January 2012 Archives

Much of the talk from Republican lawmakers on health care reform has focused on efforts to repeal the 2010 health care reform law. But this year, they are talking about what could replace it if they accomplished that goal. Last week Rep. Joe Pitts, the chairman of the health subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, described a package of policy initiatives that he hoped his committee would tackle later this year.

The planks of the package included medical liability reform, rules to make health insurance purchases possible across state lines, and efforts to ensure that employees could take their insurance with them if they left a job.

Would such policies be a good replacement for the current health care reform package? Would they expand access to health insurance? Would they bring down costs?

3 responses: Tom Miller, John C. Goodman, Ethan Rome

In order to survive 2012, the health care law will have to overcome two major hurdles: a Supreme Court hearing on its constitutionality, and an election that could tilt Congress, the White House or both in favor of repeal.

Which pathway do you think will be more likely to bring down the legislation: the Supreme Court's June decision, or the November election?

Or despite these challenges, do you think the health reform law will survive to see 2013?

Believe it or not, we are just one week away from President Obama's fourth State of the Union address, scheduled for January 24. We want to know what you want to hear from the president when it comes to health policy.

Do you think the president should defend his landmark health reform law, especially in front of the Supreme Court justices who are set to rule on its constitutionality this year?

Should the president offer up ways to save money in Medicare and Medicaid, like raising eligibility age for Medicare or changing how the federal government matches state Medicaid contributions?

Should President Obama address Republican efforts to convert Medicare into a program that gives seniors a subsidy to purchase private health insurance?

Or do you think the president should steer clear of health policy altogether?

3 responses: Ethan Rome, John Castellani, Doug Peddicord

The Obama Administration kicked off the Supreme Court case on health care reform Friday with its brief defending the 2010 law's most controversial feature -- its requirement that individuals buy health insurance. The government offered several legal arguments in support of the provision, contending that it is a valid exercise under Congress's powers to regulate interstate commerce and to collect taxes. The legal analysis was no surprise--the government has been making similar arguments for nearly two years in the lower courts, with mixed results.

Will these arguments be persuasive to the justices? Will the Supreme Court uphold the health reform law?

4 responses: Rich Umbdenstock, Henry J. Aaron, Ilya Shapiro, Stephen B. Presser