WASHINGTON — The Senate health care bill remained endangered Thursday despite revisions aimed at wooing moderate and conservative Republican votes.

GOP skeptics continued to express concern if not outright opposition to the new bill, mainly because it is broadly similar to the original version.

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W. Va., a key holdout, said she still has “serious concerns about the Medicaid provisions” that would reduce federal funding of the program for lower-income and vulnerable Americans.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, expressed even more definitive objection to the bill’s Medicaid language. “Still deep cuts to Medicaid,” she tweeted.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said he continues to object to the measure on the ground it does not dismantle subsidies and other costly elements of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare.

Holding just a two-vote majority, Republicans can afford but two defections in order to pass the bill and keep their promise to repeal former President Barack Obama’s signature law. Debate on the bill is expected to begin in the Senate next week.

A number of other Republican senators, including Sen. Todd Young of Indiana, remained on the fence, saying they needed to study the bill closer before committing one way or the other.

Democrats, as expected, scoffed at the revised measure, claiming it is just as harmful as the original draft to the poor, sick and disabled.

“The latest version doesn’t look that much different than the last,” said Sen. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind. “It still would result in millions of Americans losing coverage while many would pay more.”

Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., said the new bill “does not change the fact that it still sells out the middle class, seniors, children and individuals with disabilities.”

The new bill, like the original, reduces federal Medicaid funding, converting it from an open-ended entitlement system to fixed payments to states. It also curtails expanding Medicaid to working adults and others who make too little to qualify for traditional assistance.

In changes aimed at appeasing concerns from Capito and others, the new bill added $45 billion to states to fund opioid treatment. They have been concerned the Medicaid cuts would mean people with drug problems would no longer be able to get treatment.

Supporters of the bill argued that while it does not completely repeal Obamacare, it would eliminate many of the law’s regulations, including a requirement that every American be insured.

Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., a key player in the original bill’s creation, said he was disappointed the revised version retains payroll and investment taxes on those making over $200,000 a year ($250,000 for a couple) to help pay for health care subsidies and tax credits.

But Toomey, who contends Medicaid spending growth is unsustainable, said he supports the new bill. “It prevents Obamacare’s imminent collapse and retains essential reforms putting Medicaid on a sustainable path preventing a future fiscal crisis,” he said in a statement.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, urged passage of the bill on the Senate floor, adding: “I have to think that, at the end of the day, if we fail to take action to fulfill the promises (repeal and replace Obamacare) we’ve all made, we’ll have to answer to the American people for the missed opportunity and the chaos that will almost certainly follow.”

In a bid to coax conservative support, the new bill includes the idea pushed by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, allowing insurers to offer low-cost, bare-bones coverage so long as they also provide access to a policy that includes the essential health requirements of Obamacare in the state in which they do business.

Republicans have complained Obamacare’s comprehensive coverage forces individuals to buy expensive coverage for things many don’t need such as maternity and newborn care.

To win over GOP moderates, the new bill added $70 billion over the next decade on top of $100 billion in the prior version to allow states to reduce premiums and deductibles.

But critics said that money might be needed to address another aspect of the bill that would reduce premium subsidies, resulting in higher premiums and deductibles.

Despite the nod to conservatives, Kentucky’s Rand Paul highlighted the subsidies for premiums and deductibles in arguing the bill, does go far enough in repealing Obamacare. In op-eds and television interviews he said the subsidies go to insurance companies that already make billions in profit.

Indiana’s Young, whose state has seen nearly 400,000 people gain coverage through Medicaid expansion, didn’t take a stance on the initial bill and remained uncommitted on the revised version. He said in a statement “nearly everyone agrees that doing nothing is not an option.” He said some parts of Indiana are at risk of having no insurer selling subsidized insurance.

“I will continue to seek conversations with folks at home, doctors and state leaders to learn how this bill — positively or negatively — may impact Hoosiers,” said Young.

Ohio Sen. Rob Portman, another Republican who has opposed the Medicaid cuts, said he is likewise studying the bill and awaiting the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of the cost and how many Americans it would leave uninsured.

Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., said his goal is “to vote on healthcare reform legislation that will be affordable and practical for Oklahomans of all socioeconomic levels and all health conditions.”

Contact Washington reporter Kery Murakami at kmurakami@cnhi.com.