GOP contenders hate Obamacare but don’t have an alternative and know nothing about health insurance.
If folks who watched Thursday night’s Republican presidential debate were expecting the candidates to tell us what they’d do to replace Obamacare if they could get rid of it, those folks would have been disappointed.
In fact, the 10 candidates who are currently leading the polls said so little about health care during their two hours on stage that one has to wonder if they’ve
If House Speaker John Boehner decided to express his gratitude for the King v. Burwell ruling – and he should – it might sound like this.
In the Supreme Court’s ruling Thursday, Chief Justice John Roberts provided a truthful assessment of what would happen to the health insurance marketplace if the requirement to purchase insurance and the federal subsidies to help people afford coverage were declared unlawful in all but a few states. It would collapse.
In an amicus brief it filed with the court in King v. Burwell, America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry’s main trade group, painted a dire picture of what would happen to the private health insurance market—and to
Kentucky residents would be unaffected, Tennesseans devastated.
If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiffs in King v. Burwell, nowhere will the effect be more stark than along the 400-mile border between two states my family has called home, Tennessee and Kentucky.
In the state where I grew up, Tennessee, thousands of people would in all likelihood be forced back into the ranks of the uninsured. That’s because the cost of coverage would quickly skyrocket for the
No-man’s land captures those too rich for subsidies but too poor for sanctions.
The good news from last week’s Congressional Budget Office report was that Obamacare will cost 20 percent less through 2019 than originally expected. That’s in part because medical inflation has slowed more than the CBO anticipated back in 2010 when the law went into effect.
But the report had bad news too. Fewer people are signing up for coverage than the government had hoped. In fact, the
Supremes to decide challenge to Obamacare based on a single sentence.
At least four million Americans will rejoin the ranks of the uninsured—and consequently lose access to affordable health care—if the Supreme Court sides with opponents of Obamacare in a case that hinges on the interpretation of a single sentence in the law. But if that’s the price that has to be paid to impose an ideology that worships the so-called free market no matter what the cost, so be
Commentary: insurers use front groups and spin doctors to sow concerns about Obamacare.
Yesterday marked the fourth anniversary of Obamacare, but it marked the seventh anniversary of opposition to the concept underlying health care reform.
At least two years before the first words of legislation were written, and three years before the Affordable Care Act was signed into law, the entrenched health care interests were hard at work creating their strategies to ensure as much as possible that whatever passed
Stymied by a federal court, legislators are doing insurance agents’ bidding again.
To discourage folks from signing up for coverage on the Obamacare exchanges, Republican lawmakers in several states have pushed through bills making it difficult for people to get free help from specially trained “navigators” authorized by the Affordable Care Act.
At the top of the list of special interest groups supporting such legislation: groups representing insurance agents and brokers, who, of course, charge for their services. They view