�鶹Ů��

Republicans say the Affordable Care Act provides health insurance that manages to be both lousy and expensive. Whatever the flaws of these policies, the new Trump administration is trying to pull off a con by offering Americans coverage that is likely to be so much worse that it would barely deserve the name insurance. It would also leave many millions without the medical care they need. (1/21)

As its first act of 2017, Congress is set to repeal Obamacare through a process known as budget reconciliation. This will fulfill the promise made by congressional Republicans to reverse Obamacare’s higher health care costs, give patients better choices and finally end billions in wasteful spending. Repeal also is an opportunity for Congress to give Americans of all income levels more than a trillion dollars in lower taxes by repealing all of Obamacare’s new or higher taxes. Above all else, repeal of Obamacare should be hailed as a big win for middle-class families. (Grover Norquist and Brett Healy, 1/22)

When President Trump mentioned extending health insurance to everyone this month, it sounded like it could be pie in the sky — until you consider that the insurance he plans on replacing, Obamacare, is struggling under the weight of its own subsidies, regulations and restrictions. On his first day in office, Trump showed he recognized that with an executive order addressing just those issues. (Marc Siegel, 1/23)

The day after the election I wrote that Republicans would find it hard to repeal Obamacare — but not so hard to vandalize it. In his first official action after being sworn in as president, Donald Trump applied the first smear of graffiti to a law that today brings health coverage to more than 20 million Americans. The executive order Trump signed at the White House gives the Department of Heath and Human Services and other government agencies broad latitude to start undermining the law. It encourages them “to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay” any provision of the law that would “impose a fiscal burden” on pretty much anyone — state, hospital, doctor, or patient. (Michael Hiltzik, 1/21)

Congressional Republicans set themselves on a fast track this month to repeal the tax and spending provisions of the 2010 Affordable Care Act. But President Trump and numerous GOP lawmakers are coming around to the view that it would be irresponsible, and possibly disastrous, to take that step without enacting a plan to replace the law at the same time. That change of heart has forced opponents of the act to focus on something they should have been focusing on for years now: What is the problem they’re trying to fix? Because repealing Obamacare won’t slow rising healthcare costs by itself, and it certainly won’t enable more Americans to obtain health insurance. (1/21)

Donald J. Trump ran on a campaign promise to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. So it should not come as a surprise that he has signed an executive order urging his administration to fight it as much as possible. But that order, alone, won’t allow President Trump to unwind the sprawling health law known as Obamacare. (Margot Sanger-Katz, 1/21)

As one of the first orders of business in the 115th Congress, we are repealing the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, to replace it with a more patient-centered alternative. President Obama and congressional Democrats forced the ACA on Americans with little debate and a severe lack of transparency. Today, increased costs, dwindling choices and decreased quality of care are hurting our constituents. Citizens throughout the country are looking to their representatives to fix these issues, and we will answer their calls. (Rep. Andy Biggs. R-Ariz., and Trent Franks, R-Ariz., 1/22)

As if it isn’t enough that the GOP Congress and the Trump administration have vowed to repeal the Affordable Care Act – a plan that would disrupt or end health insurance for about 5 million people in this state, including hundreds of thousands in Republican districts – they also have greased the skids for defunding the state’s best known provider of women’s reproductive health care. (Shawn Hubler, 1/20)

The polls say we want our leaders to produce environmentally sensible and fiscally responsible solutions for our crumbling infrastructure, and a health system that fosters innovation and provides a safety net for those that need one. Polls say we want a tax code that is simple to understand and equally meted out, and an immigration system that is true to the timeless values on which our nation was built, and one that is rational and compassionate. ... How can we reach considered compromise? Let’s start with how not: labeling the ascendant party as illegitimate. Pledging, even before the new government assumes control, to fight it. (John Russell IV, 1/22)

But even as repeal is discussed, a better way forward for U.S. healthcare is contained in the ACA. Ironically, the opportunity is most obvious in the states — predominantly Republican-controlled — that didn’t take direct advantage of the subsidies offered through the law but instead took advantage of the 1115 Waiver Program. Through the waiver, states can have tailored Medicaid expansion on local terms. (Michael Williams, 1/21)

The governors know that Medicaid’s health insurance for low-income working Americans is not going away, but they expect ... that Congress and President Donald Trump will turn it into a block grant program to the states that will cap federal spending but give them much more flexibility in how they use the money. Their concern is that they could lose most or all of the billions of extra federal dollars they have been receiving compared to South Carolina and 18 other states that have not expanded Medicaid. That money is crucial to their state and local economies. (Frank Knapp Jr., 1/22)

With the convening of the 115th Congress and the inauguration of Donald Trump as the 45th president on January 20, 2017, medicine and health care in the United States are in flux. ... The central questions remain of how to attain a health care system that is accessible to all Americans, that provides needed care while avoiding unnecessary care, and that delivers care at an affordable and sustainable price. The next steps are to build on the progress that has been made, which will require further improvements in health insurance coverage, the ability of people to obtain needed medical care regardless of income, and a continued shift away from fee-for-service medicine. (Robert Steinbrook, Mitchell H. Katz and Rita F. Redberg, 1/20)

Those Medicaid reimbursement cuts for children’s therapies — passed by the Legislature in 2015 but delayed as the courts took up legal challenges — have been severely criticized by parents, the media, community groups, and many of the same legislators, both Democrats and Republicans, who originally voted for them. But, if Congress goes through with plans to turn the entire Medicaid program into a block grant, we can all expect to meet many more vulnerable Texans who would suffer and fail to reach their potential due to further cuts. The cuts, either through a Medicaid block grant or a similar “per capita cap” policy, are high on the agenda as Congress and the new President get to work this month. (Peter Clark, 1/21)

There is no question that Georgia’s rural hospitals are struggling. ... Their struggles were one of the primary reasons cited for Medicaid expansion. But before we throw money at the problem, it’s important to understand one of the fundamental causes: a massive unfunded mandate from the federal government. In 1986, Congress passed, and President Ronald Reagan signed, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), requiring hospital emergency departments to treat and stabilize all patients regardless of their ability to pay. Unfortunately, Congress did not appropriate funding to cover the cost of new benefit. (Kelly McCutchen, 1/21)

Like many current residents, I grew up in Glendale, attending Glendale High School. I decided to stay where I grew up — not least because my job kept me around, and I could stay close to family and friends. Glendale offers a good quality of life. It's a clean city with proximity to big-city life, while still being relatively affordable. However, one important parameter involved in quality of life — traffic control and safety — seems to decline inexorably every year. If you do a simple Google search, you will see that Glendale routinely makes headlines as among the nation's most dangerous cities in which to drive, and this danger is compounded for pedestrians and bicyclists. (Shant Minas, 1/19)

State treasurer Deborah Goldberg has opened a sweeping review of alcohol laws in Massachusetts, and business interests — retailers, brewers, and distributors — are sure to make their voices heard as that process plays out. Profits are at stake for them. But what about consumers? The current system of alcohol regulation in Massachusetts reduces choices. And by requiring booze to pass through a gantlet of middlemen before reaching consumers, those regulations raise prices. In towns and cities, caps on the number of liquor licenses for restaurants can further limit options. (1/22)