Boeing is now walking back claims that it’s changing its health care plan in response to the Affordable Care Act, telling reporters that it was considering altering its plans before reform became law. Late last week, the company had written a letter to employees blaming “the newly enacted health care reform legislation” — specifically the excise tax on high cost plans that does not go into effect until 2018 — [for] adding cost pressure.” The company told its nonunion employees they will pay a 10 percent coinsurance and higher deductibles next year, attributing the changes to competition, rising costs in health care, and some provisions from the Affordable Care Act.

But yesterday, a Boeing spokeswoman said: “Yes, we are making health care changes. If you would’ve asked me if we would’ve made these changes without the enactment of the law, I would’ve said yes“:

“We’re just out of line with market. We’ve been contemplating what can we do to reduce costs,” Forte said. “It came down to, we’ve got to pass some of these costs down to our employees.”

Forte said Boeing was “keeping an eye” on the new health care law, which in 2018 would impose a significant tax on “Cadillac” health plans in 2018. However she said the federal changes were not the main reasons for Boeing’s move.

Indeed, Boeing has continued to offer a comparatively generous insurance plan since 1999. For instance, the average paycheck contribution for Boeing employees for health care is $13 per month per individual and $39 per month per family, while employees at similar companies pay $60 per individual and $210 per family.

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius echoed the sentiment during a news conference this afternoon, saying that “a number of companies and my guess is employers will cite this bill with some specificity for whatever premium increase they are suggesting. But since the first of the consumer protections became effective, less than a month ago and since the trend of lines of health insurance plans cost increases have been building over time, year after year, I think that…until there is some underling data to make that connection, it’s kind of hard to justify the kind of rate increase or a massive cost shift based on a new law. ”

By 2018 some companies offering benefits beyond threshold of the new excise tax will have to start offering less generous benefits if they want to avoid paying the new fee. But reformers believe that before then, companies and employees will be able to switch into cheaper, but still comprehensive insurance plans, thus reducing overall health care spending.

The Washington Independent’s Jesse Zwick watched Gov. Joe Manchin’s (D-WV) many flip flops during yesterday’s West Virginia Senate debate and wondered “What liberal views does Manchin still hold, and what, if anything, could he be relied upon to vote for in the Senate?” — something health care advocates and reporters have wondered for quite some time now. Because if Manchin has changed his views on tax cuts and cap and trade, he’s done a 360 and back again on the Affordable Care Act. Consider the following:

Supported parts of ACA during debate: “I’m not prepared to scrap the entire bill, there are parts that need changed,” he said, “but let me tell you, I’m not prepared to tell your child who had a pre-existing condition, that he or she can’t be covered. There’s a lot of good in the bill that basically Democrats and Republicans agree with.” [West Virginia Public Broadcasting, 10/18/2010]

Supported parts of ACA in radio ad: “One out of every four West Virginians under the age of 65 suffers from a pre-existing medical condition such as heart disease, cancer or asthma,” the narrator says in the new radio spot. The ad then switches to a recording of Raese saying, “I don’t believe that insurance companies be mandated to handle pre-existing conditions.” [The Hill, 10/18/2010]

Shot a hole through ACA in TV ad: “I’ll take on Washington and this administration to get the federal government off of our backs and out of our pockets,” Manchin says in the TV spot. “I’ll cut federal spending, and I’ll repeal the bad parts of ObamaCare.” [CNN, 10/11/2010]

Would repeal all of ACA: I still and have always been in support of health reform. If anybody believes that a child should be left off of their parents and also pre-existing conditions and small businesses and all those things should go uninsured, something is wrong in America. Now with that, the president’s plan — ‘Obamacare,’ as it’s been called — is far too reaching. It’s overreaching. It needs to have a lot of it repealed. But you can fix that. If you can’t fix that, repeal the whole thing. [Fox News, 10/11/2010]

Would repeal parts of ACA: “The Governor felt it was important to move the ball forward on healthcare reform and that something had to be done to help more working people obtain health insurance, so he said at the time that he would vote to do that. However, as more details have come out about what was included in the final version of the healthcare reform bill, there are several sections that he would now vote to repeal, including any provisions that allow for the funding of abortions and the provisions that are cumbersome to small businesses. He also believes people’s personal responsibility and healthcare choices should not be taken away by overreaching regulations. So knowing what he knows now, he would have fought for changes to the final version of the bill before voting and he would not have voted for it in its current form.” [Wonk Room, 9/28/2010]

Would have vote for ACA: “I’d be for [the Affordable Care Act]. I think you’ve got to move the ball. Ted is exactly right. You have to move this ball forward right wrong or indifferent. I have never, since I’ve been in the legislative process and since I’ve been governor, I’ve never gotten a perfect bill. I’ve never gotten a bill exactly the way I’ve wanted it….Let’s try, let’s try to make this. Bring us all in. Let’s make it work.” [National Governors Association, 3/17/2010]

Interestingly, Manchin — who is now leading his race in West Virginia — is no longer answering report queries about this exact position on the law.

Outgoing Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) led the fight against the Affordable Care Act in the Senate, but during an appearance on Fox Business last night, Gregg — who has proposed a health bill that’s similar to what Democrats passed in March — disagreed with the Republican strategy of repealing and replacing the law. “Giving the Democrats another shot at health care is like giving an axe murderer another shot with an ax,” Gregg began before endorsing some of the Medicare cuts in the bill and conceding that repealing the law could allow insurers to continue increasing premiums:

CAVUTO: Well, do you worry senator that your party is going to make things worse or maybe provide an opportunity for insurance companies to keep raising premiums because you want to stave the law or delay some of its implementation? And in that gap insurance companies can continue hike, hike, hike, hike!

GREGG: Well, that would be unfortunate if that happened and I’m not going to say that you wouldn’t end up with some gaming of the system that way. But the simple fact is that the plan as structured today isn’t going to work except to push push us into a situation where the government gets expand by 2.5 trillion dollars — 2.5 trillion dollars over the next ten years.

CAVUTO: Would you repeal it or as John Boehner has indicated, starve it?

GREGG: I don’t think starving or repeal is probably the best approach here.

CAVUTO: What would you do?

GREGG: You basically go in and you restructure it. What we did in this proposal, which actually made some sense, was that we restructured the Medicare system in a way that saved half trillion to a trillion dollars for Medicare, out of Medicare. But we took all of that money and we created a brand new entitlement which we under-funded.

Watch it:

As The Hill notes, Gregg has previously supported the GOP’s repeal and replace strategy. “Our view is, you repeal and replace this bill,” Gregg said on CNN in March. “You replace it with better law and better approaches towards healthcare.” He also said on CNBC as recently as last month that using the budget reconciliation process to repeal major parts of healthcare reform were an option, too.

The House GOP has released a ‘Pledge’ that calls for repealing the entire health law, but the party hasn’t always backed this approach. In January, young guns Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) told Politico’s Mike Allen that Republicans “WILL NOT campaign for full health care repeal, but will demand partial repeal, including mandates for health coverage.” More recently, Republicans have tried to temper expectations for what they will be able to achieve if they do win back the House. (H/T: The Hill’s Michael O’Brien)