Like the proverbial dog who just caught the car he's been chasing, Republicans are about to gain control of ObamaCare's fate, but with no clear idea what to do with it — or how to bury it.

The GOP says that it will take several years to put what would inevitably be called TrumpCare in place, but they don't want the responsibility for overseeing and enforcing ObamaCare — individual mandate and all — in the interim.

Republicans have settled on what might be called a hurry-up-and-wait solution to this awkward spot they're in: Repeal ObamaCare as soon as January but wait to sunset most of its provisions until perhaps 2020. Yet a range of policy experts, including some Republicans, and health care industry players have warned that repealing the law without simultaneously replacing it could blow up the individual insurance market operating under ObamaCare rules.

After a repeal vote, even if the GOP were to keep the individual mandate, relatively young and healthy people may be even less likely to sign up for coverage. Under such conditions, health insurers which have already grown weary of taking it on the chin in the ObamaCare exchanges might not stick around. UnitedHealth (UNH), Aetna (AET) and Humana (HUM) already are exiting most of the ObamaCare markets where they did business in 2016. Anthem (ANTM) has warned that it might do the same.

The risk is that large swathes of the country could find themselves with zero individual market insurers in 2018. That would be an emergency, which might prompt the government to try and fill those gaps by essentially bribing insurers to offer coverage or perhaps temporarily removing income limits for Medicaid.

IBD'S TAKE: Read why UnitedHealth is fast becoming the Amazon of health care and why it isn't sweating forthcoming policy changes under Donald Trump.

There are two apparent motivating factors behind the GOP repeal-now strategy: 1) Republicans can claim to have done something substantive for those who oppose the law; and 2) They can justify a vote to cut some ObamaCare taxes immediately, including a 3.8% tax on investment income.

With a 52-48 majority, Republicans would need to keep all but two senators on board to repeal ObamaCare provisions through a procedure known as reconciliation that is limited to tax and spending measures. That means many of ObamaCare's key provisions, such as those guaranteeing coverage to everyone at a price unrelated to health status, would stay in place until there's a bipartisan consensus to get rid of them.

At least two Republicans, Susan Collins of Maine and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, have said the GOP should have a replacement plan lined up before repeal, so there's some possibility that a repeal of ObamaCare's major tax and spending provisions won't make it to Donald Trump's desk.

Repealing the Medicaid expansion, which provided coverage up to 138% of the poverty level, would be more straightforward to do through reconciliation. The GOP has long sought to deliver Medicaid funding to states in the form of block grants that provide greater flexibility but which are likely to increase at a rate below health care inflation to curb government spending.

Hospitals were already in a bad place before the election, but the outlook is even bleaker now. IBD's Medical-Hospitals industry group is ranked No. 195 out of 197 based on price performance, trailed only by gold and solar power.

Outright appeal of the Affordable Care Act's Medicaid expansion and individual market subsidies could cost hospitals $400 billion in revenue and $165.8 billion in income over the coming decade, an analysis for the Federation of American Hospitals and American Hospital Association found.

Yet Mizuho analyst Sheryl Skolnick, who downgraded Tenet Healthcare (THC) to underperform on Nov. 21, has warned of further downside for hospitals from Medicaid block grants that push states from traditional fee-for-service Medicaid into adopting Medicaid managed care programs. Skolnick estimates that hospitals get 48% less in revenue per patient from Medicaid managed care than fee for service. Likewise, she says, Medicare Advantage pays 17% less per patient than traditional Medicare, suggesting more downside if Republicans turn Medicare into a premium-support program as House Speaker Paul Ryan has advocated. Health insurers, on the other hand, might stand to gain from GOP-style Medicaid and Medicare reform, which could bring an influx of new customers.

RELATED:

The Only Way For TrumpCare To Be 'Terrific'