The health-care sector seems to believe they have a God-given right to consume at least one-sixth of the economy (and growing).
Apparently Harry Reid forgot to heed Hillary Clinton’s warning about fake news, because the idea that thousands of people die from lack of health insurance is preposterous.
There are many reasons conservatives should not remain fixated on the number of people with health insurance when designing an Obamacare alternative.
The fact that most seniors receive more in benefits than they paid in payroll taxes speaks to the urgent need to right-size our entitlements.
Politico appears to publish Democrat talking points as ‘facts,’ if a recent hit on Tom Price, Donald Trump’s nominee to run the Department of Health and Human Services, is any indication.
Tom Price hasn’t articulated his positions on many, if not most, of the important health-care issues the Republican Congress will face next year.
The incoming Trump administration will face a choice: Will it side with taxpayers, and prevent sending Obamacare bailout funds to insurers, or will it side with Donald Trump’s in-laws?
For those following events of the past few years, the Clinton health debate as profiled in ‘The System’ provides interesting echoes between past and present.
Obamacare’s dirty little secret: the hundreds of thousands of people with disabilities, who are on wait lists because they can’t get services.
Donald Trump’s son-in-law holds a controlling interest in a company whose primary business is selling Obamacare policies.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the media has thus far viewed the debate on an Obamacare replacement entirely through one liberal policy frame: How many people have health insurance cards.
Because President Obama used executive overreach to implement so much of Obamacare, Donald Trump can begin dismantling it immediately upon taking office.
Wealthy Obamacare supporters won’t give up a few thousand dollars to enroll on the exchanges they tout. Aren’t liberals the ones who believe in social solidarity and ‘paying your fair share’?
If the Obamacare exchange plans are so good, why haven’t liberal elites purchased one?
On Obamacare, President Obama insists he will not take voters’ repeated no for an answer. Where have we heard that before?
To say that Congress should have to write bailout checks to insurers as a result of President Obama’s lawbreaking quite literally adds injury to insult.
Whether government runs all of health care is less material than whether government pays for all of health care. The latter will lead to the former.
Here are three reasons Republicans should not help Democrats ‘fix’ their abomination of a law, but instead replace it with a sensible one that depends on human initiative.
The Obama administration is spending taxpayer dollars Congress never approved on cost-sharing subsidies to insurance companies.
Insurers still have a few to determine if they should back out of the federal exchange and escape from Obamacare’s web.
- President Donald Trump’s Inauguration Speech Was A Declaration Of WarPresident Donald Trump's inauguration speech was not mecontinue reading >
- Why NYT Hid The Numbers For The ‘Hottest Year On Record’When you read a science report claiming that 2016 was tcontinue reading >
- It’s Not Okay For You To Pass Judgment On How Many Kids I HaveMy children are healthy, happy, and well-behaved. Yet wcontinue reading >