Many politicos say the current political landscape would be very different if President Obama would have shifted his legislative priorities to put the economy in front of health reform. But would it really?
The Obama administration has issued McDonald’s (among others) a waiver on some regulations in the health law. But that hasn’t stopped the McDonald’s story from becoming propaganda in the campaign to discredit and, eventually, repeal health care reform.
Health reform critics cite recent developments regarding insurance premium cost increases as proof that their suspicions about the overhaul were on target. But are they right? Don’t be so sure.
Although far from perfect, the health reform law promises a lot of benefits — to individuals and to the country as a whole. Can Republicans make the case that Americans would be better off without these benefits?
The whole point of the nation’s conversation about health reform has been to find ways to spend differently so that the result is a higher quality, more humane health care system.
States don’t have the money to sustain Medicaid expansions during hard economic times, forcing them to make cuts. This is terrible. But to compare Medicaid cutbacks to private insurer rescission is grossly misleading.
This column is a collaboration between KHN and The New Republic . The effort to repeal health care reform, all in one fell swoop, seems to be stalling. Instead, the opponents of reform are trying to dismantle it piece by piece. The latest effort came last week, when a group of Republicans in the Senate […]
This column is a collaboration between KHN and The New Republic. The weekend’s newspapers included a pair of headlines about health care reform. And they were probably not the kind that reform advocates like to see. One was in the Boston Globe: “Firms Cancel Health Coverage.” According to the article, a number of small businesses […]
A new CBO report highlights the importance of future lawmakers’ willingness to go through with cuts called for in the new health care law.
Insurance plans have a history of frequently changing
Controversy erupted this week after the director of the Congressional Budget Office said the new health overhaul law won’t significantly reduce government speding on health care and a New York Times story critiqued Dartmouth research on health spending.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, of Kentucky, said he was “alarmed” by Berwick’s admiration of the NHS. Senators Jon Kyl of Arizona and Pat Roberts of Kansas say Berwick advocates the “rationing” of care. Of course, as Berwick pointed out, our system already rations care by income and medical status. Apparently this is not so alarming to McConnell and the rest of the GOP.
Sensible public policy shouldn’t ask people to reduce that health care bill by bargaining with their doctors over prices and using things (as one Republican U.S. Senate candidate recently suggested) like chickens to pay for care. It should prevent that kind of financial exposure in the first place.
State officials leading the nullification campaign talk a lot about what their citizens stand to lose as the Affordable Care Act takes effect. But the real loss will be if, somehow, the opposite were to happen–and the people living in those states were left dealing with the same dysfunctional health care system that exists today.
Health care reform promises to shift the middle ground between government and market, modestly, but in a way that will have far-reaching effects.
If the Democrats get their way, Blue Cross companies will have to change their business model, so that they act a bit more like the Blue Cross plans of old–the ones that helped schoolteachers, not stockholders.
Republicans and Democrats should come together on one bipartisan issue at Thursday’s health care ‘summit’: medical malpractice reform.
For most of last year, Republicans spent their time attacking Democratic plans for reform, rather than describing their own. But now they’ve put a plan on the table. Showcasing that plan–and comparing it to what the Democrats have proposed–might help clarify a few things.
Every special interest knew that the Democrats had a razor-thin margin for success–and that gave them maximum leverage. They understood early on that, by trying in good faith to reach deals with Republicans and conservatives, Democrats were falling into a trap–the one that’s ensnaring them now.
Compared to George W. Bush’s administration, President Obama has made significant gains in legislative transparency.