Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) is introducing the most ambitious Medicare-for-all plan yet — one that envisions a quick transition to a public health plan with a robust set of benefits.
The co-chair of the Progressive Caucus is releasing a proposal Wednesday to transition the United States to a single-payer health care system, one in which a single, government-run health plan provides insurance coverage to all Americans.
Critics cried sabotage when political leaders took action to repair some of the damage done by the Affordable Care Act. They saw sinister motives behind the decision by the last Congress to repeal the individual mandate and in Trump administration regulations that made more affordable health insurance options available to individuals and small groups.
But a new study by the president’s Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) finds that eliminating federal tax penalties on the uninsured and giving consumers more coverage options will provide economic benefits totaling $450 billion over the next decade.
The Trump administration wants to know what challenges employer and group health plans face in maintaining grandfathered status for Affordable Care Act plans.
The Treasury and Labor departments and HHS issued the request for informationlate Thursday. The request comes as the number of grandfathered plans fall.
The agencies want to understand “whether there are opportunities for the departments to assist such plans and issuers,” the rule said.
Today, Type 1 diabetes patients pay twice as much for insulin as they did in 2012. This is outrageous — but drug companies aren’t to blame. The problem is a dysfunctional supply chain that benefits everyone except patients.
In today’s system, insurers hire third-party firms, known as pharmacy benefit managers, to manage drug plans. These PBMs negotiate with drugmakers and have the power to decide which drugs are covered by each plan. Each year, manufacturers dole out $150 billion in rebates and discounts as a result of these negotiations. But patients rarely see these savings at the pharmacy counter.
The Democratic Party’s presidential hopefuls are diverse in all ways but one — their stance on healthcare reform. The front-runners want to eliminate private insurance and put everyone on a government-run plan.
But that’s not something they’ve been enthusiastic about revealing to voters. Senator Elizabeth Warren recently refused to say whether she would support a single-payer plan that eliminated private health insurance.
A new report from government actuaries has revealed that the Congressional Budget Office was scandalously off in its estimates of the impact of Obamacare’s individual mandate, a miscalculation that has had significant ramifications for healthcare and tax policy over the past decade.
After health care sharply divided Democratic and Republican candidates in last fall’s campaigns, Florida lawmakers are considering wide-ranging changes to what a GOP leader derides as the “hospital-industrial complex.”
Ideas on the table in Florida’s Republican-controlled Legislature steer clear of demands for universal health care or Medicaid expansion, advanced by federal and state Democratic contenders during the November elections.
States that expanded their Medicaid health insurance programs are hunting for ways to fund the new enrollees in 2020 as they face a final drop in federal contributions.
The federal government will still cover the bulk of the costs of care for the roughly 13 million Americans newly eligible for Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, which allowed states to expand the program to people earning somewhat above the federal poverty level. But the gradually decreasing federal contribution — originally set at 100 percent but reduced to 90 percent starting next year — has left some states with budget holes to fill.
My colleague Dr. Robert Graboyes encourages us to instead think about how to produce better health (not health insurance—not even health care) for more people at a lower cost, year after year. This requires allowing and fostering the kind of revolutionary innovation in the health care industry that we’ve seen in other fields, like information technology. It requires allowing consumers to choose treatments, even high-risk ones. But it also requires innovation in the provision and payment of health care.
For instance, advancements in gene therapy and personalized treatments could one day offer a cure for cancer or disorders currently considered incurable, sometimes with only a single injection. In 2017, the Food and Drug Administration approved its first gene therapy treatment, Kymriah, for acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The FDA expects 10 to 20 cell and gene therapy approvals annually by 2025.
American consumers and policymakers are increasingly concerned about the high cost of prescription drugs. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, one in four people taking prescription drugs report difficulty affording their medication. There is bipartisan support for policies that could help lower drug prices and their burden on consumers. Legislation has been introduced and regulatory actions have been advanced to promote competition among drug manufacturers and slow the growth of prices.