President Donald Trump says he “saved” popular protections for preexisting conditions, even though his administration is in court asking them to be struck down. Meanwhile, Democrats who want to run against Trump in the fall continue to argue among themselves over health issues. And Kansas may become the next state to expand Medicaid. Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico, Tami Luhby of CNN and Shefali Luthra of Kaiser Health News join KHN’s Julie Rovner to discuss this and more.
The claim, which builds on previous statements and campaign messaging, drew strong reactions.
Newsletter editor Brianna Labuskes wades through hundreds of health care policy stories each week, so you don’t have to.
A group of Democratic state attorneys general are betting the Supreme Court will take up the case and overturn a federal appeals court ruling in time for the 2020 elections. In other high-court news, most Republicans in Congress are asking the justices to use a Louisiana law to overturn the landmark abortion-rights ruling, Roe v. Wade. Joanne Kenen of Politico, Stephanie Armour of The Wall Street Journal and Paige Winfield Cunningham of The Washington Post join KHN’s Julie Rovner to discuss this and more. Rovner also interviews NPR’s Richard Harris, who wrote the latest KHN-NPR “Bill of the Month” feature.
Democrats have asked the Supreme Court to take up an appeals court ruling that could invalidate some or all of the federal health law. It’s not clear the court will take the case, but the efforts will carry consequences for both Democrats and Republicans.
Seema Verma, the administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, sat down for a rare interview with KHN senior correspondent Sarah Varney. They discuss her views on President Donald Trump’s plan for sustaining public health insurance programs, how the administration would respond if Obamacare is struck down by the courts in the future and her thoughts on how the latest “Medicare for All” proposals would affect innovation and access to care.
Candidates again sparred over “Medicare for All” and other approaches to health reform — but this time they waited more than two hours before wading into health policy issues.
A federal appeals court in New Orleans has agreed with a lower court that a key piece of the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. But it is sending the case back to the lower-court judge to decide how much of the rest of the law can stand. Also, Congress is leaving town after finishing work on a major spending bill that includes many changes to health policy. Margot Sanger-Katz of The New York Times, Kimberly Leonard of the Washington Examiner and Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico join KHN’s Julie Rovner to discuss this and more.
The court, based in New Orleans, agreed with a federal judge in Texas that the individual mandate section of the Affordable Care Act could not stand after Congress eliminated the tax penalty for not having coverage. But the case now heads back to the lower court to see how much of the law can remain.
The Affordable Care Act has been on the books for nearly a decade. Parts of it have become ingrained in our health system ― and in our everyday life. But this could change, depending on a long-awaited 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding the law’s constitutionality.
