'I have to have coverage in order to make sure that I don't die': GOP lawmakers get blasted at Obamacare town hall

February 10, 2017, 9:29 am

≫ Next: What you need to know on Wall Street right now

≪ Previous: Andy Puzder’s Reverse Nuremberg Defense

$

0

0

Lawmakers got an earful from constituents in Tennessee on Thursday night during a town hall to talk about the future of the Affordable Care Act, the law better known as Obamacare.

Republican Rep. Diane Black held a town hall about the healthcare law at Middle Tennessee State University in Murfreesburo, Tennessee, and was confronted by multiple constituents who pushed back against the GOP's plan to repeal and replace the ACA.

One man, Mike Carlson, confronted Black about the repeal, saying that the law has allowed him to gain access to life-saving coverage.

"I am an overweight person. I have to have coverage to make sure I don't die," he said. "There are people who have cancer that have that coverage that have to have that coverage to make sure they don't die. And you want to take away this coverage and have nothing to replace it with. How can I trust you to do anything that's in our interest at all?"

Another person in attendance, Jessi Bohon, pointed to her Christian faith as a reason to support the law.

"it's in my understanding that the ACA mandate requires everyone to have insurance because the healthy people pull up the sick people, right?" she said. "As a Christian, my whole philosophy in life is to pull up the unfortunate. So the individual mandate, that's what it does, the healthy people pull up the sick."

Bohon also criticized a proposal favored by Republicans that would put sicker people in high-risk pools for those with preexisting conditions, saying "we are effectively punishing our sickest people" by using the pools. Bohon pointed to previous state high-risk pools, which have exhibited high costs and poor coverage.

Bohon asked why the government doesn't just "fix" the ACA or provide Medicaid for all instead of repealing the law.

Black pushed back on both Carlson and Bohon's statements, according to CNN, saying that the Republicans replacement law would offer coverage to all Americans. Black said that while the ACA has provided coverage for more tha 20 million Americans, there are still people that go without insurance and the GOP plans to fix that.

The current uninsured rate is 8.6% according to the Department of Health and Human Services, the lowest ever. Tennessee, which has not expanded its Medicaid program under the ACA, has an uninsured rate of 11.8%.

Bohon said she is a teacher and receives coverage through the state's government, according to the CNN report. Both Carlson and Bohon voted for Hillary Clinton, according to the report.

Tennessee saw one of the highest increases in premiums for Obamacare in 2017, with costs for the average silver level plan increasing by 63% from the year before.

-Watch Carlson's and Bohon's statements below:-



"I HAVE to have coverage in order to make sure that I don't die... and you want to take away this coverage?" #ObamacareTownhall pic.twitter.com/C2JtPcOuGA

— MJ Lee (@mj_lee) February 10, 2017

 



Seriously urge everyone to watch this entire question from a woman at GOP #Obamacare townhall in Tennessee: pic.twitter.com/8mBGE1z6Rj

— MJ Lee (@mj_lee) February 10, 2017

 

*SEE ALSO: Here's how many people in every state don't have health insurance*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch protesters and Trump supporters get into a fiery argument on the National Mall right after the new president was sworn in Reported by Business Insider 9 hours ago.

---

What you need to know on Wall Street right now

February 10, 2017, 10:09 am

≫ Next: 5 big moments from Jason Chaffetz's fiery town hall in deep-red America.

≪ Previous: 'I have to have coverage in order to make sure that I don't die': GOP lawmakers get blasted at Obamacare town hall

$

0

0

*Welcome to Finance Insider, Business Insider's summary of the top stories of the past 24 hours. *

Bridgewater Associates is as well known for being the world's largest hedge fund, with $150 billion in assets under management, as it is for its quirky culture of "radical transparency."

An obvious question about the company is how — or if — Bridgewater's culture contributes to its success on the investment side. For the firm's co-CIO, Bob Prince, there's a clear correlation. We talked to Prince about the firm's intense, unique culture, and how he views the relationship between performance and working environment.

We also recently caught up with Dubravko Lakos-Bujas, the head of US Equity Strategy at JPMorgan. Here's what he had to say about dollar strength, market volatility and where investors should put their money in 2017. 

A former hedge fund manager who retired at 36 is sounding the alarm on the Trump trade. And Abby Joseph Cohen, the president of Goldman Sachs' Global Market Institute, is retiring.

Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Baldwin wrote a letter to Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein asking how much influence Goldman has over Donald Trump. And one of the world's leading credit-rating agencies thinks Trump could be a disaster for the global economy.

In deal news, the company behind Durex and Dettol just confirmed a $17.9 billion deal to buy a US baby milk maker. Wall Street stands to make more than $100 million from the deal.

And Walt Disney is buying most of Saudi Prince Alwaleed's stake in Paris Disneyland.

In corporate news:

· Under Armour denounces Trump travel ban after CEO praised president as 'a real asset for the country'
· Sears CEO Eddie Lampert will pay $40 million to settle a lawsuit that alleged he unfairly enriched himself with the company's "crown-jewel assets"
· The company behind Call of Duty and Candy Crush is soaring after reporting record revenue
· "Can't fly with broken wings"— Wall Street blasts Twitter for missing Q4 earnings
· Yelp plunges after sales outlook misses estimates

In macro news, Canada's jobs report crushed it. And investors don't trust the Fed anymore, according to Business Insider's Pedro da Costa. 

There's a bunch of news in the healthcare sector, too:

· The Senate has confirmed Trump's pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services
· The list price of a life-saving overdose treatment has skyrocketed 680% in the last 3 years — and now 31 senators want answers
· A decades-old steroid used to treat a rare disease just got approved by the FDA — and it costs $89,000
· One of the largest middlemen in the drug industry just released a video showing why it should be able to remain secretive
· Here's how many people in every state don't have health insurance
· One chart shows just how devastating healthcare costs are for American families

In other news, Tesla faces a unionization challenge after factory workers complain of injuries and long hours. Elon Musk called the attacks on Tesla's working conditions "morally outrageous."

Lastly, here are 35 trips every couple should take in their lifetime.

*Here are the top Wall Street headlines from the past 24 hour*

*Capital One is trying to curry favor with millennials with cafés around the US offering free Wi-Fi, local coffee and food, and complimentary money coaching *—* *The more than 80 million people born into the millennial generation have grown up with technology by their side.

*This is how you know something desperate is going on in China's economy* — The country has been suffering from money outflows for months — something that troubles Beijing because it pulls down the value of the Chinese yuan and makes the economy harder to manage.

*MARK CARNEY: Central banks need "the spirit of the millennial"* — Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said he wants to improve diversity at the central bank to avoid "being mono-culture, secretive and ridden with groupthink."

*Greece is in trouble again over its "explosive" debt — here's why *—* *Greece is back. A disagreement among Greece's creditors over how to deal with the country's "explosive" debt pile is making the market nervous.

*Trading volumes are crashing at China's 3 biggest bitcoin exchanges* — Trading volumes at China's three largest bitcoin exchanges have plummeted after the central bank put the virtual currency market under sharper scrutiny a month ago in a move that coincided with official efforts to stem capital outflows.

*A banker who's been on Wall Street for 20 years explains why you shouldn't worry too much about your first job* — RBC Capital Markets' technology investment banking cohead, Michal Katz, has called some big-name Wall Street firms home over the course of her over 20-year career in finance.

*SEE ALSO: The 27 most important finance books ever written*

Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 8 hours ago.

5 big moments from Jason Chaffetz's fiery town hall in deep-red America.

February 10, 2017, 12:20 pm

≫ Next: Angry voters flood town halls of GOP lawmakers

≪ Previous: What you need to know on Wall Street right now

$

0

0

Rep. Jason Chaffetz held a town-hall meeting. It didn't go well.




*Feb. 9, 2017, was a rough day for Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah.*

Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images.

*The Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee hosted a town hall back home in suburban Salt Lake City. *

The high school auditorium where the event was held was packed with roughly 1,000 constituents, with hundreds more huddled outside the space.

Most of them were not happy.

Photo by Rick Bowmer/AP.

* *Since the election, Chaffetz has been treading on thin ice.* *

Last year, as chairman of the committee, Chaffetz — a leading critic of Hillary Clinton's role in the attacks in Benghazi, Libya — talked tough about keeping the former secretary of state in check should she win the presidency. After Donald Trump's victory, however, Chaffetz has been far less critical of the president, shrugging off the former reality TV star's myriad of potential ethics violations. Chaffetz has also been highly critical of the Affordable Care Act and has voted for its repeal — a move that's unpopular with most Americans.

Photo by Rick Bowmer/AP.

These were the facts at the front of voters' minds when things came to a boil Thursday night outside Salt Lake City.

*Here are five must-see moments from Chaffetz's town-hall meeting:*

*1. When constituents — many of whom were attending a town hall for the first time — chanted "Do your job!" in regard to Chaffetz turning a blind eye rather than investigating Trump's ethics issues.*



Cong Chaffetz Town Hall crowd chanting "Do your job!" He's having a hard time answering over crowd noise @UtahIndivisible @IndivisibleTeam pic.twitter.com/gO0BXybGy5

— Kyung Lah (@KyungLahCNN) February 10, 2017

*2. When a cancer survivor who has utilized Planned Parenthood's services asked Chaffetz, "Why are you trying to take it away?"*



Cancer survivor — who relies on Planned Parenthood for care — asks Chaffetz: “Why are you trying to take [it] away?” pic.twitter.com/yexjMZ7wz6

— Dan Diamond (@ddiamond) February 10, 2017

“I was actually able to keep receiving those vital yearly screenings [after having battled cancer] because of my town’s Planned Parenthood,” the survivor said to raucous applause, noting she hadn’t had private health insurance at the time. "So, sir, can you please tell me — explain to me why you are trying to take that vital health provider away from women like me?"

*3. When boos filled the auditorium after Chaffetz told the crowd it's "not required by law" for Trump to release his tax returns. *

Trump's tax returns would paint a much better picture of the president's philanthropic efforts and business partnerships, revealing if his brand's global reach has any conflicting relationships with problematic people or foreign governments, like Russia.



Again, #Chaffetz says he wants Trump to release his tax returns, "but it is not required by law." Reaction: pic.twitter.com/KF6rX8Ei3J

— Eric Bradner (@ericbradner) February 10, 2017

While Chaffetz said he wishes Trump would release his tax returns, it's not required by law for the president to do so. He tried to carry on, but his words were immediately drowned out by the disapproving crowd.

*4. When this retired school teacher used her classroom experience with troublemakers to make an excellent point about Trump's behavior.*

“I rarely had a discipline problem because I laid out my expectations very clearly, and I laid out the consequences. But once in a while at the beginning of the year, after just two or three weeks, I could look at the kid and think, ‘you’re gonna be a problem.’ ... It’s been two or three weeks“ since Trump took office, she said to loud cheers.



At rowdy town hall, ex-teacher asks Chaffetz — chair of House oversight — “what’s your line in the sand” for Trump? pic.twitter.com/8U7IkpZtsS

— Dan Diamond (@ddiamond) February 10, 2017

"I would draw a line at the very beginning of the year and say, 'Pass this line, and this is the consequences.' When you’re president of the United States, the consequence is impeachment," she said before addressing Chaffetz, pointedly asking: "What is your line in the sand?"

*5. When constituents who couldn't get in protested outside, chanting, "We'll be back!" for Chaffetz's next visit to town. *



#Chaffetz town hall post-game: Protesters who couldn't get in are still outside chanting "we'll be back!" and "investigate Trump!" pic.twitter.com/tnkPa2Wput

— Eric Bradner (@ericbradner) February 10, 2017

*What happened at Chaffetz's town hall, although particularly contentious, was not all that unexpected.*

The same night of Chaffetz's event, Rep. Diane Black faced similar heated questions in Tennessee, with one Obamacare user pleading, "I have to have coverage to make sure I don't die." Rep. Tom McClintock of California was forced to rely on police to make his way through a crowd of passionate demonstrators at a town-hall event earlier this month. In Pinellas County, Florida, an angry constituent told Rep. Gus Bilirakis to "grow a spine!" and defend health care. And all of this, of course, comes amid nationwide protests of President Trump's travel ban targeting Muslims — another unpopular measure to most Americans.

*Frustrations have mostly been directed toward Republican lawmakers, and rowdy town halls like this are **largely happening in deep-red America** — a direct rebuke to the myth that the backlash to Trump's policies is coming solely from "coastal elite" cities and states.*

Regardless of political party, most Americans agree that revoking life-saving health care coverage from millions of people is inexcusable. Most Americans care about Trump's potential conflicts of interests as president. And clearly, most Americans couldn't care less if their representative is Team Blue or Team Red — they want a government that works for them.

If you're interested in attending a town hall hosting your representative, here are some tips for first-timers you might find helpful.


Reported by Upworthy 6 hours ago.

Angry voters flood town halls of GOP lawmakers

February 10, 2017, 1:31 pm

≫ Next: Pet Health Insurance

≪ Previous: 5 big moments from Jason Chaffetz's fiery town hall in deep-red America.

$

0

0

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) " The voter identified himself as a cancer survivor, and he had something to say to Republican Rep. Justin Amash: "I am scared to death that I will not have health insurance in the future."The comment earned... Reported by New Zealand Herald 5 hours ago.

Pet Health Insurance

February 10, 2017, 4:30 pm

≫ Next: Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger rejected by judge

≪ Previous: Angry voters flood town halls of GOP lawmakers

$

0

0

If you consider your dog or cat to be a member of the family, you are not a pet owner -- you are a "pet parent." There's a vast difference, according to Robert Jackson, CEO of HealthyPaws.com, a pet insurance provider.

Jackson's company, he says, provides health and accident insurance benefits to people who would "do anything" to save their pets. But "anything" can be expensive! The costs of an emergency surgery or a stay in intensive care could easily ring up a bill of $3,000 or more -- as I recently learned when my Yorkie needed surgery.

Pet health insurance is not designed to cover the ordinary annual costs of owning a pet such as vaccinations, health examinations and regular teeth cleaning, which, according to the American Pet Products Association, costs the average cat owner $196 and the average dog owner $233.

Should you consider buying health insurance for your pet? In recent years, it has become a far more respected product. Consumer Reports has studied the "best buys" of pet insurance, concluding that if you choose wisely, the odds are good that your policy will pay for itself at some point in your pet's life.

There are even websites such as PetInsuranceReview.com that compare premium costs and coverages on pet health policies. HealthyPaws.com consistently gets high ratings based on its pricing and reliable payment of claims.

If you're thinking about getting pet medical insurance, here are five things you should know:

--The cost of coverage depends on the age of the pet, the breed (and there is a category for mixed breeds) and your zip code. An online calculator on HealthyPaws.com gives instant quotes.

You can lower the premium by agreeing to pay a higher deductible or co-pay. A popular option at Healthy Paws is a $200 deductible with 80 percent coverage with a 20 percent copay. For a small, young dog, that works out to about $25 per month, which is automatically renewed on your credit card until you cancel.

--Not all costs are covered. Again, pet insurance is not meant for the ordinary annual costs of owning a pet. Annual heartworm tests and meds, shots and dental are not covered in most policies. But you are typically covered for expenses in case of an accident, emergency or illness -- including cancer, hereditary and congenital conditions, surgery, diagnostic treatments, prescription drugs and a long list of other potential costs.

--The costs of covered care are reimbursed. HealthyPaws has simplified the payment of claims with its own app. You can simply take a photo of the bill and upload it to submit your claim, which is reimbursed promptly. Jackson notes that in some emergency situations the company will work with the vet to pre-approve the costs and pay the bill directly to the animal hospital.

--Coverage starts 15 days after the application is approved. You don't need to send in your pet's medical records until you file a claim. Then the company will quickly check with the vet and reimburse you for your costs, after you have satisfied the deductible and made the co-payment.

--More tips: Buy insurance when your pet is young. Pets with pre-existing conditions cannot be covered, so it's best to buy when you first get your dog or cat. Also, while all breeds are covered, there is one major exclusion: A one-year waiting period for coverage for hip dysplasia for certain breeds such as German shepherds, prone to this condition. And you cannot purchase new coverage for this condition after the pet is 6 years old.

Is pet insurance worth the cost? That all depends on whether your furry friend leads a charmed life or whether its nine lives are marred by as many veterinary interventions. But unlike paying for an extended warranty on an appliance that can be replaced if it really breaks down, the costs of a pet illness are unlimited and potentially very expensive. And, as I now know personally, that's The Savage Truth.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.

Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger rejected by judge

February 9, 2017, 7:49 am

≫ Next: Anthem-Cigna deal blocked; what will companies do with all that cash?

≪ Previous: Pet Health Insurance

$

0

0

Predicting diminished competition and likely higher costs, a federal judge rejected health insurer Anthem's bid to buy rival Cigna. Reported by CNSNews.com 1 day ago.

Anthem-Cigna deal blocked; what will companies do with all that cash?

February 9, 2017, 7:40 am

≫ Next: Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger is rejected by judge

≪ Previous: Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger rejected by judge

$

0

0

Another mega-merger in the health insurance industry was stymied after a federal judge blocked Anthem Inc.'s proposed $48 billion deal to buy Cigna Corp. Wednesday. That, of course, comes a few weeks after another judge blocked the proposed $37 billion acquisition of Louisville-based Humana Inc. (NYSE: HUM) by Hartford, Conn.-based Aetna Inc. (NYSE: AET) In both cases, the judges found that the mergers would have violated antitrust laws by reducing competition. Now, as Bloomberg reports, the question… Reported by bizjournals 1 day ago.

Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger is rejected by judge

February 9, 2017, 8:03 am

≫ Next: Judge blocks Anthem-Cigna deal — now what will those companies do with all that cash?

≪ Previous: Anthem-Cigna deal blocked; what will companies do with all that cash?

$

0

0

Predicting diminished competition and likely higher costs, a federal judge has rejected Anthem Inc.’s bid to buy rival health insurer Cigna Corp.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said Wednesday that the merger would significantly reduce competition in the already concentrated insurance market,... Reported by L.A. Times 1 day ago.

---

Judge blocks Anthem-Cigna deal — now what will those companies do with all that cash?

February 9, 2017, 8:42 am

≫ Next: HHS Pick Price Made ‘Brazen’ Stock Trades While His Committee Was Under Scrutiny

≪ Previous: Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger is rejected by judge

$

0

0

Another mega-merger in the health insurance industry was stymied after a federal judge blocked Anthem Inc.'s proposed $48 billion deal to buy Cigna Corp. Wednesday. That, of course, comes a few weeks after another judge blocked the proposed $37 billion acquisition of Louisville-based Humana Inc. (NYSE: HUM) by Hartford, Conn.-based Aetna Inc. (NYSE: AET) In both cases, the judges found that the mergers would have violated antitrust laws by reducing competition. Cigna, once based in Philadelphia,… Reported by bizjournals 1 day ago.

HHS Pick Price Made ‘Brazen’ Stock Trades While His Committee Was Under Scrutiny

February 9, 2017, 12:14 pm

≫ Next: Minnesota's health exchange reports record number of signups

≪ Previous: Judge blocks Anthem-Cigna deal — now what will those companies do with all that cash?

$

0

0

Health and Human Services secretary nominee Tom Price showed little restraint in his personal stock trading during the three years that federal investigators were bearing down on a key House committee on which the Republican congressman served, a review of his financial disclosures shows.

Price made dozens of health industry stock trades during a three-year investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission that focused on the Ways and Means Committee, according to financial disclosure records he filed with the House of Representatives. The investigation was considered the first test of a law passed to ban members of Congress and their staffs from trading stock based on insider information.

Price was never a target of the federal investigation, which scrutinized a top Ways and Means staffer, and no charges were brought. But ethics experts say Price’s personal trading, even during the thick of federal pressure on his committee, shows he was unconcerned about financial investments that could create an appearance of impropriety.

“He should have known better,” Richard Painter, former White House chief ethics attorney under President George W. Bush and a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School said of Price’s conduct during the SEC inquiry.

As Price awaits a Senate vote on his confirmation, Senate Democrats and a number of watchdog groups have asked the SEC to investigate whether Price engaged in insider trading with some of his trades in health care companies. Price has said he abided by all ethics rules, although he acknowledged to the Senate Finance Committee that he did not consult the House Ethics Committee on trades that have now become controversial.

The SEC’s inquiry began in 2013, as it battled Ways and Means for documents to develop its case.

A few weeks ago, the day before President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the SEC quietly dropped its pursuit of committee documents without explanation, according to federal court records. No charges were brought against the staffer, Brian Sutter, who is now a health care lobbyist. Sutter’s lawyer declined to comment.

Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist with Public Citizen, described Price’s volume of stock trades during the SEC inquiry as “brazen,” given the congressman’s access to nonpublic information affecting the companies’ fortunes.

“The public is seeing this and they really don’t like it,” said Holman whose watchdog group recently filed complaints about Price’s stock trading with both the SEC and the Office of Congressional Ethics.

Trump administration officials and Price have dismissed questions that news reports and lawmakers have raised about stock trades coinciding with official actions to help certain companies, saying Price’s brokers chose the stocks independently and all of his conduct was transparent.

After acknowledging that he asked his broker to buy stock in an Australian drug company, he told the Senate Finance Committee that he did not direct his broker to make other trades.

“To the best of my knowledge, I have not undertaken such actions,” he wrote in response to finance committee questions. “I have abided by and adhered to all ethics and conflict of interest rules applicable to me.”

An analysis of Price’s trades shows that he bought health stocks in 2007, the first year Congress financial disclosures are posted online. In 2011, the the first year Price sat on the health subcommittee, he traded no health-related stocks, according to his financial disclosures filed with Congress.

That same year, members were facing public criticism because of a book detailing how they could use inside information and a “60 Minutes” investigation focused on how members and staff could legally use inside information to gain from their own stock trades.

In 2012, President Barack Obama signed the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act to rein in insider trading by members and require more disclosure. Public watchdog groups suggested at the time that the law would curb the practice.

That year, after his one-year break in health care trades, Price resumed investing in health care companies.

Along with investments in technology, financial services and retail stocks, he also bought and sold stock in companies that could be impacted by actions of his subcommittee, which has a role in determining rates the government pays under the Medicare program.

Health care firms spend heavily to influence members of Congress, lobbying on health matters, funding political campaigns and seeking favor with Medicare officials who decide how much the program will pay for certain drugs and devices. The Food and Drug Administration holds similar power, approving or putting conditions on drug and device use.

Beyond his personal investments in health care companies, Price has also advocated their interests in letters to officials and proposed laws, government records show.

In 2012, disclosure records show Price sold stock in several drug firms, including more than $110,000 worth of Amgen stock. Amgen’s stock price had steadily climbed out of a recession-level slump, but Price’s sale came a few weeks before the company pleaded guilty to illegally marketing an anemia drug.

By 2013, the health subcommittee was at the center of a major conflict between Medicare, which sets Medicare Advantage rates, and the insurance industry. Medicare issued a notice early that year announcing its intention to reduce Medicare Advantage rates by 2.3 percent as part of a major cost-cutting initiative.

That prompted fierce lobbying by the health insurance industry. Members of Congress, including Price, wrote a letter to Marilyn Tavenner, then acting administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, protesting the rate cut, saying the decrease would “disadvantage vulnerable beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions.”

Ultimately, Medicare decided not to cut rates but instead, to increase them. Yet an hour before Medicare announced the change, a Height Securities analyst fired off a “flash” report to 200 clients that touched off a surge of trading.

The analyst’s report said a political deal was hatched on Capitol Hill to prevent the cuts as a condition for moving forward on Tavenner’s confirmation. Medicare officials increased rates by nearly 4 percent, a change that would positively impact the bottom lines of health insurance companies.

The SEC began looking for the leak’s source, and within weeks, FBI agents began interviewing staffers at the Ways and Means Committee, court records show.

They discovered communications between Sutter and a health care lobbyist. The HHS Inspector General also began a probe, and federal prosecutors briefly examined the matter activity as well.

As the case unfolded, Price bought more health care-related stocks, according to his financial disclosures. He has testified that his broker directed all of the trades, except for his investments in Innate Immunotherapeutics, an Australian company partly owned by Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.), according to Collins’ disclosures. An HHS spokesman said Monday that Price held three broker-directed accounts.

Ethics experts have said that Price should have further distanced himself by placing his assets in a blind trust.

On April 30, 2013, Price bought $2,093 worth of stocks in Incyte, a company that develops cancer drugs; $2,076 in Onyx Pharmaceuticals, a drugmaker that would soon merge with a larger drug firm; and $2,097 in Parexel International, a consultancy that helps drugs and devices win FDA approval, according to the financial disclosure records.

The same day, Price shed shares of Express Scripts, a drug management firm, and Danaher, which makes products hospitals and doctor’s offices using for testing and diagnostics. In August of that year, he bought a $2,429 stake in Jazz Pharmaceuticals, which makes sleep and cancer drugs.

On May 6, 2014, the SEC served its first subpoena for the Ways and Means Committee documents. The committee launched a vigorous fight, appealing a federal district judge’s ruling that it should comply with the SEC subpoena.

Price continued his health stock trades, including $1,000 to $15,000 in drug firms Amgen, Eli Lilly and Co., Pfizer, Biogen and Bristol-Myers Squibb. He also bought stocks in Aetna, a major health insurer, and Athenahealth, which sells electronic medical record and medical billing software. In 2016, he also increased his investment in Innate Immunotherapeutics.

The purchase became controversial because both he and Collins bought stock in a private placement at a discounted price.

“You’re asking for trouble if you have access to nonpublic information about the health care industry and you’re buying and selling health care stocks,” Painter said.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 day ago.

Minnesota's health exchange reports record number of signups

February 9, 2017, 12:17 pm

≫ Next: Angry voters flood town halls of GOP lawmakers

≪ Previous: HHS Pick Price Made ‘Brazen’ Stock Trades While His Committee Was Under Scrutiny

$

0

0

(AP) — A record number of residents signed up for private insurance this year through Minnesota's health exchange, officials said Thursday, attributing the spike in part to uncertainty over the federal health care law and a novel state program that offsets skyrocketing premiums. Combined with concern about shrinking plan access in Minnesota's fragile health insurance market, O'Toole said that uncertainty might have prompted more Minnesota residents to try to lock in coverage before there are massive changes. MNsure's initial data shows 41,000 of its shoppers will receive the state's new 25 percent discount — a sum that doesn't include residents who purchased coverage through insurance agents or directly from health plans. Reported by SeattlePI.com 1 day ago.

Angry voters flood town halls of GOP lawmakers

February 10, 2017, 1:43 pm

≫ Next: A Secretary Of HHS Who Opposes Women's Health

≪ Previous: Minnesota's health exchange reports record number of signups

$

0

0

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) — The voter identified himself as a cancer survivor, and he had something to say to Republican Rep. Justin Amash: “I am scared to death that I will not have health insurance in the future.” The comment earned 61-year-old retiree Paul Bonis a standing ovation from the crowd packed into a […] Reported by Seattle Times 5 hours ago.

A Secretary Of HHS Who Opposes Women's Health

February 10, 2017, 8:15 pm

≫ Next: GOP lawmakers face angry, worried constituents at town halls

≪ Previous: Angry voters flood town halls of GOP lawmakers

$

0

0

By Nancy K. Kaufman

Last week, in an unprecedented move, Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee voted to suspend the rules requiring a quorum for votes on nominations, allowing them to push through US Representative Tom Price's nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) without the committee's Democratic members present. That move led, eventually, to this morning's 2 AM roll call, where the Senate voted on party lines to confirm Rep. Price's nomination. But let's not get distracted by how we got here. The real issue is that Price is a bad choice for Secretary of Health and Human Services. We must keep our opposition firm and fight to protect health care programs and services under his purview that he has pledged to decimate.

Secretary Price has a record of strident opposition to the basic mission of the Department of Health and Human Services. No doubt chief among his qualifications for his new post is that he voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act more than 60 times, voted at least 10 times to shut down Planned Parenthood, and would gut Medicare and Medicaid -- programs that disproportionately serve women.

By confirming Price, the Senate empowered someone who has said "there's not one" woman who can't access the contraception she needs. But we know that half of all women aged 18-34 have had difficulty affording prescription birth control, with greater disparities experienced by Latina and black women. Price wants to end the access to preventive care that nearly 56 million women have gained, without added costs, under the Affordable Care Act. He has repeatedly voted to push safe, affordable abortion out of reach, especially for women struggling to make ends meet, with far-reaching consequences for women and their families. And, Price, deeply committed to dismantling the separation of religion and state when it comes to health care, is now in charge of regulations governing contraceptive access. Further, he is profoundly committed to shredding the social safety net, including health care programs that protect the most needy among us.

What will women lose if Secretary Price has his way? Gender discrimination in health insurance could once again be legal. Charging women more than men for comparable plans could come back. Bans on denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions could disappear, including such "conditions" as having given birth by Caesarean section; being pregnant; having survived domestic violence and received treatment related to abuse; or having received medical treatment after sexual assault. Other achievements of the Affordable Care Act may well vanish, including guaranteed maternity coverage for all and recommended preventive care, including contraception, domestic violence screenings, Pap tests, and mammograms.

Price cosponsored legislation to enshrine into law his particular religious view about when life begins, as well as bills to allow doctors, insurers, and other health care entities to deny any care or coverage that doesn't align with their religious doctrines. Adherence to the views favored by Sec. Price could outlaw several forms of birth control and create barriers to other key services.

His basic attitude toward ending discrimination is actually hostile. He cosponsored a constitutional amendment to bar marriage equality and condemned the US Supreme Court's historic decision affirming same-sex marriage. Price also voted against efforts to make existing anti-discrimination laws more inclusive. He opposed legislation that ensured protections against hate crimes based on gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability. He also opposed reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act -- a law that has provided support for survivors of violence for decades -- with new protections based on immigration status, for Native Americans, and for those in same-sex relationships.

All of this should have been disqualifying, but there's more. Made wealthy by his career as an orthopedic surgeon before entering Congress, Price is alleged to have exploited his position as a congressman to invest in pharmaceutical and medical-products companies. To be an effective member of the cabinet, Price must not only meet all the ethical standards prescribed for members of Congress, but he must avoid the appearance of any conflict of interest if he should serve in the executive branch. Questions like these sparked the Democratic boycott of his committee vote.

According to the HHS website, the department's mission is "to enhance and protect the health and well-being of all Americans....by providing for effective health and human services and fostering advances in medicine, public health, and social services." Shame on the Senate for confirming someone who has demonstrated minimal or no commitment to that mission. He's been confirmed, but we must be vigilant if he starts to degrade that mission. Though the vote occurred while many were sleeping, make no mistake we are wide awake and will be working to protect the programs and services that are critical to our families and communities.

Nancy K. Kaufman is the chief executive officer of the National Council of Jewish Women, a grassroots organization inspired by Jewish values that strives to improve the quality of life for women, children, and families and to safeguard individual rights and freedoms.-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 23 hours ago.

GOP lawmakers face angry, worried constituents at town halls

February 11, 2017, 12:27 am

≫ Next: Here's How Medicare Advantage Is Changing in 2017

≪ Previous: A Secretary Of HHS Who Opposes Women's Health

$

0

0

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (AP) — The voter identified himself as a cancer survivor, and he had something to say to Republican Rep. Justin Amash: “I am scared to death that I will not have health insurance in the future.” The comment earned 61-year-old retiree Paul Bonis a standing ovation from the crowd packed into a […] Reported by Seattle Times 19 hours ago.

Here's How Medicare Advantage Is Changing in 2017

February 11, 2017, 3:59 am

≫ Next: Health Care Reform

≪ Previous: GOP lawmakers face angry, worried constituents at town halls

$

0

0

You may have more options than you think, when it comes to health insurance and Medicare. Learn more about why Medicare Advantage plans are so popular -- and how they're changing in 2017. Reported by Motley Fool 15 hours ago.

---

Health Care Reform

February 11, 2017, 5:46 am

≫ Next: A judge blocked the Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger. What does that mean for Colorado?

≪ Previous: Here's How Medicare Advantage Is Changing in 2017

$

0

0

Both Republicans and Democrats agree that health care costs are too high and that there are too many people that are not covered by health care insurance. Both the Affordable Care Act (ACA) passed during the Obama administration and several plans being discussed by the Republicans have remarkably similar goals. If the Republicans follow through on their promise to "repeal and replace" the Affordable Care Act, then they must carefully tailor their plan to (1) decrease costs of health care, (2) allow everyone to have access to some form of health insurance, (3) allow patients to have choices in tailoring their individual plans, (4) place an emphasis on preventative care so as to keep more patients out of the hospital, and (5) have some form of medical malpractice tort reform. They should also do what they can to keep the parts of the ACA that garnered good feedback.

There were several good ideas imbedded in the Affordable Care Act. For example, pre-existing conditions could no longer be used to deny a person health care coverage. Small businesses (defined as a business with less than 50 employees) were given tax credits for up to 50% of employee premiums. The cut-off age for young adults to be covered by their parents insurance was raised to 27. This was especially good for recent college graduates who were finding it difficult to get jobs in the depressed economy.

The ACA also decreased the "donut hole" by 50%. The previous hole limited prescription medication expenditures over $2,700.

Lifetime caps on health insurance expenditures were to be eliminated by the ACA. Previously, insurers could cut off patients whose bills exceeded a certain amount. With the ACA, insurers had to keep paying for health care so long as the patient was not dead. This clause has taken on more importance with the McMath case which I wrote about last month (this case described a patient who was deemed to be dead in California but alive in New Jersey).

Under the ACA, all insurance plans had to include preventative care without co-pays by 2018. Preventative care is important in keeping patients with chronic conditions out of the hospital where the costs are highest.

At this time, it seems clear that the Republicans have the votes to repeal the Affordable Care Act. There are several models being presented as to what they will replace the Act with and it is now worthwhile to look at some of these ideas. Whichever plan they choose, it would be wise for them to keep the good aspects of the ACA in place.

Here are some thoughts on what a new health plan might incorporate.

Most Republican plans will eliminate the community rating where everyone in a community are charged the same premiums. The community rating was needed to keep premiums down for people with pre-existing conditions but it forced others to pay higher premiums. Also, mandatory benefits in the ACA health plans forced people to pay for benefits they would never use. The Republicans argue that people should not have to pay for plans mandating care for such things as in-vitro fertilization, cosmetic surgery, and abortions. The ACA required this coverage so that the higher premiums could be used to off-set the costs of the patients who needed these benefits and other benefits that few would use.

There are several other ideas that are being discussed to make health care insurance more affordable. For example, vouchers of $5,000 for the purchase of health insurance with tax-free dollars would allow people to shop for policies that would meet their budget and needs. This would not require a large bureaucracy; it would only require people to process the forms and police the system for fraud. People would have a vested interest in their health care policy and, hopefully, the free market would decrease the costs. The use of vouchers would be a good way for those with pre-existing conditions to purchase policies without having everyone else pay higher premiums for coverage for things they would never need.

Currently, the states regulate health care insurance. This leads to large cost disparities. If people could cross state lines to buy insurance, then they could shop for the best deals to meet their needs. I believe the Commerce Clause would allow the Congress to pass a law to allow for this. This would probably lead to an overall decrease in premiums as the insurers would have to compete with more companies in other states.

Another way to cut health care costs is to put people in charge of their own routine care. One way to do this is to let people set up health savings accounts where tax free dollars are used to pay for routine care. Medical providers will have to compete for these dollars by offering the best service for the lowest price. Once the free market is back in play, drug companies, hospitals, and providers will not be able to raise prices without losing patients.

The health savings accounts should not be used for over the counter remedies and there would be tax penalties for those patients who make non-medical withdrawals.

Premiums for health insurance should be tax deductible. If companies can do it (and they can) then individuals should be allowed to do this also. This would allow most of the 176 million enrolled in company owned plans to buy their own insurance and force the companies to compete by offering supplemental tax free compensation to allow the consumer to buy more insurance if they see the need. This would be another way to allow those with pre-existing conditions to get coverage without having everyone else pay higher premiums.

Health coverage should be portable. Employees should be able to control their own health plans and should be able to take these plans with them from job to job. This would force employers to treat their workers better since the worker would not be locked into the job for fear of losing their health care insurance.

Health care insurance should be like other insurance i.e., auto, life, home, and fire. The plans would be private property and they would allow for maximum choice. They should be flexible and creative allowing the consumer to buy a policy they deem necessary to meet their needs. This would remove big business, labor unions, and politicians from the health insurance business and let the free market control the costs.

Updating Medicare by allowing each senior an actuarial determined $250,000 to purchase some form of elder care insurance would encourage older patients and their care-givers to shop for their own health care. Again, it is hoped that the free market would lead to decreased costs as this patient population would be empowered to look for the best deals.

Allowing the states to cover their own Medicare and Medicaid populations would encourage better management that is state specific. Each state would be given a set amount every year based on their Medicare and Medicaid population. The states could then experiment for better ways to improve care and decrease costs. Successful programs could be emulated by states that are not as successful.

Unfortunately, under the Affordable Care Act, many providers stopped seeing Medicare and Medicaid patients as the costs exceeded the payments. Costs and payments must be brought into alignment so that the providers will be willing to care for all patients in the system.

If the government would allow charitable care to be tax deductible, health care providers would be more inclined to treat the low income or uninsured patient. This would be much cheaper than having these patients rely on the emergency room for their primary care. It would also lead to a predictable continuity of care which would be beneficial for the patients and the providers. Providers who have patients for the long term are more likely to reap the benefits of managing chronic conditions in the "out of hospital" setting.

The Affordable Care Act had no provisions pertaining to tort reform. Most Republican plans recognize that tort reform is critical if health care costs are to be decreased. Malpractice insurance is costly. For some specialties, premiums can be over $200,000 per year and these costs are transferred to the patients. Defensive medicine as a strategy to defend against potential malpractice claims raises the cost of health care for everyone. Estimated costs for defensive medicine is about $124 billion per year and each year, this estimate is going up.

Some states limit the payment for non-economic damages in a malpractice suit in an effort to control malpractice premiums. Some states may soon try to take malpractice claims out of the hands of juries by using alternative forms of resolution such as Health Courts.

Limiting attorneys' fees is another strategy being looked at to decrease the costs of malpractice premiums but attorneys are lobbying against this; since many legislators are themselves attorneys, this will be an uphill battle.

The ACA was over 2000 pages long and was very complex. The Republican plan should not try to fix everything at once. They should start with some laws that are understandable and allow some choice for the patients. The providers also need some protection to keep all the cost cuts from falling on their shoulders.

No matter what elements are incorporated in a Republican plan, it looks like they recognize the fundamental fact that optimal health care is a very personal experience between the patient and his provider. This experience must be affordable and patient centered. Patients should be allowed to pick and keep their provider. The constant switching from one plan to another from year to year which often lead to new providers who did not have an on-going relationship with the patient was not good health care. It is no surprise that the ACA was struggling to meet its mission. I look forward to studying the details in the proposed Republican plans. I think everyone should be as interested as me.

Dr. Weiman's website is www.medicalmalpracticeandthelaw.com

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 14 hours ago.

A judge blocked the Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger. What does that mean for Colorado?

February 11, 2017, 7:19 am

≫ Next: Don't Tell Bernie Sanders But Healthcare Is Not Immune To The Laws Of Economics

≪ Previous: Health Care Reform

$

0

0

After a federal judge blocked the proposed merger of health insurance giants Anthem and Cigna, a Q&A on what it means for Colorado. Reported by Denver Post 12 hours ago.

Don't Tell Bernie Sanders But Healthcare Is Not Immune To The Laws Of Economics

February 11, 2017, 11:44 am

≫ Next: Angry Veterans Use 'SNL' To Send Pres. Trump A Serious Message

≪ Previous: A judge blocked the Anthem-Cigna health insurance merger. What does that mean for Colorado?

$

0

0

Submitted by Jonathan Newman via The Mises Institute,

*One of the great things about economics is that it is devoid of all mysticism. *Every person, good, service, and dollar is treated equally — nothing is special or above the rules. There’s nothing about the supply of or demand for apples that is categorically different from that of oranges. Since every good or service demanded by anybody is scarce, economics treats apples, oranges, computers, haircuts, education, and health care in the same way.

There is not a special branch of economic theory that only applies to health care. Economists may focus on health issues, but they use the same basic set of tools as economists who focus on energy, or any other area for that matter.

*Does Health Care get a Pass on the Laws of Economics?*

This was the root of the disagreement between Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders in this week's CNN debate on Obamacare. Cruz (for all his faults) defended the view that health care is not special when it comes to economics.* Sanders seemed to think that if he could just proclaim that health care is a right proudly enough, new doctors, hospitals, drugs, and medical equipment would fall from the sky, equally portioned out across the population of the United States.*

At one point, Sanders asked Cruz, “Is every American entitled, and I underline that word, to health care as a right of being an American? Yes or no?” The implication was that the only thing holding Cruz back from agreeing with him was Cruz’s own misanthropy or cowardliness.

Cruz held his ground and espoused a view of rights that says “you have a right for government not to mess with you” and cited the first two amendments in the Bill of Rights as examples.

Notably, economic theory as a wertfrei science has nothing to say about rights. Economics cannot answer the question, “Who ought to have this doctor?” or “What should insurance companies charge various people?”

*Voluntary Exchange and Giving Provides for the Best Result*

What economics can say, however, is that voluntary exchange is the only way scarce goods find their highest valued use.

*Sometimes the highest valued use of a good or service is charitable giving.* According to the OECD, the United States is ranked #1 for voluntary private giving (11.1% of GDP), which far exceeds that of the next highest countries: the UK (5.0%) and the Netherlands (7.1%). One can only guess what these figures would be without a giant government crowding out effect.

Sanders’s emotional argument hinges on what happens to people who cannot afford health insurance. But his answer is one that can only yield worse outcomes for people who cannot afford health insurance.

*Amy and Bob Want To Help Charlie*

Consider an economy of three people: Amy, Bob, and Charlie. Amy has $100 to her name, Bob has $50, and Charlie only has $5. Amy and Bob don’t like how Charlie isn’t able to pay for some items they consider necessary to live a decent life. Amy would like to give $25 to help Charlie, and Bob would like to give $10. Charlie, of course, is happy to receive any help.

Now consider two ways of distributing the funds to help Charlie: one democratic method and one voluntary method. A democratic method would involve the three voting on a standardized distribution scheme, meaning one person may end up having to give more than they desire or less than they desire. Of course, any difference in the latter case can be made up with voluntary, private giving which is still legal. The three must also pay for the ballot box and the forms for income reporting, among other bureaucratic fees. Amy, who is put in charge of the process, is also paid to manage the whole ordeal.

In the end, the actual amount that ends up in Charlie’s hands is less than what Amy and Bob originally wanted Charlie to receive, and, adding insult to injury, someone may have been forced to give more than they wanted, meaning they are worse off. The best case scenario for this democratic method would involve a law that forces people to give exactly as much as they would give voluntarily. But even in this unlikely case (especially once expanding it to a population of 300+ million people), extra funds are still required to go through the voting and redistribution process.

In the voluntary giving method, Charlie directly receives exactly as much as each individual cares to give. Even if Amy decides to set up a charity organization that specializes in getting funds to Charlie, Bob can decide whether or not it is effective in helping Charlie and decide how to give his $10 accordingly.

What this means is that we do not need political “solutions” to any problem involving resource allocation. Nobody likes starvation, illiteracy, or untreated medical ailments. To the extent that we dislike these, we give out of our own abundance, and the especially generous can go even further.

*The government can only disrupt this process by crowding out charitable giving and serving as an inefficient middleman. The best-case scenario for Sanders’s plan is one that is worse than what would exist without a single government intervention in health care.* Reported by Zero Hedge 8 hours ago.

Angry Veterans Use 'SNL' To Send Pres. Trump A Serious Message

February 11, 2017, 7:01 pm

≫ Next: Fin24.com | NHI will have some losers and winners

≪ Previous: Don't Tell Bernie Sanders But Healthcare Is Not Immune To The Laws Of Economics

$

0

0

President Donald Trump is not shy about his scathing hate for NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” or the golden-wigged Alec Baldwin. And one veterans advocacy group is using that famed feud to send POTUS a very serious message.

VoteVets, a political action committee that claims the support of more than 500,000 veterans, troops and supporters, announced Friday that they will be airing an ad during tonight’s “SNL” telling President Trump to act like a “legitimate president.”

The 30-second spot features a veteran, who lost his leg during the Afghanistan war, doing weighted squats as his voiceover addresses the Commander in Chief.

President Trump, I hear you watch the morning shows. Here’s what I do every morning. Look, you lost the popular vote, you’re having trouble drawing a crowd, and your approval rating keeps sinking.

But kicking thousands of my fellow veterans off their health insurance by killing the Affordable Care Act and banning Muslims won’t help.

And that’s not the America I sacrificed for. You want to be a legitimate president, sir? Then act like one. 

Watch the full ad below:


Hey @realDonaldTrump - remember us? Since you won't meet with vets at the WH, we're airing this ad on #SNL this weekend to get on your TV. pic.twitter.com/ORNXbubx11

— VoteVets (@votevets) February 10, 2017

The commercial first aired during MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” another show which, like “SNL,” Trump hate-obsesses over.

Peter Kauffmann, a Navy veteran and vice chair of VoteVets, said in a Monday press release that the organization chose to air the message on TV because “the White House comment line is down and Donald Trump hasn’t set up that veterans hotline he promised.” The point of the ad, the release explains, was “to get in front of [Trump’s] face.”

If VoteVets wanted to get Trump’s attention, “SNL” might be their best bet. POTUS has tweeted about the variety show three times in the past three months, mostly recently whining over Baldwin’s pursed-lip impression of him. 

Even if Trump doesn’t watch Saturday’s episode, rest assured that a lot of America will be tuning in.

“SNL’s” viewership is now up 22 percent, compared to this time last season, and the show is seeing its highest ratings in more than 20 years, according to NBC.

So when the rest of the country tunes in on Saturday night, one question remains: Will Trump?

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 25 minutes ago.

Fin24.com | NHI will have some losers and winners

February 11, 2017, 8:10 pm

≫ Next: Nigeria: I Have Not Recruited Anybody Into NHIS - Prof. Usman

≪ Previous: Angry Veterans Use 'SNL' To Send Pres. Trump A Serious Message

$

0

0

The National Health Insurance scheme aims to induce “massive” restructuring of the public and private healthcare sectors that could see some citizens getting lower-quality services. Reported by News24 21 hours ago.