Bloomberg News: Hospital Chains Can't Move Home-State Republicans On Obamacare
Conventional wisdom says big corporations that employ lots of people in a state generally call the shots with local politicians, especially when those corporations are the source of major campaign contributions. But that's not the case in Tennessee. At least when it comes to Obamacare. Tennessee is looming as ground zero for the political fallout from the Supreme Court's decision, which could come as early as Thursday, on the insurance subsidies at the heart of President Barack Obama's health care law. Some of the nation's biggest hospital chains are based in the Volunteer State and stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars if the justices invalidate the subsidies. Yet they haven't been able to make the state's Republicans budge off their stance against the health care law. (Tracer, 6/23)

Modern Healthcare: Hospital Cost Of Uninsured: $900 Per Patient, Per Year
New research suggests the financial strain on hospitals and households will be immediate and significant if a U.S. Supreme Court decision ends subsidies for health insurance in 36 states. As many as 6.4 million Americans who bought insurance may drop it and become a financial burden to providers. The study, published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, found a “minimum and unavoidable” demand for hospital care among the uninsured at an annual cost to hospitals of $900 a patient. (Evans, 6/23)

The Nashville Tennessean: ACA Uncertainty Sends Tennessee Official To DC To Testify
The future of health insurance premiums on the federally run marketplace is rife with uncertainty, and Tennessee's insurance commissioner is headed to Washington, D.C., to talk about it. Insurers are beginning to get a view into how people who buy insurance on the exchange use insurance, but a U.S. Supreme Court case set to be decided in the coming days could throw the nascent system into disarray. (Fletcher, 6/23)

The Associated Press: Groups Estimate 160,000 Hoosiers Could Lose Subsidies
About 160,000 low- and moderate-income Indiana residents could lose health insurance premium subsidies provided under the Affordable Care Act if the U.S. Supreme Court rules them illegal, two groups estimated Tuesday. The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation and Families USA, an advocacy group for affordable health care, both based their estimates on data provided by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (6/23)

New Hampshire Public Radio: SCOTUS Decision On Healthcare Subsidies Could Disrupt N.H. Insurance Market
The United States Supreme Court is expected to decide a case this month that could be do or die for President Obama’s signature healthcare law. At issue are the subsidies available to people who purchase insurance plans on Healthcare.gov, also called the healthcare exchange. New Hampshire is one of 37 states using this federally-operated insurance marketplace, and if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiff in the case, about 30,000 people in New Hampshire may see their subsidies disappear. (Biello, 6/23)

Even though California's subsidies aren't at risk, the exchange -- Covered California -- still will face challenges -

The San Jose Mercury News: Covered California Health Insurance Exchange At A Crossroads
Even if the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs trying to gut the law, imperiling the subsidies 6.3 million people are using to help pay their insurance bills, the decision should have no immediate effect on California and other states that have set up their own state-run exchanges. ... But that doesn't mean the Golden State's exchange, called Covered California, doesn't face other significant challenges, from trying to build up its enrollment numbers, to the end of federal revenue guarantees for health insurance companies that agree to participate in the exchange -- something observers say could cause premiums to spike. (Seipel, 6/23)

Meanwhile, Business Insider offers this possible clue regarding how a pivotal justice may vote on the case -

Business Insider: This Comment From Justice Kennedy Could Signal The Fate Of Obamacare
The Supreme Court will issue a decision on President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law any day now, and Justice Anthony Kennedy made a telling comment in March that could signal how he will vote. Kennedy, a key swing voter, said during oral arguments that he saw a "serious constitutional" question with the interpretation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) set forth by the plaintiffs who are trying to strike it down. (Fuchs, 6/23)

Tallahassee Democrat: Feds Say Hospital Funding Deal Reached ‘In Principle’
After months of wrangling about the issue, a top federal official Tuesday outlined a deal to continue Florida’s Low Income Pool health-funding program for two years. Federal official Vikki Wachino sent a letter to state Medicaid Director Justin Senior that said an agreement “in principle” has been reached about the size of the program and how money will be divvied up among hospitals and other health providers. ... Part of the debate in recent months stemmed from uncertainty about how much money would be available to help hospitals cover the costs of caring for uninsured patients. But the issue became tangled in a fierce political battle about a state Senate plan to use federal Medicaid money to offer health coverage to hundreds of thousands of uninsured Floridians — a plan that House Republican leaders opposed and, ultimately, killed. (Saunders, 6/23)

Tampa Bay Times/Miami Herald: Fight Over Hospital Funding For Poor In Florida Ends Quietly
The tumultuous debate over the future of health care funding for the poor came to a quiet end Tuesday as the governor signed into law a budget that includes $1 billion to pay for charity care and raise Medicaid rates at Florida hospitals. In a letter to state officials, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said they have "agreed in principle" to a Florida plan for distribution of the Low Income Pool (LIP) funds that pay for hospital care for Medicaid beneficiaries and the low-income uninsured. The plan also calls for paying higher Medicaid rates to hospitals, particularly those that care for large numbers of uninsured patients. State lawmakers had to redesign the LIP program and raise Medicaid reimbursement rates because the federal government reduced LIP money for Florida by $1.2 billion for the coming year, which led to a budget impasse between the House and Senate this spring and then to a special session on the budget that ended last week. (Klas and Chang, 6/23)

The Associated Press: Florida, Feds Agree To Extend Hospital Low-income Pool Funds
The Obama administration and the state have reached an agreement in principle to continue funding Florida's hospital low-income pool for two more years but at a much lower cost, officials said Tuesday. Florida will receive $1 billion this year — about half of what the state has been receiving — and $600 million for 2016-2017. The federal government must still wait until the end of a public review to issue its final ruling. The fight over the funds tore apart Florida's regular legislative session in late April and prompted Gov. Rick Scott to sue the federal government. (6/23)

And on the Medicaid expansion front -

Maine Public Broadcasting: Maine House Endorses Medicaid Expansion But Passage Unlikely
After more than an hour of debate, the House voted to expand Medicaid coverage in Maine to an estimated 70,000 poor residents and generate millions in federal funds for health care providers. ... Opponents argued the expansion is not a good long-term investment and the bill's future is uncertain. The Senate has yet to consider the measure and Gov. Paul LePage has said he would veto any bill lawmakers passed that would expand Medicaid. (Leary, 6/23)

Fortune: How Obamacare Has Impacted The Uninsured Rate
An annual survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recorded the sharpest drop in uninsured adults in 2014 since the survey began in 1997. The uninsured rate among adults under 65 dropped from 20.4 percent in 2013 to 16.3 percent in 2014. The uninsured rate among adults 19-25, especially, saw progress from 31.3 percent uninsured to 26.9 percent in 2014. The growing prevalence of insurance reflects the start of Obamacare’s expanded coverage in January 2014. In states that accepted Medicaid expansion with Obamacare, the percentage of insured adults dropped from 18.4 to 13.3 percent — 2 percentage points more than the drop in states that refused the expansion. (Groden, 6/23)

Business Insider: The Uninsured Rate Just Experienced Its Sharpest Drop Ever Under Obamacare
The uninsured rate in the US declined by nearly one-fifth with the Affordable Care Act implemented for a full year, according to data released Tuesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC's National Health Interview Survey, considered the most reliable government estimate of the country's uninsured population, found the uninsured rate for adults under the age of 65 dipped from 20.4% in 2013 to 16.3% in 2014. Americans could start buying insurance through marketplaces set up by the Affordable Care Act beginning in October 2013. (Logiurato, 6/23)

The Statesman: Texas Lags Behind The National Average In Rate Of Uninsured Adults
The number of people lacking health insurance in Texas remains stubbornly high more than a year after the Affordable Care Act took effect and Texas continues to lead the nation in the rate of uninsured residents, according to a federal study released Tuesday. The National Health Interview Survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found the rate of uninsured Texans ages 18 to 64 fell 2.7 percentage points to 25.7 percent between 2013 and 2014. Nationally, the percentage of uninsured Americans dropped 4.1 percentage points to 16.3 percent over the same period. (Eaton, 6/23)

Meanwhile, in the news from the insurance industry -

The Wall Street Journal: UnitedHealth Group Exits Health Insurers’ Largest Trade Group
UnitedHealth Group Inc. is leaving the health insurance industry’s largest trade group this month, saying the company’s interests were no longer being best represented. UnitedHealth, the largest U.S. health insurer, will sever its relationship with America’s Health Insurance Plans, a national association with almost 1,300 member companies, according to a statement from the company. (Amour, 6/23)

The Washington Post: Your Pocket Guide To Obamacare Replacement Plans
Within a week, the justices are due to rule in King v. Burwell whether federal subsidies can flow through state health insurance exchanges created by the federal government. A decision for the Obama administration would maintain the status quo and kill perhaps the last significant legal challenge to the 2010 health care law. A decision for the plaintiffs would be a major victory for Republicans who hate the Affordable Care Act, but it would also put the party immediately on the spot. That’s where the trouble begins. (Viebeck, 6/23)

NPR: Republicans Don't Have A Plan Yet To Replace Obamacare Subsidies
If GOP lawmakers get the court decision they've been hoping for, it will be up to the Republican-controlled Congress to figure a way out of the mess. After more than 50 votes in the House to repeal either all or parts of the Affordable Care Act, Republicans have yet to unveil a proposal on how to replace the health care law. And they also haven't united around a stopgap plan that would bridge an adverse ruling by the court with the health care policies of the next president. Republicans in both chambers have been working for months on proposals, but, so far, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell — and their respective caucuses — haven't coalesced around a single path forward for the 6.4 million people, who would lose their subsidies should the court rule against the Obama administration in King v. Burwell. (Chang, 6/23)

Reuters: Democrats Vow Action If Supreme Court Rejects Part Of Obamacare
Democrats were prepared to quickly come up with a legislative solution should the U.S. Supreme Court rule in the next few days to invalidate a central part of President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law, party leaders in the Senate said on Tuesday. The high court is expected to rule by the end of June in a case that challenges tax subsidies that are helping millions of Americans afford health insurance premiums under the 2010 Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. (Cornwell, 6/23)

The Hill: House Votes To Repeal Medicare Cost-Control Panel In ObamaCare
The House voted Tuesday to abolish a cost-cutting board under ObamaCare that has drawn criticism from members of both parties. Lawmakers voted 244-154 to abolish what is known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). The board is tasked with coming up with Medicare cuts if spending rises above a certain threshold, but has been criticized as outsourcing the work of Congress to unelected bureaucrats. (Sullivan and Marcos, 6/23)

The Associated Press: House Votes To Kill Health Law's Medicare Savings Panel
The House voted Tuesday to kill a federal panel that is supposed to find ways to curb Medicare spending, as Republicans ignored a veto threat and leveled their latest blow at President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. Members of the Independent Payment Advisory Board have never been appointed, and the panel has never recommended savings from Medicare, the $600-billion-a-year health care program for the elderly. (6/23)

The Washington Post: 'Death Panels' May Never Die
Shortly before the Supreme Court could invalidate Obamacare subsidies in most states, House members rolled back into town for a Tuesday evening vote to abolish “death panels.” Well, that’s the phrase Sarah Palin used. It might not be accurate in any direct or literal sense, but it has stuck around in Washington’s vocabulary for the last six years, a wry in-joke about the absurdity of the Obamacare debate. Of course, not everyone feels that way. House Republicans have the votes to pass their bill repealing the Medicare cost-cutting board known as IPAB (that’s “Independent Payment Advisory Board”). It’s a body charged with recommending ways to cut payments to doctors who accept Medicare patients in order to prevent federal healthcare costs from spiraling out of control over time. (Viebeck, 6/23)

The Associated Press: Senate Bills Cut Social Programs, Boost NIH Research, Amtrak
Senate Republicans Tuesday proposed cuts to community health centers, national service, and grants to help children from low- and moderate-income families attend preschool as they unveiled the largest domestic appropriations bill, a $153 billion measure that’s sure to attract a veto threat from President Barack Obama. The author of the bill, Roy Blunt of Missouri, instead boosted the budget for the National Institutes of Health by $2 billion while awarding small increases to large programs giving grants to states for low-income school districts and special-needs children. (Taylor, 6/23)

Meanwhile, the Senate approves a new VA health care chief and a House panel looks at improper spending by the agency -

The Associated Press: Senate Approves New Veterans Affairs Health Care Chief
The Department of Veterans Affairs has a new leader of its troubled health care arm. Dr. David Shulkin, president of the Morristown Medical Center in New Jersey, won approval as the VA's undersecretary for health by a voice vote Tuesday in the Senate. Shulkin steps into a key role managing a health-care system responsible for 9 million military veterans in nearly 1,000 VA hospitals and clinics nationwide. The VA was rocked by scandal last year over long waits for veterans seeking medical care at the Phoenix VA hospital and other sites and falsified records to cover up the delays. (Daly, 6/24)

The Washington Post: House To Probe How VA’s Improper Spending Hurt Small Businesses
That’s the subject of a joint hearing to be held Tuesday by the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee and the House Small Business Committee, which will center on the aftermath of an explosive memo sent by a VA official detailing improper spending and contracting practices worth up to $6 billion at the agency. In a letter sent to VA Secretary Robert McDonald and made public last month, Jan R. Frye, the agency’s deputy assistant secretary for acquisition and logistics, said employees did not use a bidding system to buy goods, instead using purchase cards meant for convenience to buy billions of dollars’ worth of medical supplies without contracts. (Jayakumar, 6/23)

House appropriators also weigh in on the looming implementation of new medical billing codes -

CQ Healthbeat: Appropriators Weigh In On Billing Codes, Audit Disputes
House appropriators asked the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to help doctors and hospitals confront two of their biggest challenges; the looming implementation of new ICD-10 medical billing codes and disputes with contractors hired to audit hospital claims. The requests accompany the fiscal 2016 Labor-Health and Human Services-Education spending bill, which the House Appropriations Committee will mark up tomorrow. In writing what amount to detailed instructions for agencies on how to use the $153 billion provided in this bill, the House appropriators also weighed in on current controversy over mammography recommendations, abortion coverage in insurance plans and travel spending within the Department of Health and Human Services. (Young, 6/23)

Politico: Obamacare Dilemma For GOP Govs Running For President
If the Supreme Court rules against Obamacare subsidies, the four governors running for president will face a harsh choice: Let tens of thousands of people get kicked off their health plans, or try to create a state exchange and lose credibility with a virulently anti-Obamacare Republican primary base. Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal, Wisconsin’s Scott Walker, New Jersey’s Chris Christie and Ohio’s John Kasich all refused to set up Obamacare exchanges, as did most other GOP governors. Their states would be directly affected if the court rules that the health law’s subsidies can go only to people living in states that did establish the new online Obamacare markets. (Pradhan and Demko, 6/24)

The Washington Post: Bobby Jindal To Announce Presidential Plans Wednesday
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a one-time rising star in the Republican Party now struggling to become one again, will announce Wednesday afternoon whether he intends to run for president in 2016. ... If Jindal does get into the race as expected, he will be the first Indian-American to ever be a serious candidate for president. But at this point, his chances of winning the GOP nomination seem extraordinarily low. (Fahrenthold and Hohmann, 6/24)

McClatchy: Jindal’s Bid For White House Begins With Many Doubters
Meet Bobby Jindal, self-styled hero of the Christian right. The Louisiana governor was once seen as a rising national star with deep, nuanced thoughts about health care, education and budget issues, who in 2009 gave the party’s nationally televised response to President Barack Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress. (Lightman, 6/24)

The Associated Press: Where They Stand: Bobby Jindal On Issues Of 2016 Campaign
Where two-term Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal stands on various issues that will be debated in the Republican presidential campaign: Like most other Republicans considering a presidential campaign, Jindal calls for repealing Obama's health care law. He favors "premium support" for Medicare, which would replace the insurance coverage given to seniors with a federal subsidy to purchase insurance coverage, a sort of voucher program to choose their own coverage plan. (6/24)

Politico Magazine: The Stupid Party’s Candidate
In 2013 Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal called on the GOP to “stop being the stupid party.” A former Rhodes scholar with serious policy chops, he appeared perfectly positioned to elevate the discussion of ideas. Instead, Jindal has chosen to run in 2016 as the stupid party’s standard-bearer. A governor who reshaped his state by overhauling the education and Medicaid systems now hardly talks substance at all. In fairness, he has released detailed plans on taxes and education, but he routinely spends his time on the stump throwing red meat to the most conservative parts of his party. (Greenblatt, 6/23)

The Associated Press: Fitness Trackers Are Hot, But Do They Really Improve Health?
Sales of fitness trackers are climbing, and the biggest maker of the gadgets, Fitbit, made a splashy debut on the stock market Thursday. But will the devices really help you get healthier? Experts agree that getting people to set goals — and then reminding them of the goals — absolutely works, and the wearable devices are built to do that. But evidence that people get healthier when using fitness trackers is limited because they are new and studies of them have mostly been small or focused on specific groups of people. (Jay, 6/23)

Kaiser Health News: When Is A Workplace Wellness Program Coercive, Rather Than Voluntary?
Christine White pays $300 a year more for her health care because she refused to join her former employer’s wellness program, which would have required that she fill out a health questionnaire and join activities like Weight Watchers. ... Like many Americans, White gets her health coverage through an employer that uses financial rewards and penalties to get workers to sign up for wellness programs. ... Today, a small but growing number of employers tie those financial rewards to losing weight, exercising or dropping cholesterol or blood-sugar levels — often requiring workers to provide personal health information to private contractors who administer the programs. The incentives, meanwhile, can add up to hundreds, or even thousands, of dollars a year. (Appleby, 6/24)

Modern Healthcare: Consumers Demand Price Transparency, But At What Cost?
Consumers are demanding more transparency around healthcare costs, but there are limits to how much that information can help them make decisions and it could end up costing them more in the end. Price transparency has been a key initiative for the Healthcare Financial Management Association, which is holding its Annual National Institute this week in Orlando, Fla. The group established a task force on the issue in 2013. (Kutscher, 6/23)

Marketplace: Personalizing Medicine With Tailored Social Services
In virtually every city and town in America there are men and women who can’t keep up with chronic illnesses like diabetes and congestive heart failure. In virtually every city and town in America there are also doctors and nurses who believe poverty, mental illness and addiction are at the root of the problem. (Gorenstein, 6/24)

Marketplace: The Challenge In Pairing The Sick With Social Services
The sickest and most expensive 5 percent of patients use about half of the healthcare dollars. Many wind up in the emergency room or the hospital again and again, because they can’t manage their chronic illnesses. Combine that with an environment where there are new financial incentives for doctors to find better outcomes, not simply provide service after service, and the landscape is ripe for this kind of innovation. (Gorenstein, 6/23)

The Associated Press: 5th Circuit Panel Rejects Challenge To Birth Control Mandate
A U.S. appeals court panel has ruled that certain provisions in the Affordable Care Act dealing with birth control don't violate the religious rights of faith-based groups under federal law. A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans delivered its ruling Monday in the consolidation of several cases brought by Texas-based religious institutions, including universities and charities. (6/24)

The Statesman: Court Rejects Texas Religious Challenge To Obamacare
The Affordable Care Act’s rules on contraceptive coverage do not violate the religious freedom of church-based organizations in Texas, a federal appeals court has ruled. The law, commonly known as Obamacare, requires employers with at least 50 workers to provide health insurance that covers contraceptives unless a written form is submitted that declares their religious opposition to the coverage. (Lindell, 6/23)

CQ Healthbeat: Clinics Ask Supreme Court To Halt Texas Abortion Law
Abortion providers asked the Supreme Court on Tuesday to stop strict measures in Texas’ anti-abortion law from going into effect in July because they are appealing the law. The application for a stay follows a June 9 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans that upheld controversial parts of the 2013 law. The providers say they plan to ask the Supreme Court to review that appeals court’s decision allowing the Republican-backed provisions to take effect in Texas. (Ruger, 6/23)

The Associated Press: House Plan To Overhaul NC Medicaid Approved
The House has approved its model to overhaul North Carolina's Medicaid system, contrasting starkly with a proposal incorporated in the Senate's budget. House members voted 105-6 on Tuesday for the measure, which like the Senate's plan directs Medicaid to give a fixed amount of money to medical organizations for each patient treated. Medicaid now reimburses hospitals and doctors for every medical procedure they perform. (6/23)

Los Angeles Times: Tech Problems May Crimp Launch Of State's New Prescription Drug Database
One week before California unveils an enhanced prescription drug database, some health providers say the upgraded program will be incompatible with their computer systems, hobbling their access to the tool that is meant to combat drug abuse. (Mason, 6/23)

Los Angeles Times: Vote On Aid-In-Dying Bill Delayed To Secure More Support
The author of an aid-in-dying bill postponed a scheduled Tuesday hearing on the measure because it lacked enough support to pass a key committee. State Sen. Lois Wolk (D-Davis) agreed to delay a vote on her bill in the Assembly Health Committee until next month. The proposal would allow terminally ill patients to end their lives with drugs prescribed by a doctor. (McGreevy, 6/23)

The Associated Press: Bentley Pocket Vetoes Bill To Redistribute HIV Medication
Gov. Robert Bentley has chosen not to sign a bill that would have allowed HIV clinic pharmacies to redistribute unused drugs, a move that patient advocates on Tuesday said was "extremely disappointing." The legislation would have allowed clinics to give government-funded prescription medication to other low income HIV patients instead of throwing expensive drugs away. (Swant, 6/24)

The Des Moines Register: Mental Hospital Supporters Plead For Its Future
Supporters of the state mental hospital here made a last-ditch plea to the governor on Tuesday to sign a compromise plan that legislators passed to keep it open. Gov. Terry Branstad's administrators have been moving to close the facility and a sister hospital in Clarinda within the next few weeks. Branstad contends that the services can be provided more efficiently by private agencies or at the state's other two mental hospitals, which are in northern Iowa. Two of the three programs at the Mount Pleasant facility have been emptied, and most employees of the third program received layoff notices last week. (Leys, 6/23)

Georgia Health News: A Tale Of Two (Neighboring) Hospitals
Many Georgia hospitals are reeling financially from the high costs of uncompensated care, because they are treating so many uninsured patients. But Piedmont Fayette is in a far different position. It’s in one of Georgia’s most prosperous counties. Median household income in Fayette County is almost $80,000, versus $49,000 statewide, according to Census figures. Fayette’s uninsured rate is 13 percent, compared with 21 percent statewide. (Miller, 6/24)

North Carolina Health News: Uncertainty Hangs Over Providers As They Work To Improve Care
More than a hundred physicians, nurse practitioners, social workers and other health care providers crowded into the cafeteria space at the City of Medicine Academy magnet school in North Durham Monday night to hear about how they could do a better job integrating mental health services into their primary care practices. The providers – who are part of the Northern Piedmont Community Care network that serves Medicaid patients in Durham, Vance, Warren, Person, Franklin and Granville counties – sat at picnic and cafeteria tables eating a dinner of cheap burritos. As they ate, they were barraged by presentations on programs they could take advantage of to help patients with mental health problems do better both psychologically and physically. (Hoban, 6/24)

The Chicago Sun-Times: Former Illinois Health Official Gets 8 Years For Kickbacks
A former Illinois Department of Public Health aide has been sentenced to eight years in prison for her part in a kickback scheme that defrauded the state of millions of dollars. Prosecutors claim Quinshaunta R. Golden conspired with a former IDPH aide, Roxanne B. Jackson, and Chicago social services provider Leon Dingle Jr. to steer millions of dollars in state health department grants and contracts their way and, in return, get kickbacks. (6/23)

The Associated Press: Ohio Legislation Would Eliminate Tax On Feminine Products
A proposal by Ohio lawmakers would do away with taxes on feminine care products. Legislation was introduced Monday that would make Ohio the sixth state to scrap the so-called pink tax on products such as tampons and pads. Rep. Greta Johnson, an Akron Democrat, said at a news conference that women spend $6 to $10 of taxable dollars every month on the products, and it's time to help them save money on the essential purchases. (6/23)

The Columbus Sun-Times: Columbus Reacts To 'Pink Tax' Legislation
Three democratic state representatives introduced legislation Monday that would exempt feminine care products from sales tax. The exemption, which they referred to as a ‘Pink Tax,’ would apply to tampons and pads. Five other states have already passed such legislation, including Massachusetts, New Jersey and Minnesota. (Cardoza, 6/24)

The Washington Post: Anesthesiologist Trashes Sedated Patient — And It Ends Up Costing Her
Sitting in his surgical gown inside a large medical suite in Reston, Va., a Vienna man prepared for his colonoscopy by pressing record on his smartphone, to capture the instructions his doctor would give him after the procedure. But as soon as he pressed play on his way home, he was shocked out of his anesthesia-induced stupor: He found that he had recorded the entire examination and that the surgical team had mocked and insulted him as soon as he drifted off to sleep. In addition to their vicious commentary, the doctors discussed avoiding the man after the colonoscopy, instructing an assistant to lie to him, and then placed a false diagnosis on his chart. (Jackman, 6/23)

The New York Times: New York City Allocates $5 Million To Move Tenants Out Of ‘Three-Quarter’ Homes
Three-quarter homes, so described because they are seen as being between regulated halfway houses and actual homes, often cram four to eight people in a room and sometimes have blocked exits and squalid conditions. The article focused on one unscrupulous operator, Yury Baumblit, accused of taking illicit payments on Medicaid fees for drug treatment while forcing people to sleep in bunk beds squeezed into tiny rooms. (Barker, 6/24)

The Huffington Post: The Surprising Reason So Many People Still Don't Like Obamacare
The Supreme Court could issue a ruling in King v. Burwell, the lawsuit threatening to undermine a key part of the Affordable Care Act, as early as Thursday. But the debate over President Barack Obama's controversial health care law is likely to continue no matter how the justices rule. And one reason is that Americans, on the whole, remain deeply ambivalent about it. While the popularity of "Obamacare" has fluctuated a bit in the five-plus years since it became law, the amazing thing is how little public opinion has changed. (Mark Blumenthal and Jonathan Cohn, 6/22)

Forbes: Who Wins If the Supreme Court Disables Obamacare?
In the next few days, the Supreme Court will issue a decision in King v. Burwell, the most contentious case of the year. (I’m not counting same-sex marriage because everyone thinks it’s a foregone conclusion.) For those still unfamiliar with what is probably the last existential legal challenge to Obamacare, King asks whether the text of the Affordable Care Act, which provides for subsidies for people who buy health insurance from exchanges “established by the state,” also allows the IRS to give these tax credits to those buying from the federal healthcare.gov. ... it’s certainly true that if Obamacare is enforced as written, there will be losers — there have already been plenty! But let’s look at who wins if the justices rule the way the president fears. (Ilya Shapiro, 6/23)

National Review: Congress And Governors: Just Say No To Obamacare
If King is correctly decided, the president will be barred from doling out Obamacare subsidies in Texas and the dozens of other states that refused to be lured into his eponymous welfare program. The hard part is what comes next. Politicians from both sides of the aisle are lining up to rescue Obamacare from itself. These efforts are ironic, given that many of them won their offices by campaigning against the law — and yet now they sit ready in the driver’s seat of its getaway car. That irony is offensive because the would-be accomplices of the failed Obamacare law are asking governors to step in where federal policymakers have failed. Today I am calling on my fellow governors across the country, and on members of Congress in Washington, to show some political spine and just say no to Obamacare. Now is not the time to throw Obamacare a lifeline — it is time to sound its death knell. (Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, 6/22)

San Antonio Press Express: What Abbott Wishes For Obamacare Would Pummel Texans
Gov. Greg Abbott opines that, if the Supreme Court kills the Affordable Care Act, Congress and the states should just let it die. In this, he is in reality suggesting death for more than the act. Even more Texans at risk for bad health — and death — will be the certain outcome if the Supreme Court rules substantively against the measure and Congress fails to comes up with the fix. (O. Ricardo Pimentel, 6/23)

The Washington Post's Plum Line: In Paul Ryan’s District Alone, 19,000 People May Lose Obamacare Subsidies
The other day we brought you new data from Families USA that hinted at the political chaos that could unfold if the Supreme Court guts subsidies for millions. ... Now Families USA has released new data in another batch of key battleground states. In Pennsylvania, some 349,000 stand to lose subsidies. In Wisconsin, it’s 166,000 people. In Ohio, it’s 161,000. This data is broken down by Congressional district as well. Some highlights: In Paul Ryan’s Wisconsin district alone, some 19,000 people stand to lose subsidies. In John Boehner’s Ohio district, that number is 9,000 people. In Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, five House Republicans represent districts each with over 20,000 who would lose subsidies. A number of GOP districts in all three states are each home to over 10,000 such people. (Greg Sargent, 6/23)

The Washington Post: Reshaping The Supreme Court, Our Most Disruptive Branch Of Government
On everything from the states’ systems for drawing legislative districts, to the Affordable Care Act, to voting rights, to the tear-down of campaign finance laws that has supercharged the leverage of the politically inclined super-rich, this court has shown a voracious appetite for finding cases with the potential to disrupt settled policies. The Supreme Court always matters, but under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., with the court so enthusiastic about shifting the direction of the country, it really (really!) matters who is on that bench. (Rachel Maddow, 6/23)

Vox: What If Health Insurance Doesn’t Make You Much Healthier?
[W]e, as a society, often get less value out of health insurance than we think, and that that might be particularly true for people who have weak ties to the medical system (which would include people who have long been uninsured) or particular difficulties getting care (like language or transportation barriers). That isn't to say health insurance is useless, or that medical care doesn't help. But we're probably paying too much and getting too little, and now that we're a lot closer to a world where every American who wants health insurance can afford it, we should be focusing on making sure that all that health insurance we're buying is actually delivering the health we're expecting. (Ezra Klein, 6/22)

The Wall Street Journal: ObamaCare Beyond The Handouts
By one standard no government program can fail, and that’s the standard being applied to ObamaCare by its supporters: If a program exists and delivers benefits, the program is working. Paul Krugman, Nancy Pelosi and others consistently point to the fact that people are willingly receiving ObamaCare benefits as proof of the program’s value. Mr. Obama himself says: “When you talk to people who actually are enrolled in a new marketplace plan, the vast majority of them like their coverage. The vast majority are satisfied.” (Holman W. Jenkins Jr., 6/23)

Forbes: Let's Repeal The Dumbest Levy Of All Time: The ObamaCare Excise Tax On Medical Devices
Medical devices may not be as glamorous as blockbuster drugs, but they include some of the genuine miracles of modern medicine: pacemakers, artificial joints, replacement heart valves, scanners, and radiation-therapy machines. The United States has been the global leader in medical devices, one of the few major industries that both boasts a net trade surplus and is a job-creator. The sector employs 400,000 Americans directly and is indirectly responsible for almost 2 million more that supply and support the highly-skilled workforce. Most important, its products are essential elements of modern medical care, including everything from CT scanners and pacemakers to blood pressure cuffs and robots used by surgeons. (Henry I. Miller, 6/24)

The Wall Street Journal: Another ObamaCare Dream Goes Bust
The Affordable Care Act created a new kind of “cooperative” heralded by supporters of health reform. These Consumer Operated and Oriented Plans, chartered and regulated by the states, would compete with for-profit health-insurance companies and were meant to appease disgruntled advocates of a single-payer and “public option” model for the nation’s health-care system. All but one of the co-ops are operating in the red. One already has been shut down, and others are in precarious financial condition. Chalk up another ObamaCare failure. (Grace-Marie Turner and Thomas P. Miller, 6/23)

The Wall Street Journal's Washington Wire: Our Entitlement Problem For The Next Generation, In One CBO Chart
The Congressional Budget Office released its annual update last week regarding the long-term budget outlook. In that document, one chart in particular demonstrated the financial difficulties caused by an entitlement system that has promised Americans more in benefits than it can deliver. (Chris Jacobs, 6/23)

Newsweek: Medicare Isn’t The Problem. It’s The Solution
Again and again the upcoming election you’ll hear conservatives claim that Medicare—the health insurance program for America’s seniors—is running out of money and must be pared back. Baloney. Medicare isn’t the problem. In fact, Medicare is more efficient than private health insurance. The real problem is that the costs of health care are expected to rise steeply. Medicare could be the solution—the logical next step after the Affordable Care Act toward a single-payer system. (Robert Reich, 6/23)

The Washington Post: A Humane Way To End Life
Less than a month before she died, Brittany Maynard posted a video explaining her decision to move to Oregon to take advantage of the state’s law allowing terminally ill people to end their own lives. Maynard, 29, had been diagnosed with an aggressive and terminal brain cancer and said she wanted to die on her own terms. “I hope to pass in peace,” she said. Her video, viewed more than 9 million times in the first month, and her death, after she ingested medication prescribed by a doctor, helped fuel a national movement for “death with dignity.” ... Death with dignity laws need to be carefully thought out, written and monitored. Oregon and the states that followed its example show that such care is possible. We hope the rest of the nation catches up with this humane option for life’s end. (6/23)

Los Angeles Times: California Needs A Right-To-Die Law
Much-needed and long-overdue legislation that would allow terminally ill Californians to end their lives peacefully and painlessly got off to a promising start earlier this year, passing two Senate committees and winning approval on the Senate floor. The California Medical Assn., previously a formidable foe of such bills, dropped its opposition. But on Tuesday, SB 128 faces its toughest hurdle yet — a hearing in the Assembly Health Committee, where support is shaky. Objections range from moral qualms about allowing people to kill themselves to worries that low-income people and those who aren't fluent in English will be pressured to take lethal doses of prescription medication. (6/23)

The Denver Post: $12,000 For Treadmill Work Stations? Why Not Take A Walk?
Ever heard of (let alone seen or been on) a treadmill work station? Nor had we until reading Denver Post reporter Lynn Bartel's story on how the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing bought five of them for $12,000. They are meant to combat The Next Great Health Threat: sitting. No kidding. That's what one expert claims. And at $2,340 per station, they're apparently a steal. (6/23)

JAMA: The 2015 US Dietary Guidelines: Lifting The Ban On Total Dietary Fat
Every 5 years, the US Department of Agriculture and Department of Health and Human Services jointly release the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. ... Integral to this process is the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) report, just released, prepared by appointed scientists who systematically review the literature and provide evidence-based recommendations .... In the new DGAC report, one widely noticed revision was the elimination of dietary cholesterol as a “nutrient of concern.” ... A less noticed, but more important, change was the absence of an upper limit on total fat consumption. The DGAC report neither listed total fat as a nutrient of concern nor proposed restricting its consumption. (Dariush Mozaffarian and David S. Ludwig, 6/23)

JAMA: Medical Marijuana: Is The Cart Before The Horse?
[I]f the states’ initiative to legalize medical marijuana is merely a veiled step toward allowing access to recreational marijuana, then the medical community should be left out of the process, and instead marijuana should be decriminalized. Conversely, if the goal is to make marijuana available for medical purposes, then it is unclear why the approval process should be different from that used for other medications. Evidence justifying marijuana use for various medical conditions will require the conduct of adequately powered, double-blind, randomized, placebo/active controlled clinical trials to test its short- and long-term efficacy and safety. ... Since medical marijuana is not a life-saving intervention, it may be prudent to wait before widely adopting its use until high-quality evidence is available to guide the development of a rational approval process. (Deepak Cyril D'Souza and Mohini Ranganathan, 6/23)