributions From The Insurance Industry In The Senate. (Center For Responsive Politics, Accessed 9/13/18)
