U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski
Lisa MurkowskiGOP govs: ObamaCare repeal bill shifts 'significant' costs to states GOP faces dilemma over ObamaCare tax credits in red states Alaska’s Murkowski is problematic for the GOP-held Senate on ObamaCare repeal MORE (R-Alaska) is an overt problem for passing sound, governmental policy for her fellow colleagues in the Senate GOP caucus.
With all due respect to the good senator, Murkowski doesn’t resemble a Republican lawmaker working for smaller government and pro-liberty solutions for her constituents.
Jeff SessionsVan Jones and and Ryan P. Haygood: Trump is wrong on criminal justice THE MEMO: GOP breaks from Trump in 'wiretap' furor Overnight Finance: Inside Trump's first budget | Reaction from Congress | Budget panel advances ObamaCare repeal | Debt ceiling returns MORE claimed that no legal pot crackdown is “imminent” but still near.
Her moves are clearly in line with the opposing party and don’t support the overarching goals of the national GOP platforms.
Republicans took the presidency and both chambers of the federal Congress on three major campaign promises. The first promise is to reform the regulatory state, the second is to promote more state’s rights, and the final and most controversial is to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare.
In regards to the debate on repealing the wide-ranging healthcare reform bill former President Barack Obama
Barack ObamaHouse Intel Committee 'satisfied' with info DOJ gave in wiretapping probe DOJ sends documents related to Trump wiretap claim to House panel Trump: Napolitano ‘a very talented legal mind’ MORE signed into law in 2010, Sen. Murkowski was a "no" vote on the final procedural actions on the ObamaCare legislation. Since then, though, the stance of Murkowski has moved away from the majority of her colleagues in the Senate to a stance that is more in line with maintaining the existence of the healthcare reform in the law books.
But now, as Congress faces a battle on how to repeal ObamaCare, the House Speaker, Paul Ryan
Paul RyanFreedom Caucus leader: Despite changes, healthcare bill doesn't have the votes The Hill's 12:30 Report Dems wonder: Can GOP even pass a budget? MORE, and his leadership team have presented the American Health Care Act as the quintessential proposal to undo the former administration's benchmark healthcare policy. Already, Murkowsi has voiced preliminary opposition while her colleague, Sen. Dan Sullivan, has voiced concerns for any sort of repeal coming from the House.
Regardless, the proposal that should be noteworthy and that could resonate a little better with, at least, a part of the Alaska Congressional delegation is the ObamaCare replacement plan from House conservatives.
Differing from House leadership’s American Health Care Act, Mark Sanford (South Carolina) and his fellow members of the House Freedom Caucus are backing a proposal that the delegation from Alaska should support. Sen. Rand Paul
Rand PaulFreedom Caucus leader: Despite changes, healthcare bill doesn't have the votes Peggy Noonan: Trump should ally with Dems on healthcare Sen. Susan Collins comes out against House GOP healthcare bill MORE of Kentucky serves as the legislation’s prime sponsor in the Senate.
The proposal is a re-introduction of an ObamaCare repeal that received unanimous Republican support in 2015. Dubbed the ObamaCare Replacement Act, the proposal creates a free-market solution that relies on the proven support of private healthcare solutions.
The legislation empowers more consumer oriented choice in healthcare services, among all things. And, to address concerns of Murkowski’s concerns of defunding Planned Parenthood, the legislation fits perfect to a solution that empowers healthcare consumers to purchase private health plans at lower prices that still cover elective abortion services, minus the cost to taxpayers. Health savings accounts under this proposal would not cover these elective services, based on a new set of tax credits and deductions that would be created.
Essentially, the reforms on health savings accounts would allow all premiums and expanded preventive treatments to be covered and provide a tax credit that counts up $5,000 per taxpayer to fund health plans. The proposal would also support purchasing of healthcare across stateliness by removing barriers limiting the ability of a competitive marketplace to grow.
Yet, Murkowski and her congressional colleagues need to come to the realization that the sitting Republican-held federal government will end ObamaCare policy as we know it.
So, what does she have to lose? Murkowski should support free-market solutions that promote healthcare delivery to all people, regardless of socio-economic positioning and personal health. ObamaCare has gotten too expensive to support for many states, even Alaska. Despite the fact that Gov. Bill Walker voiced his concern to Congress on finding a balanced approach to repeal actions, the recommendations and the proposal coming from Sen. Paul and his House colleagues should serve as such things.
Low-income individuals in impoverished regions in states across the Union can't wait any longer. If Murkowski sabotages the repeal of the very law she voted against, initially, she will have to account for her actions in 2022.
Michael McGrady is the executive director of McGrady Policy Research; much of his analysis on free-market healthcare reform, foreign policy and regulation have been published nationwide. Follow him on Twitter @mikemcgrady2.
The views of contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.
