The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.
David Nexon, a top health care adviser to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, says that no matter what the outcome is of the Supreme Court deliberations or the fall elections, tremendous pressure to reduce spending and cut the deficit will continue to push lawmakers to find ways to control health care costs.
For the first time, the U.S. Olympic Committee is digitizing health records for the athletes who will be competing in London. Some say this step is a sign that electronic medical records are finally catching up to the demands of specialized health care.
Mitt Romney, who is expected to be the Republican nominee for president, doesn’t usually talk about health care in his campaign stump speeches. Tuesday, at Con-Air Industries in Orlando, Florida, he blasted the 2010 federal health law and outlined what he would do if elected president.
The pharmaceutical industry agreed in the health debate to reduce brand-name drug costs by 50 percent for Medicare beneficiaries who reach the coverage gap known as the doughnut hole.
Murray Ross, a vice president in the part of the company that sells health plans, says the law’s individual mandate is needed to attract healthier participants, which balances risks and costs.
A southern California writer explains why he chose to go without coverage for six months so he could secure a better health plan for 18 months. But his strategy is not a sure thing.
Blue Cross Blue Shield will require a review after 30 days to reduce addiction risks and keep the drugs from teenagers and others for whom they weren’t prescribed.
UnitedHealthcare, Aetna and Humana said no matter how the Supreme Court rules on the health law, they would continue to allow young adults coverage on their parents’ plans and offer no-copayment preventive services.
The case could be a turning point in the Supreme Court’s 200-year history with the Commerce Clause.
Andy Allison, Arkansas Medicaid director and president of the National Association of Medicaid Directors, is adamant that cash-strapped states won’t be able to do much to expand coverage to the uninsured if the Supreme Court strikes down the law.
If the Supreme Court strikes down part or all of the 2010 federal health law, millions of Americans – including the uninsured, young adults and the chronically ill – could be affected.
State-based health insurance exchanges – a centerpiece of the law designed to expand coverage to millions of people – are on hold as many states delay implementation of the federal health law.
