A 91-year-old woman calls her doctor complaining that she feels dizzy. No, that's not the beginning of a joke. It's what actually happened to my mother last week when she woke up feeling 'a little sick.' And here's the punch line. She ends up at the ER and in the hospital overnight.
Regardless of whether you are young or old, healthy or ill, insured or uninsured, every person, in every state, has a stake in King v. Burwell.
If the Supreme Court invalidates premium credits in the federal exchange, the number of uninsured Americans would jump by roughly 8 million. Millions more would face dramatic premium increases; RAND estimates that premiums would jump by 47 percent.
In short, there was a great deal in Justice Kennedy's questions this morning that should give hope to supporters of the ACA. To be sure, opponents of the law might tell a different story.
This lawsuit and most of the rhetoric of those that oppose Obamacare is a blatant disrespect for lower-income Americans. Who are these Americans? They are families, college students in deep debt, people with serious health issues, senior citizens, first-generation Americans, single mothers, YOU.
It may look like the new Apple Watch or one of the 'Activity Tracker' systems for your wrist, nicely designed and in-style for a day-to-day use.
Based on the above, together with trends going forward, it is clear that the ACA has failed to remedy the nation's access to care problem.
Let's hope that state and federal regulators don't put too many roadblocks in the way of many more hospital systems becoming insurers. Extending Medicare to everyone might be the most cost-effective reform but Washington will prevent that, at least for the foreseeable future.
The basic principles were ratified in Obamacare and are no longer under serious challenge. The change hasn't relied entirely on government action, but reflects private sector movement in the same direction.
Health conscious consumers who have proven their value to insurers over the course of twelve months deserve to receive financial reimbursement for their efforts. Even a year's worth of successful compliance by those patients facing on-going conditions such as diabetes would prove beneficial to patient and insurer.
The lawyers challenging the Affordable Care Act (ACA) haven't only invented a new interpretation, but they have concocted an entire theory that Congress and the President intended this result. This is preposterous and defies the statutory language, the context and design of the law, and the legislative history.
When I was an industry PR guy, I was part of a never-ending effort to defame the NHS, usually by citing a few anecdotes about Brits who claimed to endure long waits for needed care. The industry's propaganda got little resistance from the media or the American public.
When members of Congress caved to demands from the insurance industry and ditched their plan to establish a "public option" health plan, the lawmakers also ditched one of their favorite talking points, that a government-run plan was necessary to "keep insurers honest."
If you don't get to take Exit 1, or have questions about whether you owe a shared responsibility payment with your tax return or if you are must repay some of your advance premium tax credit payment, it might be best to consult a tax pro. Wishing you safe travels.
Now is the time for the people of "non-expanding" states to appeal to and lead their lawmakers out of the convoluted ACA partisan landscape. It is time for the remaining 22 states to expand Medicaid - it just makes sense.
Fifty years since its enactment, Medicaid has proven over and over again to be successful in achieving what it is designed to do: provide needed health care coverage to the most vulnerable individuals.