Reactions to the Republicans' Proposed Tweaks to the ACA ("Obamacare")

I'm still looking for a comprehensive review, but with such an important piece of legislation, it feels necessary to give some kind of analysis, even if it's preliminary. Before that, though, one thing screams for attention: I don't think I've ever seen a bill that's as hated by everyone. I have yet to see a single mostly-positive review of the proposed bill, from anyone across the political spectrum. This bill's far from a "compromise", where people may be unhappy about a few particulars but willing to live with it overall.

As for its effects, some seem quite likely with even a quick analysis:

Millions Risk Losing Health Insurance in Republican Plan, Analysts Say, Abby Goodnough, Reed Abelson, NYT

Millions of people who get private health coverage through the Affordable Care Act would be at risk of losing it under the replacement legislation proposed by House Republicans, analysts said Tuesday, with Americans in their 50s and 60s especially likely to find coverage unaffordable.

Starting in 2020, the plan would do away with the current system of providing premium subsidies based on people’s income and the cost of insurance where they live. Instead, it would provide tax credits of $2,000 to $4,000 per year based on their age.


Other people likely to be hurt under the new plan are those in areas where the cost of coverage is high. Subsidies are now pegged to the cost of a plan within a specific market, but the tax credits in the Republican plan are the same whether you live in Alaska or Minnesota...

The GOP health bill doesn’t know what problem it’s trying to solve, Ezra Klein, Vox

4. Adverse selection seems like a huge problem in this plan. The individual mandate is gone, healthy people can buy coverage at any time with only a 30 percent penalty, and eliminating actuarial values makes it simpler for insurers to pull the young and healthy away from older and sick. Death spirals seem very likely in weak markets. Republicans will fully own those death spirals.
5. The plan is strikingly regressive compared to the Affordable Care Act. Cynthia Cox estimates that a 40-year-old making 160 percent of the poverty line would get $4,143 in subsidies under the ACA, but only $3,000 under the GOP plan. By contrast, a 40-year-old making $75,000 would get nothing under the ACA, but $3,000 under the GOP plan.

And a more in-depth analysis (details on the method for estimating cost in the article): Analysis: GOP plan to cost Obamacare enrollees $1,542 more a year, David Cutler, Vox

We’re presenting an analysis here of the net financial impact of the Republican bill on premiums, after tax credits, plus cost-sharing. We estimate that the bill would increase costs for the average enrollee by $1,542, for the year, if the bill were in effect today. In 2020, the bill would increase costs for the average enrollee by $2,409.
We provide the figure for 2020 because that’s when the Republican tax credits would go into effect; we provide a figure for this year so that readers can get a sense of how the plan might affect their situation were it implemented today. Importantly, the gap between costs under the ACA and under the Republican bill would grow over time.
In general, the impact of the Republican bill would be particularly severe for older individuals, ages 55 to 64. Their costs would increase by $5,269 if the bill went into effect today and by $6,971 in 2020. Individuals with income below 250 percent of the federal poverty line would see their costs increase by $2,945 today and by $4,061 in 2020.