“Medicare for All” is an enormously popular slogan, as evidenced by a slew of recent surveys. Its widespread appeal has emboldened the growing ranks of America’s democratic socialists, the more ambitious of whom see it as the entering wedge of a larger transformation of the country’s economic life. It’s also an indulgent fantasy, based on the illusion that we can simply reset the way the U.S. health-care system operates.
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) on Wednesday introduced a measure to overturn a Trump administration rule expanding access to non-ObamaCare insurance plans.
The move is a step in Senate Democrats’ plan to force a vote on the measure as they seek to argue Republicans are attacking protections for people with pre-existing conditions, a key argument Democrats want to make in the midterm election campaign.
Part of the fun of running for office appears to be taking creative liberties with your opponent’s record, so get ready for a fiction-filled autumn. An early ObamaCare misdirection out of Wisconsin is one that Republicans nationwide will have to anticipate.
Senate Republicans say they would like Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) to appoint a successor to the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) who, unlike McCain, would support GOP legislation to repeal ObamaCare.
Our health care system must improve quality while reducing the cost of care. There is near-universal agreement that, to do so, we must move from fee-for-service reimbursement to paying for the value of care received.
Yet, despite the fact that the idea of “volume to value” has been around for a decade or more, it is not yet the norm. That means too many patients are not getting the care they need, and our health care system has become too expensive.
Ten GOP senators this week introduced legislation that they say would protect ObamaCare provisions for people with pre-existing conditions.
The bill, introduced on Thursday, comes as congressional Democrats try to tie Republicans to the Trump administration’s decision not to defend some ObamaCare provisions in a federal lawsuit filed by red states.
HHS wants to encourage providers to enter value-based care agreements with each other, and it’s researching whether it can offer new legal protections for those arrangements.
Most of the prominent Democrats eyeing 2020 presidential bids — including Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts — champion the idea of “Medicare for all,” suggesting it’s become almost a litmus test for the party’s base.
But the notion of government-funded health care has proved a tough sell to Democratic voters in swing districts that will determine control of the House.
The House recently passed two bills (H.R. 6199 and H.R. 6311) that would make a number of modifications to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). While most of the provisions contained in these bills would increase the usefulness of HSAs to consumers, their cumulative effect on costs wouldn’t be noticeable in the context of the immense U.S. health sector. HSAs won’t reach their full potential until more is done to promote vigorous price competition among those supplying services to HSA enrollees.
A type of health insurance plan encouraged by President Trump, in which workers band together to get coverage, has applied to cover residents in Nevada.
The plans, known as “association health plans,” have been framed by the White House as a cheaper option for insurance coverage than Obamacare. Critics and pro-Obamacare groups have warned consumers that the plans may not be as extensive as those offered under the healthcare law.