An analysis by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health, published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Jan. 29, suggests that a significant number of health insurance companies are employing new schemes to discourage high-cost patients with chronic illnesses from enrolling in their plans1.
With the Supreme Court scheduled to hear oral argument in King v. Burwell next week, those looking for clues as to what the Court will decide later this year when it rules in King need look no further than a very different case.
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.
No matter your political point of view on the law, basic humanity dictates that we not leave millions of people without insurance and thousands who are getting needed medical care with no option to continue to buy health insurance and/or get the medical care they need.
In any case, if you do not have paperwork you expected, and you are still patiently waiting -- diligently waiting, checking the mailbox each day -- KNOW THIS, it probably isn't in the mail, so you should get the information from other methods.
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.
Outside of our shared love for Eastern Kentucky University, Elizabeth and I came at the decision to do the gastric sleeve surgery from very different perspectives.
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.
The rise of "independent contractors" Is the most significant legal trend in the American workforce -- contributing directly to low pay, irregular hours, and job insecurity. It's become a race to the bottom.
Give us a majority, and we'll show you what the GOP can do. That was the basic sales premise of the midterm elections. Controlling both chambers of Congress, Republicans would show Americans that their party is a governing party.
The GOP wasted no time in creating yet another self-induced government shutdown showdown. Not even two full months into their control of Congress, and they are pushing a critical federal department towards shutting down, all in an effort to make a political point.
Given the network of mutuality in which we live, the health of our whole society improves when we uphold the rights for our LGBT brothers and sisters.
The ability to access quality health care services for the majority of the black population has been largely due to federal government policies and initiatives designed to address long-standing, systemic barriers to medical care for African Americans.
The ACA is unsustainable because of its inefficiency, increasing bureaucracy, and unaffordable costs to taxpayers as well as patients and families. As all this becomes more clear, we should all ask, what should follow the ACA?
With no other alternative in place or even proposed, nearly 300,000 Tennesseans remain without health insurance.
Staples' decision will undoubtedly renew arguments that the ACA's employer mandate has led to harmful effects on work. These arguments, like parallel narratives about min. wage laws and paid sick leave ordinances, are largely inaccurate, and advocates of evidence-based, power-balancing policy are absolutely right to debunk them.