Tweets began ear­ly after the CBO and JCT pub­lished their joint find­ings about the long term effects of the AHCA as pro­posed by the House (the Sen­ate has yet to con­jure up a vision).  They do say that there will be sav­ings (most­ly due to changes in sub­si­dies) of $32 bil­lion net.  The tax cred­its will off­set some of the “loss­es” expect­ed in cov­er­age but over­all they are deal­ing with some huge num­bers — $1.11 tril­lion in reduced direct spend­ing (tax sav­ings and a change in Med­ic­aid) vs. a rev­enue reduc­tion (tax cuts) of $992 bil­lion.  What if their cal­cu­la­tions are off just a few per­cent­age points?

The non­group mar­ket is expect­ed to remain sta­ble, even in those states that request waivers from mar­ket regulations…until 2020, after which they expect some insta­bil­i­ty in that mar­ket.  There are still a lot of assump­tions, includ­ing the idea that younger peo­ple will buy insurance

more often (with­out a man­date?) and that many states would make mod­er­ate changes to mar­ket reg­u­la­tions.  The biggest poten­tial prob­lem, and again sub­ject to a lot of math with which many already dis­agree, is that 23 mil­lion more Amer­i­cans would be unin­sured under the AHCA.