Quantcast
Channel: Health Insurance Headlines on One News Page [United States]
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live

Apple's Recent Hiring Spree Offers A Big Hint That New Products Are On The Way (AAPL)

$
0
0
Apple's Recent Hiring Spree Offers A Big Hint That New Products Are On The Way (AAPL) According to the latest research note from Morgan Stanley's Katy Huberty, which we discovered via Quartz’s Matt Phillips, this list of Apple’s most recent hires highlights what the company is focusing on the most. And — no surprise — there is a great deal of focus on wearable and health-related research.

As you can see from this list of 17 notable hires, Apple has hired at least nine important people to focus on different aspects of wearables, including research for blood, sleep, and respiratory-related technologies.

Among that group of wearable-focused employees is Jay Blahnik and Ben Shaffer, who previously helped build Nike’s FuelBand fitness tracker, as well as Paul Deneve, the former Yves Saint Laurent CEO who now heads up Apple’s “special projects” division.

Other notable hires on this list include Kevin Lynch, the former CTO at Adobe; Angela Ahrendts, the former Burberry CEO who now heads up Apple’s retail business; and Beats executives Jimmy Iovine, Dr. Dre, and Ian Rogers. Rogers is now head of iTunes; Iovine and Dre will focus on unknown roles within Apple having to do with content and curation.

But again, the main focus of this list obviously revolves around wearables. 

For years, it’s been rumored that Apple would release a “watch that double[s] as a computer, two-way radio, mapping device or television,” as The New York Times’ Nick Bilton first put it. The device would marry the looks of a luxury wristwatch with the powerful sensors found in today’s fitness wristbands. And, of course, it would also include familiar elements from the iPhone and iPad shrunken down and reconfigured to work on your wrist.

While this list includes only nine recent hires working on Apple’s wearable device, The Financial Times last year reported on Apple’s “aggressive” hiring push, which may have brought nearly 100 engineers and designers into the fold to help build the company's new wearable gadget.

This year, while the rumors of Apple’s “iWatch” have heated up, the company has reportedly been striking partnerships with health institutions, hospitals, and health insurance companies around the U.S. to help develop and distribute its HealthKit software, announced in June, which will reportedly be a major part of the iWatch experience.

HealthKit, as Apple describes it, "allows apps that provide health and fitness services to share their data with the new Health app and with each other." The user can decide how much of their health-related information they want to share with third-parties.

The idea behind HealthKit is to get people to be more mindful about their health; Apple can’t prescribe medicine or conduct surgeries, but if it can collect and measure users’ biometric data, they can offer preventative solutions — useful, personalized advice to heed before an issue becomes an emergency.

With this jam-packed “special projects” division, there will be even more pressure on Apple to deliver a wearable device that makes health-related technologies sexy and desirable.

Apple will reportedly unveil its iWatch in October.

*SEE ALSO: Apple Hints At A Push Into Healthcare — Let's All Hope That Happens*

Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 4 hours ago.

Jaime Herrera Beutler's contradictory positions on health insurance coverage

$
0
0
U.S. Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler’s suggestion that the Affordable Care Act has nothing to do with her baby’s survival procedure may be true technically but, in the bigger picture it is all about it [“Survival of Rep. Herrera Beutler’s child a celebrated case study,” Loca Reported by Seattle Times 2 hours ago.

Outcry flares over Calif. abortion push in Catholic colleges

$
0
0
Sacramento, Calif., Aug 26, 2014 / 03:02 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Amid backlash from religious liberty and education advocates, Calif. Gov. Jerry Brown's administration has ordered abortion coverage in health insurance plans for two Catholic universities.

“California Catholics are no longer safe to practice their faith within their own institutions. Gov. Brown's decision demonstrates that, in California, tolerance does not extend to people of faith and moral conscience,” David Luke, co-founder of Renew LMU, told CNA Aug. 26.

Luke's group aims for the renewal of Catholic identity at the Los Angeles-based Loyola Marymount University, from which he graduated in 1993.

He said that Gov. Brown and his administration has given the university leadership “a unique opportunity to prove that being a Catholic institution still means something.”

Brown, he noted, “has given them an opportunity to stand in defense of innocent human life and religious freedom. I hope they take advantage of that opportunity.”

Luke's comments follow California government officials' scrutiny of health care plans designed to remove some abortion coverage from health plans that Loyola Marymount University and Santa Clara University provide to their employees.

On Friday, Michelle Rouillard, director of California's Department of Managed Health Care announced that health plans that restricted abortion coverage were illegal under state law.

Her Aug. 22 letter to health care companies active in the state instructed them to cover abortion on the grounds that it is “a basic health care service.” She said that some contracts “limiting or excluding coverage for termination of pregnancies” may illegally discriminate against women.

Under California's Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975 and judicial rulings applying the California state Constitution, Rouillard's letter said, “all health plans must treat maternity services and legal abortion neutrally.” The letter instructed health care companies to remove “discriminatory coverage exclusions and limitations,” including those that limit coverage to “therapeutic” or “medically necessary” abortions.

The department's action, however, could face legal challenges.

The Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal religious liberty advocacy group, co-authored with the Life Legal Defense Foundation a letter to the California department objecting to the action. The two groups said that the action is a “clear violation” of the federal Weldon Amendment, which bars states that accept federal funds from discriminating against institutions and health care entities that do not provide coverage of abortion or refer for abortions.

The California government department “cannot deny approval to or otherwise penalize a health insurance plan for failing to provide coverage of some or all abortions,” said the letter, which was written on behalf of the Cardinal Newman Society.

“When Congress enacted the Weldon Amendment, it sought to ensure that the government could never strong-arm pro-life employers into paying for abortion coverage; therefore, California’s decision is illegal,” Matthew Bowman, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defending Freedom, said Aug. 22.

“No state can ignore federal law in a pursuit to conform everyone to the state’s own ideology on abortion,” Bowman added. “Faith-based organizations should be free to operate according to the faith they espouse and live out on a daily basis.”

The letter threatened to file complaints with the Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Peter Warren, an assistant director of communications at Loyola Marymount University, told CNA Aug. 25 that the university is waiting to hear from its insurance companies on how the decision affects the university.

Deepa Arora, communications director at Santa Clara University, said Aug. 25 that the university has reached out to its insurers.

“We will confer with them to ensure that our health plans continue to be fully compliant with state and federal law,” Arora said.

*A fight for Catholic identity*

Christopher Kaczor, a philosophy professor at Loyola Marymount, told CNA/EWTN News Aug. 19 that California government officials’ scrutiny of abortion coverage in health plans are hindering Catholic colleges’ ability to be consistently Catholic.

“A Catholic university, if it is to retain its identity, must be distinctive in its fidelity to fundamental truths.”

Kaczor cited the Society of Jesus’ 2003 document “Standing for the Unborn,” saying that “the defense of human life prior to birth is a justice issue.”

He said Loyola Marymount, a Jesuit university, “should not, in any way, facilitate abortion.”

In fall 2013 both Loyola Marymount and Santa Clara announced that they planned to stop paying for employees’ elective abortions, the Associated Press reports. They said their insurers, Anthem Blue Cross and Kaiser Permanente, had secured approval from state officials.

In an October 2013 letter, Santa Clara University president Father Michael E. Engh, S.J., said that the Catholic university’s “core commitments” are incompatible with abortion coverage.

State officials revisited their decision following agitation from pro-abortion rights faculty and staff at the universities, as well as activism from pro-abortion groups such as Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Santa Clara University faculty voiced their rejection of the changes to the health care plan by a vote of 215 to 89 in December, the California Lawyer magazine reports. Before the policy was revised, Santa Clara’s abortion coverage also applied to dependents of faculty and staff.
 
The universities' revised health plans still offer supplemental coverage for abortion through a third party.

Kaczor said that Loyola Marymount’s health coverage change is a “significant, meaningful improvement” over the previous policy that covered elective abortion. He said university president David Burcham’s initial proposed policy was “a wonderful affirmation of our Jesuit character.”  

However, he said the change actually implemented by the university’s board of trustees was not as strong because it still cooperated in the provision of abortion.

Luke, of Renew LMU, agreed that the university’s current policy still makes it “morally complicit” in the procurement of abortion.

He said it was “not clear” that Loyola Marymount’s leadership “has the commitment to Catholic mission required to oppose an assault on religious freedom.”

He noted that the president of Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles was invited to speak on campus despite the protests of concerned students, faculty, alumni and others.

Luke said that Loyola Marymount's Catholic mission and identity “have been in decline for years.” He charged that the university’s leadership “would rather bow to a loud, secular faculty majority than do the right thing.”

“The faculty who lobbied Governor Brown were not satisfied with the affordable abortion coverage provided by their Catholic employer,” Luke said. ”They will only be satisfied when their Catholic employer actively participates in the killing of the unborn.”

He encouraged prayer for the restoration of the university's Catholic character. Reported by CNA 41 minutes ago.

Zane Benefits Releases New Information on Health Insurance for Small Businesses

$
0
0
New Article Outlines Health Insurance FAQs for Small Businesses

(PRWEB) August 26, 2014

Today, Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, released new information on health insurance for small businesses.

According to Zane Benefits, even though small businesses are not required to offer health insurance to their employees under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), many still want to provide affordable health insurance to recruit and retain key employees.

This article answers five frequently asked questions on health insurance for small businesses.

Click here to read the full article.

--

About Zane Benefits
Zane Benefits, the #1 Online Health Benefits Solution, was founded in 2006 to revolutionize the way employers provide employee health benefits in America. We empower employees to take control over their own healthcare, while helping employers recruit and retain the best talent. Our online solutions allow small and medium-sized businesses to successfully transition to a health benefits program that creates happier employees, reduces costs and frees up more time to serve their customers. For more information about ZaneHealth, visit http://www.zanebenefits.com. Reported by PRWeb 49 minutes ago.

NiQ Health's CarePlus™ Meeting the New Australian Privacy Principles Requirements

$
0
0
The recent amendments to the Australian Privacy Act offer advanced protection for patients and harsher consequences for breaches of privacy. CarePlus™ is able to improve the protection of patient privacy.

Perth, Western Australia (PRWEB) August 27, 2014

Enhancements have been made to privacy laws within Australia and were introduced in March 2014, with thirteen Australian Privacy Principles (APPs) introduced. These APPs regulate the handling of personal information by organisations; health service providers must comply with these principles. These new APPs also introduce civil penalties for institutions and individuals should breaches of privacy occur.

Smartphone and mobile technology use within healthcare for communication, medical diagnosis and information exchange continues to grow. This presents new challenges for healthcare organisations when attempting to protect patient privacy. Recent studies have been conducted to evaluate smartphone use with clinical staff, one particular study found that 100% of training doctors used their smartphones for clinical photos, with 85% of these doctors storing over 100 of these pictures on their smartphones.

The new APPs require organisations to take reasonable steps to protect the personal information it holds and take active measures to ensure the security of this information. Patient information and photographs stored on unsecured devices can constitute a breach of patient privacy. Under the new APPs, civil penalties have been introduced which may lead to institutions being fined up to $1,700,000 and individual doctors fines up to $340,000 for patient privacy breaches.

With the enhanced legislation and harsher penalties, health service providers should be searching for solutions to prevent privacy breaches occurring. CarePlus™ is able to offer this solution through their integration with Mobile Connect. CarePlus™ Mobile Connect is available on Apple®, Android®, Blackberry® and selected Cisco® devices. The application is also able to meet the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) requirements, which protects patient privacy in the United States. A short video on CarePlus™ Mobile Connect can be viewed here.

The CarePlus™ Nurse Call solution also meets international regulations for Nurse Call Systems as medical devices. The Therapeutic Good Administration (TGA) now regulates Nurse Call Systems as medical devices, following an international trend started by the International Medical Device Regulators Forum (IMDRF) to harmonise the definition of a medical device to include Nurse Call Systems. CarePlus™ meets TGA and various international regulations surrounding medical devices. CarePlus™ is one of the few US Food & Drug Administration certified and audited Nurse Call Systems available in Australia. For more information on the importance of these regulations, NiQ Health CEO Andrew Rothon recently published an article available to view here.

NiQ Health’s CarePlus™ significantly improves the workflow and efficiency of clinicians and caregivers while simultaneously combatting growing concerns within the healthcare environment. CarePlus™ can be considered “middleware in a box” integrating smartphones, paging, wireless and VOIP telephony, ward signs, large screen information boards, email, patient entertainment terminals, duress systems and Building Management Systems (BMS). CarePlus™ provides extensive reporting and Business Intelligence software capabilities providing significant workflow productivity efficiencies and improved patient safety. More information can be found at http://www.careplus-niqhealth.com.au. Reported by PRWeb 1 day ago.

Insurers pay more tax on executive compensation under Obamacare: study

$
0
0
(Reuters) - When Washington eliminated corporate tax deductions on health insurance executive compensation above $500,000 under President Barack Obama's healthcare reform law in 2013, it generated more than $72 million in additional tax revenue for the U.S. government, a left-leaning think tank said on Wednesday. Reported by Reuters 20 hours ago.

Frost & Sullivan: Change in Demographics and Surge in Domestic Manufacturing Drive Asia-Pacific Medical Devices Market

$
0
0
KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Aug. 27, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- Higher disposable incomes and the rapid penetration of health insurance are fuelling the demand for medical devices in Asia-Pacific. With the rise of medical tourism, the inflow of patients requiring medical and surgical intervention... Reported by PR Newswire 19 hours ago.

Experient Health Brings Light to Medical Identify Theft in Latest Blog Post

$
0
0
In 2013, nearly two million Americans were victims of medical identify theft, a growing concern that occurs when someone uses another individual’s personal information to obtain medical services, devices or prescriptions.

Richmond, VA (PRWEB) August 27, 2014

In 2013, nearly two million Americans were victims of medical identify theft, a growing concern that occurs when someone uses another individual’s personal information to obtain medical services, devices or prescriptions.

That's what Experient Health, the health insurance arm of the Virginia Farm Bureau, reported this month in its blog series on health care reform, health insurance and health care issues. The blog was launched last year to keep the community informed of issues and trends that impact their lives.

When people think of identify theft, they typically think of financial identify theft, but medical identify theft is a growing concern for individuals and employers.

In 2013, Americans impacted by medical identity theft faced losses of more than $22,000 per incident — six times higher than the average loss due to financial identify theft.

Employers are negatively affected through lost employee productivity and through the fraudulent overuse of health plan benefits.

So what is medical identity theft?

It's when, according to Experient Health, "someone uses another individual’s personal information, which may include his or her name, birth date, Social Security number and insurance information, to obtain medical services, devices or prescriptions."

Medical identify theft can come from several different sources:·     Friendly Fraud, or when a friend or family member illegitimately uses another person’s identify and medical information to obtain health care services or goods. Studies have shown and estimate that somewhere between one-third and one-half of all medical identity theft committed is due to “friendly fraud.”

·     Dishonest staff in providers’ offices, including nurses, doctors, technicians, receptionist or other individuals, who steal private information.

·     Hacker who sell personal and medical information online to people who want to use another person’s identity to obtain medical services.

"The increase in electronic health records (EHRs) is presenting greater opportunity for criminals to illegally access private information," Experient Health wrote. "In the past five years, breaches in medical information security have affected more than 31 million Americans, ac-cording to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)."

Though it is difficult to prevent medical identify theft, Experient Health recommends ways people can protect themselves, including using strong, unique usernames and passwords; not sharing personal information; keeping medical records in a safe place; and disposing properly of old records.

"The financial impact of medical identity theft can include lost money, unpaid bills and collection agency letters, and tarnished credit reports," Experient Health wrote. "Finding and correcting records can be a lengthy process, often taking as long as a year to complete. The messy con-sequences of inaccurate medical records and insurance claims can be both a time-consuming nuisance as well as a threat to the victim’s health. The medical repercussions for medical identity theft victims can include misdiagnosis, conflicting prescriptions, missed symptoms and other harmful consequences."

To understand more about medical identify theft and the ways to prevent it, visit the Experient Health blog post, and its entire series, online: http://experientinsurance.com/2014/07/27/understanding-medical-identity-theft/. Reported by PRWeb 17 hours ago.

Stop freaking out about retirement

$
0
0
*Stop freaking out about retirement*

Maybe it’s time to retire the word “retirement.” For millions of working Americans, the idea of scrapping work cold turkey one day is unfathomable. Reports that workers are saving too little—confirmed by their bank and 401(k) statements—leave many wondering whether the money will last through their lifetime. The beach-chair-in-the-sand retirement ideal is fast becoming an outdated cliché.

Consumer Reports readers feel the frustration. In a recent survey of more than 24,000 subscribers ages 55 to 75, only 29 percent of those within five years of retirement expressed a high degree of satisfaction with their retirement planning. About 20 percent said they couldn’t afford to stop working. Even among those who expect to retire, 40 percent said they hadn’t saved enough.

But the news from our already retired readers suggests that some of that worry might be unnecessary. Seventy-four percent said their expenses were in line with or less than what they expected before retiring. Seventy-one percent told us they were highly satisfied with their retirement. And 83 percent said they wouldn’t work again even if given the opportunity.

In fact, we may be better set for retirement than we’ve been led to believe. The oft-cited Social Security Administration publication series, “Income of the Aged,” showing retirees’ high dependence on Social Security, underestimates retiree income by about 15 percent, say researchers and former SSA officials Andrew Biggs and Sylvester Schieber. That’s because it excludes most income from individual retirement accounts and other savings. More sophisticated but less well-known models used by the SSA show that current and future retirees as a whole have relatively small savings shortfalls, Biggs says.

For doubters and late-to-the-party savers, planning and perseverance can make a difference. Moreover, our survey found that many readers are choosing an ever-widening middle path: reducing work hours but not stopping, opting for paid pursuits more about passion than a paycheck, and focusing on schedule flexibility. That gradual slowdown can be a balm to the mind and a boon to the wallet, and may help you live longer and be healthier and happier, too.

*Find out why women should think differently about retirement planning.*

If you have postponed looking in your money mirror, you’re not alone. Sixteen percent of preretired respondents said they had done no financial planning at all.

Taking that first step can be scary, but knowledge is power. Determining how much you’ll need can help you reach your goals or adjust your expectations. And it turns out that getting real about retirement is a key to satisfaction. In our survey, retirees with less than $250,000 in savings who had properly estimated their financial needs were more satisfied than those with more than $1 million who had misjudged them.

Roberta Duncan, 60, says good planning and prudent saving allowed her to retire four years ago. At the time, her husband, Dave McRae, now 55, had just lost his job. The high cost of living in Cerritos, Calif., plus other factors convinced them it was time to make a radical move. The couple consulted their financial planner and determined that with Duncan’s teacher’s pension and continuing health coverage, they were well set up for a longed-for adventure, even though their nest egg was in the low six figures. So they sold their house, invested the proceeds, and bought a 26-foot recreational vehicle. For the past four years they have been road warriors, logging about 70,000 miles.

To get a preliminary read on your retirement needs, use an online calculator. More than one-third of the respondents who expect to retire in five years told us they had tried one. A comprehensive one we’ve tested is T. Rowe Price’s free Retirement Income Calculator. We like its straightforward approach.

An important figure you’ll need to enter into any calculator is the percentage of income you’ll need in retirement. Taylor Gang, a certified financial planner and principal at Evensky & Katz in Coral Gables, Fla., echoes many advisers who say that expenses in the early years of retirement can equal or even exceed those while working. “You have more time to play golf and travel,” Gang says. “That costs money.” Our own survey supports an 80 to 90 percent rule of thumb. Though a third of retirees reported no change in their spending in the year they retired, 44 percent said their expenses were lower. Most saw a drop of between 10 and 20 percent.

Once you have an estimate, talk with a financial adviser. We recommend finding a fee-only planner at websites such as Garrett Planning Network and the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors.

Daniel Walk knows that the early bird lays a bigger nest egg. The 25-year-old from Pittsburgh taught himself investing as a teenager, and now his holdings are in the mid-five figures. Walk, who’s studying to be a chartered financial analyst, recently showed his 23-year-old sister Sarah, a musician, how to invest in low-cost index mutual funds through a Roth IRA. That works well for younger and lower-earning investors; they don’t pay taxes while the money grows and in most cases even upon withdrawal, when their tax rates presumably will be higher.

Our survey of retirees corroborates the wisdom of that approach (see “The benefits of an early start," below).

But even if you’re far behind, you still can start to get a foothold. Making the maximum contribution to a 401(k) or 403(b) account will build up savings fast. Contributing $10,000 per year from age 50 through 55 would add about $192,000 to your portfolio by age 67, given a historical average annual rate of return of 8.3 percent for a half-and-half mix of stocks and bonds. (A more conservative portfolio—80 percent bonds, 20 percent stock—would grow by 5.5 percent to almost $131,000.)

From our survey: The benefits of an early start

Among retirees in our survey who said they expected to retire within the next five years, those who invested early had far more in savings than those who began late. Waiting until your 40s to start saving will usually reduce your retirement funds by half. Notably, a sizable 14 percent in our survey didn’t start saving until they were in their 50s or 60s.

Social Security made up a major portion of income of our retired survey respondents. More than half said it was more than 25 percent of their income.

As the Social Security program is currently designed, waiting to claim benefits is the best guaranteed retirement savings plan around. Workers who delay filing until they’re 66—the full retirement age for those born between 1943 and 1954—increase their monthly benefits by 8 percent per year until age 70, or 32 percent over four years. But filing early reduces benefits. A worker whose full retirement age is 66 would have his monthly check cut by 25 percent by filing at 62, the earliest age for eligibility.

Claiming benefits late wasn’t the norm among our readers. Of those already retired, 55 percent had started taking benefits at 62. But 52 percent of those not yet retired told us they would claim their benefits at full retirement age; an additional 29 percent said they’d wait even longer.

At age 65 your chances of living past 90 are one in four, the Social Security Administration projects. In our survey, 43 percent of those not yet retired reported a fear that they’d outlive their money.

Many costs later in life are likely to be health-related. Based on a survey of retirees and preretirees, Fidelity Investments recently projected that an American couple retiring at an average age of 65 would accumulate $220,000 in unreimbursed medical costs during retirement. Stop work at age 62—before Medicare eligibility—and that figure jumps by $17,000 per year; continuing to work to age 67 reduces it by $10,000 per year.

Longevity insurance is a type of annuity that can address that challenge. You pay a single insurance premium up front early in retirement. Then, when you reach the age you have chosen to begin payouts, the policy pays a regular monthly amount for the rest of your life. That could boost your confidence about spending the remainder of your money knowing you’ll be covered later.

The thought of plunking down a chunk of your retirement savings toward an uncertain need may not be appealing, but a recent Treasury Department announcement could make it more palatable. IRA and 401(k) participants can now invest 25 percent of their account balances—up to $125,000—in longevity annuities within their retirement plans without having to start taking the money out at age 70½, when required minimum withdrawals must begin. If they die prematurely, their heirs can get the premiums that weren’t disbursed in annuity payments. “It’s like another level of Social Security, but from an insurance company,” says Keith Singer, a financial planner in Boca Raton, Fla.

Increasingly, the solution to retirement anxiety is to keep working. Eighty-three percent of preretirees in our survey expected to work full- or part-time.

The phenomenon of a gradual retirement isn’t so new. Each year since 2007—before the economic downturn—about a quarter of our fully retired respondents have reported starting their retirement by working less, not stopping entirely. They reduced hours at their main job, worked part-time at a new one, or started a business. They worked for a median of four years. The most satisfied partly retired respondents worked 9 hours or less per week.

Laboring longer provides more income and delays when you begin withdrawing from savings, allowing more time for growth. And for many, it keeps those synapses firing.

Jack “Trip” Rockafellow, 70, who retired from a legal career in 2006, is now using his time to scratch an old itch—and make a bit of cash. Since mid-2013, the Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., resident has been working almost weekly as an extra in movies, TV shows, and commercials in and around New York City. He usually earns $88 for 10 hours of work per day. Occasionally, he’s featured more prominently. (He walked a character named Mia down the aisle in a “Nurse Jackie” episode.) He doesn’t clear much, but he finds the work more fun and less stressful than being a lawyer.

Be aware, though, that part-time work has an impact on Social Security. If you haven’t reached full retirement age but have claimed your benefit, Social Security holds on to $1 for every $2 you earn above $15,480. When you reach full retirement age, it gives that deferred amount back, adding to your monthly benefit.

Working shorter hours at the same employer could affect pension benefits or employer-based group health insurance, so check with human resources before you commit to part-time work.

From our survey: Expectations meet reality

Baby boomers might imagine a future retirement that involves work of some kind, but the reality might be strikingly different. Eighty-three percent of those in our survey who expected to retire within the next five years said they would probably ­continue to work in some capacity. But among retirees no longer working full-time, almost three-quarters weren’t working at all. And 83 percent of those reported no interest in ­working again.

Remember what they say about the best-laid plans? Most of the surveyed preretirees assumed that they would work after retiring, but only a third of retired survey respondents said they actually did. Health concerns or the needs of a partner might interfere. Or you might just decide that you have had enough. Whatever the case, you might need to adjust your expectations and your budget.

Wilma (Billie) Andrews, 64, had a revelation three years ago while toiling as a systems analyst. She was tired and ready to quit, but she kept working to pay for future bucket-list trips. “But my dreams were bigger than my bank account,” she says.

Finally, Andrews, who lives in Seven Hills, Ohio, decided to punt those goals and retire. Right away, she felt relief. She says she now wakes up almost every day with anticipation. She visits grandchildren, gardens, and does home-improvement projects. She has ridden her motorcycle to Florida. Her financial planner said that with her small pension and savings of about $300,000, she should do OK. “I’m not where I thought I would be, but it’s fine,” she says. The decision to leave work “was a tiny light at the end of the tunnel that just got bigger and bigger.”

Your mother probably told you that money doesn’t buy happiness, and our data prove it. Our survey found that retirement satisfaction was significantly higher among households reporting between $400,000 and $1 million in savings than among those with less. But happiness didn’t rise much more for those who had $1 to $2 million. And we found that people are often perfectly content with far less. In fact, retirees with less than $250,000 in savings who were highly engaged socially were more satisfied with their circumstances than retirees with $1 million or more in savings who were not. And numerous studies have found a connection between social engagement and better cognition in elderly people.

Jim Plummer, 74, and his wife, Ruth, 72, have assets that fall below the $500,000 to $1 million sweet spot. But the couple, who live in Highland, Ill., have made the most of their retirement years by volunteering. Several times each year they travel to different parts of the U.S. to help a Christian group that rehabilitates buildings and houses for individuals and families. Sometimes they’re hammering boards, other times they’re planting gardens. They’re meeting like-minded people and feeling good about their contributions.

“It’s neat doing what you know how to do, meeting great people,” Jim Plummer says. “I tell friends who want to retire, you can’t just sit around and watch TV. Have something you really want to do.”

This article also appeared in the October 2014 issue of Consumer Reports magazine.

*Consumer Reports has no relationship with any advertisers or sponsors on this website. Copyright © 2006-2014 Consumers Union of U.S.*

*Subscribe now!*
Subscribe to *ConsumerReports.org* for expert Ratings, buying advice and reliability on hundreds of products.
--------------------
Update your feed preferences
   
   
   
   
    Reported by Consumer Reports 2 hours ago.

Projé Inc. Named to Inc. 5000 List for 2014

$
0
0
Projé Inc. Named to Inc. 5000 List for 2014 HUMBLE, Texas, Aug. 27, 2014 /PRNewswire-iReach/ -- Projé Inc., a project management consulting firm serving health insurance companies and healthcare organizations, has been named to Inc. magazine's annual Inc. 5000list of the fastest-growing, privately held companies in the United... Reported by PR Newswire 13 hours ago.

James Foley's Murder Highlights The Risks Freelance Journalists Take

$
0
0
WASHINGTON (AP) — Journalists James Foley, Steven Sotloff and Peter Theo Curtis all shared one thing in common when they were captured by Islamic militants in Syria, the title "freelance journalist."

The role of freelancers, who make a living by selling individual stories, photos and video to multiple outlets, has expanded across conflict zones in recent years with the spread of technology and social media, which provides a ready canvas for their work. Some are cautious and well-trained; Others take major risks. And they often lack the institutional support staff journalists receive if they get into trouble in a conflict zone. "There is no question that people with less experience and less support are venturing out into conflict zones and seeking to make their name as journalists," said Joel Simon, the executive director of the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists.

While freelance journalists make important contributions, those who go into danger without a contract and the support of an established organization can face immense challenges, said Simon, who worked as a freelancer himself in Latin America. If freelancers are injured or detained, for example, it can take longer for word to get out because no one is monitoring their whereabouts — and early intervention can be crucial to their survival, he said.

According to the committee's data, just under half of the 70 journalists killed in Syria since the conflict began in 2011 have been freelancers. Foley, who was beheaded by Islamic militants in a grisly video released last week, is one of them, and militants threatened to make Sotloff their next victim. Other militants freed Curtis on Sunday.

Ellen Shearer, the Co-Director of Northwestern University's National Security Journalism Initiative and one of Foley's former professors said that when Foley went missing in 2012, the Boston-based media company GlobalPost, one of the organizations he freelanced for, went "above and beyond" in supporting him and working behind the scenes to try to get him freed. But other freelancers may not get that kind of backing or have access to the infrastructure that a staff journalist would, she said. For major news organizations, that might mean a risk assessment team determining whether a place is safe, hostile environment training, health insurance, life insurance, kidnap and ransom insurance and expensive protective equipment including helmets and fitted body armor.

Reporters Without Borders tries to fill the gap by loaning freelancers protective gear and GPS personal distress beacons, and providing safety training sessions and insurance, said Delphine Halgand, the U.S. director of the Paris-based group.

Francesca Borri, an Italian journalist who left her job as a human rights worker to become a freelancer in Syria two years ago, said low pay can also put freelancers in more danger. Borri, 34, said many freelancers go without protective gear, "the first thing they save money on," and rely on less experienced guides instead of people like the driver and "fixer" she used in Syria, who cost her $1,000 per day. Writing a piece on freelancing for the Columbia Journalism Review last year she called freelancers "second-class journalists," but she said Tuesday in a telephone interview from Gaza that it's more honest to call freelancers "exploited journalists."

Some organizations try to discourage risk-taking by refusing to take non-commissioned work from particularly dangerous places — or from journalists without insurance — even though it might be compelling. In 2013, the British newspaper The Sunday Times made news when it rejected pictures from a British freelancer who went to Syria.

But there is no standard policy. When border crossings in northern Syria fell to the rebels fighting to topple President Bashar Assad in early 2012, many journalists went in because they could get in without a visa. When a surge in militant groups and a wave of kidnappings made it increasingly dangerous, many news organizations suspended reporting trips to opposition-held northern and eastern Syria.

Some media organizations still bought material from freelancers in the danger zone, however, creating an incentive for some to still make trips to the area. Many relied on "fixers" they barely knew, local Syrians who arranged for their transportation and acted as translators and escorts within the country. Several freed hostages reported being sold out or betrayed by their "fixers."

James Brabazon, a British documentary filmmaker and freelance journalist who has reported from conflict zones including Liberia, cautioned against thinking of all freelancers as young, inexperienced and untrained. Brabazon, a trustee at the Rory Peck Trust, a London-based organization helping freelancers and their families, acknowledged that when he was younger he "broke every single rule that I urge people to adhere to now" including thinking about their motivations before going into a conflict zone. But Brabazon, 42, said it's true that journalists starting out can make a name for themselves with "spectacular and unique coverage" and that some young journalists may see conflict journalism as "a shortcut" to getting a good job in the profession.

New York City-based freelancer Michael Luongo, 46, who has reported from Iraq, Afghanistan and some 80 other countries, though not from the front lines, said even when media organizations say no to a story because of the danger, that may not be the last word. Luongo said once when he was in Iraq he was told: "We want work from you but we won't officially commission it" because we don't want to be connected with you if something happens. The editor knew he'd go anyway, he said.

___

Associated Press reporter Zeina Karam contributed to this report from Beirut.

___

Follow Jessica Gresko at http://twitter.com/jessicagresko . Reported by Huffington Post 12 hours ago.

Obamacare's "Secret Trick"

$
0
0
Our economy is broken. There's one economy for the wealthy, and another for the rest of us. This division has been worsened by the behavior of corporate executives who manage their corporations for short-term personal gain, rather than for long-term fiscal soundness.

Could a "secret trick" help change that?

This "trick" is reviewed in a new report from the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), written by Sarah Anderson, Sam Pizzigati, and Marjorie Elizabeth Wood, and it comes from what they describe as "a most unlikely source": Obamacare.

CEOs and other executives are overpaid nowadays by any reasonable standard. To make matters worse, taxpayers are footing a large part of the bill. Thanks to some historical lobbying and maneuvering, corporations are able to deduct much of the money they pay to their most highly compensated executives.

We can blame corporate CEOs for selfish, shortsighted, and greedy behavior, and we should. But that misses an important point: government policy actually encourages them to behave that way. In one of its lesser-known provisions, the Affordable Care Act limited these tax breaks for health insurers who benefit from the law. While that may sound arcane, the implications could be profound and far-reaching.

*An imperfect law.*

It's not that the ACA is an ideal law. Far from it. Among other things, it's a boon for for-profit insurers (hence, presumably, the IPS's use of "unlikely"). Insurance companies have certainly benefited from many of its provisions. Enrollment in for-profit plans has increased significantly. Health insurance stocks have surged since the ACA took effect, as this chart illustrates:

Source: Institute for Policy Studies

Medical providers have seen some gains, too. While there have been some limitations on provider reimbursement, hospitals are receiving more income for emergency room visits. Pharmaceutical sales are likely to keep rising, although the Federal government -- the largest purchaser of pharmaceuticals in the nation -- is still forbidden to negotiate price discounts with drug companies.

The individual mandate is a challenge for many households. Union members and others with decent health care will lose out under the law's naïvely-designed excise tax on higher-cost plans That's a Republican idea which the President originally campaigned against, and which was then included in the ACA at his Administration's insistence. This ill-conceived provision will soon punish people for health care expenses which, contrary to Beltway folk wisdom, is largely driven by health status rather than "Cadillac benefits." (See here and here for more.)

These problems may may eventually lead the nation to conclude that we need deeper and more comprehensive reform, the kind which doesn't rely on private-sector corporations to provide our medical care.

*The plus side.*

But for all its flaws, the ACA has its merits. The Medicaid expansion provision, while imperfect in its design, has provided urgently-needed health care coverage to millions of Americans (where it hasn't been blocked by intransigent Republican governors, an outcome which was all but inevitable). It's entirely possible that the law is helping to slow down the rate of increase in our nation's health care costs, although they are already intolerably high.

The IPS study has now shed some light light on another positive aspect of the law.  The ACA lowers the cap on the deductibility of executive compensation from $1,000,000 to $500,000 per executive per year; eliminates the exception for stock options and other forms of "performance-based" pay; and extends the cap beyond senior executives to all highly-paid employees of the firm.

To be sure, the revenue collected by ending this tax break is relatively insignificant.  The IPS estimates that the top ten health insurers paid an additional $72 million in taxes last year. The provision is expected to bring in an additional $1 billion over the next ten years. Those aren't big dollars in Washington terms.

But, as the IPS study rightly points out, the real significance of this tax lies in the model it offers for the entire corporate economy. First, there are the direct tax benefits. As the IPS points out:"If the Obamacare executive pay tax provision applied to all major US corporations ... taxpayers would save $50 billion over the next 10 years."That's a significant improvement to the government's bottom line. This revenue could be used to create jobs, educate children, rebuild our infrastructure ... even deliver added health care services.

*Perverse CEO incentives.*

But the greatest economic benefits would come from changing the perverse incentive structure which currently drives executive compensation in this country.  That could profoundly improve our economy. Here's why: The public's last wave of outrage over executive pay led Congress to impose limits on the tax deductibility of the pay a corporation gives to its top for executives.

But, as the IPS study explains:"In reality, the 1993 tax deductibility cap came with a huge loophole ... that has essentially rendered the cap meaningless ... corporations can simply declare the stock rewards they lavish on executives 'performance-based' and then go on to deduct the many millions involved as a basic business expense."The end result was a move from relatively straightforward pay packages to "ballooning" compensation which increasingly centered on exorbitant stock options and grants. Since these packages were usually decided annually, their "performance" aspect encouraged executives to focus primarily on short-term gains in stock prices. That, in turn, led executives to abandon long-term concerns about financial viability in favor of maneuvers that could spike the stock price -- and therefore their personal compensation -- on a much shorter time frame.

Those maneuvers are frequently reckless, and often fail to address the interests of all company stakeholders -- a group which includes customers, shareholders, and common stock holders. These "performance" packages have become so divorced from actual performance that, as the IPS study reminds us, "CEOs at 63 S&P 500 companies won 'performance pay' increase in 2012 at the same time their corporate share returns were underperforming their ... peers."

Expanding the ACA's executive-pay provision to all companies, and improving its design even more, would begin the process of removing senior executives' incentives to put their companies at risk and disregard the needs of employees and customers.

*The way forward.*

The IPS study performs an additional valuable service by summarizing some of the domestic and foreign proposals for curbing executive pay and correcting the perverse incentives in the current system. They grade these proposals on four simple principles:

1. Encourage narrower CEO-worker pay gaps.

2. Eliminate taxpayer subsidies for excessive executive pay.

3. Encourage reasonable limits on total compensation.

4. Bolster accountability to shareholders.

5. Extend accountability to broader stakeholder groups.

While there is no space to review all of them here, the ideas which IPS has gathered are valuable and insightful. This kind of reform already enjoys broad, bipartisan support. Republican Rep. Dave Camp has offered a similar proposal, as has Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee. Lee's proposal would also deny tax deductions for any executive pay which is more than 25 times the amount paid to a firm's lowest-paid worker. 

Such moves would certainly be popular with voters. As the authors note, polls show that 63 percent of Americans want to "prevent corporations from avoiding taxes when they award their executives millions in stock options."

To be sure, health insurance corporations have not improved their behavior substantially as a result of this law, at least so far. They are still overpaying their executives. UnitedHealth, which will increase its Medicaid enrollment by a projected 800,000 this year, is the most egregious over-payer of senior executives. WellPoint used tax dodges to skirt the first year of this law. But a comprehensive reform of executive pay could make this kind of misbehavior harder to pull off -- and it would mean taxpayers no longer have to foot the bill for a system which encourages mismanagement and greed.

Obamacare's "secret trick" won't single-handedly fix our economy or end our nation's epidemic of executive misadventure. But it's an excellent idea, and the Institute for Policy Studies is using it the right way: to start a much-needed national conversation about reforming executive compensation. Reported by Huffington Post 9 hours ago.

3 ways insurers can still avoid covering the sick

$
0
0
Insurers can no longer reject customers with expensive medical conditions thanks to the health care overhaul, but there's still wiggle room for them to discourage the sickest and costliest patients from enrolling. Insurance companies can exclude some well-known cancer hospitals or certain individual specialists who treat pricey conditions from the list of providers they cover under a plan. Consumer advocates and industry insiders warn that insurers are using tactics like these to limit their coverage of the sick, which can make it difficult for the people who need insurance the most to find the right plan. Narrow provider networks, in particular, have become more common, especially in coverage sold on new public health insurance exchanges created by the overhaul. "Health plans now guarantee coverage for individuals and families regardless of health status," said Clare Krusing, a spokeswoman for the trade association America's Health Insurance Plans, or AHIP. Insurers can lower their chances for covering patients with expensive medical conditions like cancer and autism simply by limiting the number of doctors and hospitals in a coverage network. An Associated Press survey of the nation's top cancer centers this spring found that patients covered under the health care law could encounter barriers to access in many cases. Narrow provider networks help maximize value by grouping providers "who have a track record of delivering high-quality, cost-effective care," said Krusing, the AHIP spokeswoman. The overhaul sets some standards for provider networks, and a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services spokesman said regulators plan to increase their review of these networks for 2015 to figure out whether they need to strengthen requirements. Reported by SeattlePI.com 9 hours ago.

Wonkblog: The obscure part of Obamacare that takes on executive pay

$
0
0
We all know Obamacare is a pretty big law, with plenty of obscure provisions that don't get much attention. For one, the law targets big executive pay packages at health insurance companies — and based on data released Wednesday, the provision is already going a long way.* * Reported by Washington Post 9 hours ago.

How you end up spending $800 million on HealthCare.gov

$
0
0
Signed into law by President Obama on March 23, 2010, the Affordable Care Act has proven to be its own kind of jobs act, especially when it comes to the Washington-area IT community.

When, in several places, the bill called for the creation of an "Internet website" to allow Americans to find and sign up for new health insurance coverage, it opened the tap on hundreds of millions of dollars that would eventually go to creating HealthCare.gov's front end and back end, as well as a small universe of accompanying digital sites. On Wednesday, the office of Daniel Levinson, the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, put out a report detailing the dozens of contracts that went into building out the Federal Marketplace project. And a look at each in the disaggregate paints a picture of an effort far more sweeping than even that suggested by the half-billion dollars the federal government has already paid out to implement the digital side of the health insurance law. Reported by Washington Post 8 hours ago.

USIBC Concludes Successful Pharmaceutical Mission to India; Looks Forward to Continued Dialogue and Collaboration with the Government of India

$
0
0
USIBC Concludes Successful Pharmaceutical Mission to India; Looks Forward to Continued Dialogue and Collaboration with the Government of India WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The U.S.-India Business Council (USIBC) has concluded its Pharmaceutical Executive Mission to Delhi, India. The delegation expressed its commitment to the Indian market, called for further dialogue with the government on issues related to pricing and intellectual property, and discussed strategies for expanding greater access to healthcare and health insurance in India. USIBC’s Executive Mission was led by Paul Schaper, Executive Director, Global Health Policy, Merc Reported by Business Wire 8 hours ago.

CBO Thinks Millions Of Americans Aren't Going To Sign Up For Obamacare

$
0
0
CBO Thinks Millions Of Americans Aren't Going To Sign Up For Obamacare Submitted by Robert Murphy via Mises Canada,

*In June the U.S. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) updated its forecasts regarding the “individual mandate” component of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as “ObamaCare.”* Recall that the individual mandate is the tax levied on Americans who commit the outrage of refraining from buying health insurance. You can click the link for the full list of the (ascending) fine structure, and the list of exemptions. But in this post I want to draw your attention to a shocking table from the CBO report:

Let’s walk through some of these numbers, all of which refer to CBO’s estimates for Calendar Year 2016. (The penalties would actually be assessed in 2017 when these people pay their CY 2016 taxes.) First of all,* the “3.9″ at the bottom of the first numerical column says that 3.9 million people will actually pay the relevant penalty to the government. *(Earlier in the document CBO explains that some people will not have health insurance, and will not be eligible for an exemption, but may simply evade their legally owed tax payment.)

Keep in mind that this figure includes dependents on behalf of whom others might actually make the payment. For example, if a family of 4 decides to forego health insurance altogether and does not qualify for the poverty exemption, then the person filing income taxes for the family has to pay the penalties because of everybody. But that family would show up as 4 people in the 3.9 million total, not 1 person.

However, one of the notes under the table (not shown above) explains: “Individual penalty payments are classified by the income of the tax-filing unit.” So in our example, if the head of household earns $100,000, while the 5-year-old twins earn $0, then–my understanding is–each of the 4 going into the total calculation would be classified as having an income of $100,000 for the purposes of the above table.

Finally, note that the poverty level is defined in this way: “In 2016, the federal poverty guidelines (commonly referred to as the federal poverty level) are projected to equal about $12,150 for a single person and about $24,750 for a family of four.”

Now that we have an idea of what the table shows, here are some fun facts:



==> In total, the government expects to collect $4.2 billion in one year from individuals because they don’t have health insurance.

 

==> 1 million people who earn less than twice the poverty level will be fined for not having health insurance in 2016.

 

==> This group of people–earning less than twice the poverty level–accounts for 25% of those who will be fined.

 

==> The government will extract $500 million in penalties from this group. These people are too poor to buy health insurance, remember.

 

==> Drilling down further, 200,000 people will be fined who earn less than the poverty level. These 200,000 people whom the government says are living below the poverty level will be forced to pay the IRS a total of $100 million in fines just for 2016. They also will not have health insurance, remember.



What is not shown in the above table–though the report itself explains–is that the *total number of nonelderly uninsured Americans projected for calendar 2016 is some 30 million*. This figure includes illegal immigrants and people who are exempt for various reasons from the mandate.

Isn’t it interesting that the “universal coverage” provided by the “Affordable Care Act” will still yield–according to the government’s own projections–*almost 4 million Americans who will prefer to pay an average tax of more than $1,000 to the government for 2016, rather than buying health insurance that year?* Reported by Zero Hedge 5 hours ago.

​MedStar and CVS/pharmacy announce partnership in Maryland, D.C.

$
0
0
The ever-expanding reach of retail medicine through CVS/pharmacy and MinuteClinic has touched MedStar Health. The Columbia-based health system announced Wednesday it would become the 41st health system to partner with CVS. Officials said the affiliation would connect the electronic medical records for MedStar patients seeking care at CVS locations. MinuteClinic, the retail health care division of CVS Caremark (NYSE: CVS), specializes in family health care and accepts most health insurance. The… Reported by bizjournals 5 hours ago.

Washington residents get more insurance choices

$
0
0
People who buy their own health insurance through the state's health exchange, Washington Healthplanfinder, will have more choices next year and will only see a small change in rates. Reported by Miami Herald 5 hours ago.

The Manufactured Crisis of Halbig

$
0
0
On July 22, 2014, a divided three-judge panel of the DC Circuit ruled that people living in states with federally-created Health Care Exchanges under the Affordable Care Act are not eligible for subsidies to help them cover the cost of health insurance. On the same day, a different three-judge panel in the neighboring Fourth Circuit said everyone who is eligible for the subsidies can get them, no matter whether the state or federal government created the Exchange through which you happen to purchase your insurance.

If the D.C. Circuit decision in Halbig v. Burwell became the law of the land, it would threaten to place health insurance once again out of reach for the approximately 4.7 million families and individuals living in the 36 states where the federal government set up the Exchange. But all of us who care deeply about that outcome should resist the effort by those on the other side to create a sense of crisis, because panic plays directly into their strategy.

The lawyers orchestrating the challenge to the subsidies are urging the Supreme Court to take up the cases immediately to resolve the circuit split - and, conveniently, halt what is likely to be an avalanche of rulings against them in the lower courts. They urge the full D.C. Circuit not to rehear the Halbig case, because that would delay Supreme Court review and continue uncertainty about whether people who get insurance on federal Exchanges will be eligible for tax subsidies and whether those who have received the subsidies will have to repay them to the federal government.

Not so fast. Whatever crisis of uncertainty exists is entirely of these lawyers' making. They are using their self-proclaimed crisis for purely tactical reasons - to by-pass the lower courts, where they expect to lose, and get into the Supreme Court where they expect the conservative majority there to give them a victory. Resolution of the issue will be welcome but no one needs to worry about having his or her subsidy "clawed back." And if, as many expect, the D.C. Circuit decides to reconsider Halbig en banc and reads the statute in its entirety and consistently with its purpose, as the Fourth Circuit did, there will be no circuit split for the Supreme Court to resolve. And while there are two cases making their way through other circuits, these lower courts should reach the same conclusion - that Congress intended for subsidies to be available to people who purchase insurance on Exchanges, whether state, federal, or a hybrid.

So much ink has been used in analyzing the various provisions of the ACA addressing Exchanges that I fear the issue looks harder than it is. While the ACA was not perfectly drafted and there is isolated language that supports the challengers' argument, the fair reading of the whole statute is that Congress intended the subsidies to be available to persons obtaining insurance on any Exchange set up under the ACA. That is the reading most consistent with Congress' intent to make health insurance available to as many people in the country as possible. Congress directed each state to establish an Exchange, but then provided for the federal government to establish "such Exchange" if a state elects not to do so. The ACA calls both of these marketplaces Exchanges. If Congress had intended to coerce states into setting up Exchanges, by conditioning the receipt of tax subsidies by its citizens on the creation of a state Exchange, it would have said so clearly and there would be a lot more evidence of this coercion than the challengers have been able to uncover. In fact, this argument has been refuted in court filings by those who would know best - the chairpersons of the responsible Congressional committees and state legislators who would have known if there had been any such threat.

The majority of federal judges has concluded that tax subsidies are available to people who purchase insurance on a federal exchange. This reading, by the way, avoids having to toss out a few other provisions of the ACA, such as the one that requires federal Exchanges, like state Exchanges, to report the amount of tax subsidies paid to people obtaining insurance on that Exchange. That requirement would be meaningless if people on federal Exchanges were not eligible for tax subsidies.

The two judges in the majority in Halbig focused on the literal terms of isolated language in the ACA and, in so doing, ignored the other provisions that conflict with that literal reading. Those judges are like the mechanic working on an engine who has a few pieces left over and just throws them away, not worrying that the engine no longer works the way it should. We should give the rest of the mechanic's team a chance to put the engine back together properly.

The lawyers' panic strategy is clever, but it must fail. This "crisis" can and should be resolved in the lower courts. But even if the Supreme Court takes this one, we should expect the Court to do its job and refuse to sacrifice legal analysis at the altar of a political agenda.

As for the state officials who are litigating against their own citizens' ability to get quality health care, they should be ashamed of themselves. They are sacrificing the interests of the people of their states to a political cause - a last ditch, desperate attempt to make the President's health care plan a failure. But it is not and will not be a failure. The millions of people who have health insurance for the first time will not happily give it up. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images