What We're Reading - September 17
Spread the word
|
|
Good morning, everyone! With only 50 days until the election, things are getting busier and busier. Here’s what we’re reading this morning…
Obamacare is working. “Editorial: Under ObamaCare, 3.6 million more people insured”—“Amid this week's otherwise dreary Census report on poverty and income comes this bit of good news: The number and percentage of people with health insurance grew last year. About 3.6 million more people were insured in 2011 than in 2010. The percentage of those with coverage rose from 83.7% to 84.3%. These numbers mark the first time in five years that the percentage grew. They also mark the first time in 10 years that the percentage of people with private coverage did not drop. For this we can thank the Affordable Care Act, aka health care reform, aka ObamaCare. More precisely, a provision in the law giving young people the right to stay on their parents' insurance plans through age 26. At the very least, these numbers suggest that politicians demanding the repeal of the law come up with what they have not so far: an alternative comprehensive enough to address the problem of the uninsured. As it stands, repeal would result in many of the 539,000 young adults who gained coverage last year rejoining the ranks of the uninsured. Over time, the numbers would surge. Independent analysts project that 30 million people will gain insurance through ObamaCare after it is fully implemented in 2014.”
Plans to repeal Obamacare would hurt low-income seniors. “Romney health plans would affect seniors’ care, studies find”—“It has been a central campaign promise from Mitt Romney: His Medicare overhaul plan would not touch benefits for anyone older than 55. That may not, however, be the case with the Republican presidential nominee’s other health-care proposals. A growing body of research suggests that his plans to repeal the Affordable Care Act and cut Medicaid funding would have a direct impact on the health care that seniors receive. Repealing the health law would mean higher Medicare premiums, the Kaiser Family Foundation found in a recent analysis. Wellness visits and prescription drugs also would cost more. Although under the current law, reductions in doctor payments could create an access issue. The impact could be greatest for the lowest-income seniors, who qualify for both the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and there could be a significant slowdown in federal funds available for their care. The health-care law cuts $716 billion in Medicare spending, largely by reducing how much insurers and health-care providers get paid to manage seniors’ care. Since Medicare beneficiaries pay a percentage of the program’s overall budget, lower spending means lower premiums.”
New TRAP regulations in Virginia cause the candidates to speak out. “Tim Kaine criticizes abortion regulations; George Allen stays mum”—“There’s no telling what impact, if any, Virginia’s newly inflamed abortion politics will have on the U.S. Senate and presidential race. But it’s safe to say that in the Senate contest at least, Democrat Timothy M. Kaine thinks the issue could work in his favor, while Republican George Allen is not playing it up. After the Virginia Board of Health did an about-face on abortion regulations Friday, voting to impose hospital-style building standards on existing clinics, Kaine’s campaign promptly issued a response. ‘These unnecessary regulations are a very clear attempt to infringe upon women’s constitutionally protected right to make their own health care decisions,’ the former governor said.”
