GOP Senators Interested in Shoring up Policy Trump Railed Against for Years
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Some Republican senators are started to eye an extension to the premium tax credit, a key provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), set to expire at the end of the year, according to a new report.
Newsweek has reached out to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, and House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, for comment via email.
Why It Matters
The premium tax credit, which helps lower-income Americans purchase health care in the ACA marketplaces, is set to expire at the end of 2025 if Congress does not act. This could pose a problem in messaging for Republicans, who have generally opposed the ACA, as they face some challenges ahead of the 2026 midterms, when they are hoping to thwart losses that often come with the first midterms under a new administration.
If Congress does not extend the premium tax credit, 4.1 million Americans would lose their health insurance, according to a report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released in June.
President Donald Trump and his supporters have generally opposed the ACA, also known as Obamacare, and have pushed for its repeal. During his first administration, Trump almost repealed the health care law, but was famously rebuffed by Republican Arizona Senator John McCain voting against the administration.
Trump criticized the tax credit in a 2012 post to X, writing Obamacare's "tax credit is underperforming by over 95% creating an even bigger cost to the debt."
Polling suggests the ACA has remained popular, with a June KFF poll finding that 66 percent of all Americans support it.
President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign event on August 29, 2024 in Potterville, Michigan.
President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign event on August 29, 2024 in Potterville, Michigan.What To Know
A handful of Republican senators have expressed an openness to extending the premium tax credit, according to remarks in Punchbowl News.
North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis, who recently voted against Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" due to concerns about Medicaid cuts, told the publication it would be a "perfect opportunity for us to move past the reconciliation process, which is clearly a partisan exercise."
Tillis has already announced he won't run for reelection in 2026, making North Carolina a top target for Democrats in trying to slim the 53-47 GOP majority in the upper chamber.
Senators Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, both of Alaska, expressed support for bipartisan talks to extend the credit, while Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri said Republicans must do something to "allow people to afford health care."
"The cost of insurance on the exchanges is just astronomical. That's why so many people are on Medicaid," he said.
Thune told the publication that leadership is having conversations about how to deal with the expiration, but leaders have not said for sure whether they support the extension.
The debate about whether to extend the premium tax credit is "sure to be fierce and complicated," Michael Sparer, chair of Columbia University's Department of Health Policy and Management, told Newsweek.
"That this vote will be close is not a surprise. Most Republicans have long opposed the expanded credits but many in the party also worry about the political backlash that might well follow a failure to extend the credits," he said.
Medicaid cuts in the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" further complicate the policy battle, though Republicans "delayed" the impact of those cuts "after the midterm elections in an effort to reduce the political backlash," according to Sparer.
Republicans will hope to use the cuts in publicly funded insurance benefits to "scale back the nation's safety net as part of an effort to reduce the size of the federal government while also enabling their desired tax cuts," he said. Those efforts could, however,, lead to millions losing coverage, he said.
Congressional Republicans have mostly opposed the ACA and sought to repeal it during Trump's first term, with those efforts ultimately being blocked by GOP Senators Murkowski, McCain and Susan Collins. Trump has frequently criticized the ACA and the premium tax credit over the years.
Trump's plan to replace the ACA would have included the end of the program's premium tax credits, replacing it with a new tax deduction based on age.
The report comes just one day after Trump pollsters Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward indicated Republicans in swing districts could benefit from supporting the extension ahead of the midterms. Historically, the party that controls the White House loses seats in the midterms, and their latest poll suggested Democrats have an early advantage against the GOP in swing districts.
What People Are Saying
Pollsters Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward wrote in a polling memo: "Republicans can position themselves ahead of Democrats in these districts by extending the premium tax credit and using the individual market as a landing spot for working age adults on Medicaid."
Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, told Punchbowl News: "I'll work with anybody, but I don't see anything resembling that, and what I do see is all over the political rags is they're already planning the second reconciliation partisan bill."
A Peterson-KFF report from June said: "The enhanced premium tax credits are now set to expire at the end of 2025. Unless the premium tax credits are extended, consumers can expect increases in both the net premium payments and gross premiums."
What Happens Next
Health care will likely remain a key issue in the midterms, particularly following Medicaid cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Whether GOP leadership decides to extend the premium tax credits remains to be seen at this point.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Does JOST Werke SE (ETR:JST) Create Value For Shareholders?
While some investors are already well versed in financial metrics (hat tip), this article is for those who would like to learn about Return On Equity (ROE) and why it is important. By way of learning-by-doing, we'll look at ROE to gain a better understanding of JOST Werke SE (ETR:JST). ROE or return on equity is a useful tool to assess how effectively a company can generate returns on the investment it received from its shareholders. Simply put, it is used to assess the profitability of a company in relation to its equity capital. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. How Is ROE Calculated? The formula for return on equity is: Return on Equity = Net Profit (from continuing operations) ÷ Shareholders' Equity So, based on the above formula, the ROE for JOST Werke is: 11% = €46m ÷ €406m (Based on the trailing twelve months to March 2025). The 'return' refers to a company's earnings over the last year. Another way to think of that is that for every €1 worth of equity, the company was able to earn €0.11 in profit. See our latest analysis for JOST Werke Does JOST Werke Have A Good Return On Equity? By comparing a company's ROE with its industry average, we can get a quick measure of how good it is. Importantly, this is far from a perfect measure, because companies differ significantly within the same industry classification. If you look at the image below, you can see JOST Werke has a similar ROE to the average in the Machinery industry classification (10%). That isn't amazing, but it is respectable. Even if the ROE is respectable when compared to the industry, its worth checking if the firm's ROE is being aided by high debt levels. If a company takes on too much debt, it is at higher risk of defaulting on interest payments. Our risks dashboardshould have the 3 risks we have identified for JOST Werke. Why You Should Consider Debt When Looking At ROE Companies usually need to invest money to grow their profits. That cash can come from issuing shares, retained earnings, or debt. In the first two cases, the ROE will capture this use of capital to grow. In the latter case, the debt required for growth will boost returns, but will not impact the shareholders' equity. In this manner the use of debt will boost ROE, even though the core economics of the business stay the same. JOST Werke's Debt And Its 11% ROE JOST Werke clearly uses a high amount of debt to boost returns, as it has a debt to equity ratio of 1.52. With a fairly low ROE, and significant use of debt, it's hard to get excited about this business at the moment. Debt does bring extra risk, so it's only really worthwhile when a company generates some decent returns from it. Summary Return on equity is one way we can compare its business quality of different companies. A company that can achieve a high return on equity without debt could be considered a high quality business. If two companies have around the same level of debt to equity, and one has a higher ROE, I'd generally prefer the one with higher ROE. Having said that, while ROE is a useful indicator of business quality, you'll have to look at a whole range of factors to determine the right price to buy a stock. It is important to consider other factors, such as future profit growth -- and how much investment is required going forward. So I think it may be worth checking this free report on analyst forecasts for the company. If you would prefer check out another company -- one with potentially superior financials -- then do not miss this free list of interesting companies, that have HIGH return on equity and low debt. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Boston Globe
13 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
New Hampshire is expanding school choice. Will Massachusetts follow?
Advertisement This surge in school choice is part of a broader national trend. Enrollment in such programs has more than doubled since 2020 — from roughly 540,000 to more than Massachusetts, home to some of the nation's strongest private, parochial, charter, and vocational-technical schools, is increasingly being left behind, politically unwilling and legally constrained from offering families access to private options. The catalyst for this wave of private options was the US Supreme Court's 2020 decision in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue. The court Advertisement Her story resonated nationwide, particularly during the pandemic. The move to online learning by public schools, union resistance to returning students to the classroom, and a seeming disregard for students' mental health and learning loss drove many families toward private and homeschool options. Even in Massachusetts, Massachusetts may remain among the top-performing states nationally, but that status masks a troubling decline. On the National Assessment of Educational Progress (the nation's report card), average eighth-grade The pandemic and student distraction due to cellphones are partially to blame, but the decline is Clearly there is a hunger for options other than traditional public school. Advertisement New Hampshire's latest choice expansion is relevant to Massachusetts because, in addition to the two states' cultural and demographic similarities, they post nearly identical academic performance. On the 2024 NAEP, New Hampshire eighth-graders scored averages of 280 in As student performance declines, Massachusetts lawmakers remain committed to a top-down, monopolistic education system. They refuse to consider private school choice, hiding behind 19th-century anti-Catholic amendments in the state constitution that prohibit public funds from flowing to religious schools, even indirectly. At the same time, lawmakers have stood by as the pillars of the Commonwealth's landmark 1993 education reforms — strong academic standards, accountability through testing, and choice through charter schools — have steadily eroded. New Hampshire is taking a more pragmatic approach: It is steadily expanding school choice with thoughtful fiscal safeguards and a clear focus on helping the students most in need. As a result, many more New Hampshire parents will now be able to narrow class- and race-based achievement gaps — whether through public or private schools, the small learning groups called The recently passed 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' President Trump's massive tax and spending plan, enacts the first national school choice program, offering scholarships funded through tax credits to all but the wealthiest families. Starting in 2027, taxpayers nationwide will be able to redirect up to $1,700 in federal taxes to approved scholarship organizations. Advertisement The program could benefit many of the 120,000 families in Massachusetts paying a private school tuition, or using homeschool and microschool options, which grew enormously during the pandemic. Expanding its appeal further, the program benefits families paying for after-school supplemental learning, including tutoring. The catch? States must opt in. For now, Massachusetts officials say they are For the dozens of states with school choice programs, including New Hampshire, the pathway forward is clear: Private school choice has broad public support and expands equality of educational opportunity. What will Massachusetts do?
CNBC
14 minutes ago
- CNBC
U.S. firms scramble to secure rare-earth magnets — imports from China surge 660%
China's exports of rare-earth magnets to the United States in June surged more than seven times from the prior month, as American firms clamor to get hold of the critical elements following a preliminary Sino-U.S. trade deal. In April, Beijing placed restrictions on several critical magnets, used in advanced tech such as electric vehicles, wind turbines and MRI machines, requiring firms to receive licenses for export. The move was seen as retaliation against U.S. President Donald Trump's steep tariffs on China. Beijing has a stranglehold on the production of rare-earth magnets, with an estimated 90% of the market, as well as a similar hold on the refining of rare-earth elements, which are used to make magnets. The U.S. received about 353 metric tons of rare-earth permanent magnets in June, up 660% from the previous month, data released by the General Administration of Customs showed, though the exports were about half that from June last year. The U.S. was the second-largest destination for China's rare-earth magnets, behind Germany, as it relies heavily on their imports for its large manufacturing sector, particularly in automotive, electronics, and renewable energy. In total, China exported 3,188 metric tons of rare earth permanent magnets globally last month, up nearly 160% from May, but 38% lower compared with the same period last year. The growth in exports came after Washington and Beijing agreed last month on a trade framework that included easing controls on Chinese rare-earth exports as well as a rollback of some American tech restrictions for shipments to China. AI behemoth Nvidia said last week it was planning to resume shipments of its H20 AI chips to China, after the exports were restricted in April. Last month, controls on American AI chip software companies' business in China had also been rolled back. Chinese rare-earth magnet producers started announcing the approval of export licenses last month. If exports continue to increase, it will be of great benefit to companies that have been suffering from shortages of magnets due to the lengthy time required to secure export licenses. For example, several European auto-parts suppliers were forced to halt production in recent months. The magnet shortages had also hit emerging industries such as humanoid robotics. In April, Elon Musk said production of Tesla's Optimus humanoid robots had been disrupted. China's controls on its rare-earths sector have prompted some global governments to reexamine their rare-earth supply chains and search for ways to support domestic mining of the minerals. However, experts say that setting up alternatives to China's rare-earth magnet supply chain could take years, as it requires an intricate process of rare-earth element refining and separation. "The separation process is quite complex, and China has a lot of advantages in this after putting in decades of research into the processes," Yue Wang, a senior consultant of rare earths at Wood Mackenzie, told CNBC last month. One way that the U.S. has been trying to compensate for lack of rare-earth magnets is through increased recycling. Apple and miner MP Materials announced a $500 million deal last week for the development of a recycling facility that will reinforce the iPhone maker's U.S. magnet supply chain. Peter Alexander from financial consultancy Z-ben Advisors said that Washington's latest concessions on tech restrictions were a reflection of just how much leverage China has in its trade relationship with the United States, speaking on CNBC's "China Connection" on Monday.
