Health Law Spurs For-Profit Diet Clinics
The New York Times reports on how a provision in the law that requires insurers to pay for nutrition and obesity screening has been a boon for some of these clinics. Also in the news about the health law's implementation are reports about how hospitals are changing how they care for chronically ill patients, a deeper look at Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion to uphold the law's subsidies and other GOP efforts to chip away at the law.
The New York Times:
In Health Law, A Boon For Diet Clinics
Dr. Michael Kaplan looked across his desk at a woman who had sought out his Long Island Weight Loss Institute .... By the end of the 50-minute session, the woman had chosen Dr. Kaplan’s most expensive weight-loss plan: $1,199 for six weeks’ worth of meal-replacement products, counseling and vitamin supplements. ... Then he delivered some good news: Her insurance would probably reimburse her for at least a small portion of the bill, thanks to a provision in the federal health care law that requires insurers to pay for nutrition and obesity screening. The news was pleasing to the patient. But it has also created a financial opportunity for a corner of the diet industry that has often operated on the fringe of the medical establishment: for-profit diet clinics overseen by doctors. (Abrams and Thomas, 7/4)
The Philadelphia Inquirer:
How The ACA Is Changing Chronic Care At Hospitals
Healthcare professionals say the landmark health reform law, the Affordable Care Act, is accelerating changes in how hospitals treat patients with chronic conditions like diabetes, heart failure and obesity. Successfully treating those patients, who use many more healthcare services, have higher rates of hospitalization and more frequent emergency department visits, is challenging because many of their conditions are aggravated by unhealthy eating habits and inactivity. Chronic disease rates increase steadily as patients age, making this issue particularly key to the Medicare program. (Taylor, 7/5)
NPR:
Liberal Minority Won Over Conservatives In Historic Supreme Court Term
The court's other major decision at the end of the term upheld nationwide subsidies in the Affordable Care Act. And as [Walter] Dellinger observes, Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion for a 6 to 3 majority was "surprisingly favorable" to the law. "The first five pages of the chief justice's opinion ... is the best articulation of the case for the Affordable Care Act anybody has written," Dellinger says. The decision did something else important. It sided with the liberal view that legislation should be interpreted in terms of its overall purpose and not by flyspecking a phrase here and there. (Totenberg, 7/6)
The Wall Street Journal:
House GOP And White House Trade Shots Over Obamacare
The Supreme Court showdown over the Affordable Care Act may be over, but the legal offensive against the law isn’t. Lawyers representing the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and the Obama administration took their best shots at each other’s arguments this week in their battle over Obamacare. The case, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. last year, is about whether the executive branch overstepped its bounds in how it’s paying for and enforcing parts of the health law. (Gershman, 7/2)
Fox News:
Republicans Look To Deliver Blow Against ObamaCare Tax
Despite the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding ObamaCare subsidies, opponents of the law remain poised to strike a key blow against another component of the health care overhaul in a matter of months.
Republicans, with help from Democrats, have gained momentum in their long-running effort to repeal the law's controversial 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices. ( Beaucar Vlahos, 6/4)
