The concern is not about denying a service to an individual based on gender identity, it is an issue of requiring a medical professional to take an action he deeply and morally opposes.
Sen. Claire McCaskill voted for a ‘rock-solid deal’ with Big Pharma that raised premiums on millions of seniors, which makes her part of the problem, not part of the solution.
The incompetence on display over cost-sharing reductions demonstrates the need for increased accountability among state authorities.
If Congress fails to comprehensively reform Medicare, seniors will miss out on significant savings, and taxpayers will miss out on the opportunity to slow the program’s cost growth.
A new study suggests Medicaid provides inferior outcomes in the nation’s largest state, raising more questions about the program that represents the bulk of Obamacare’s coverage expansion.
On this episode of the Federalist Radio Hour, Senior Writer Mary Katharine Ham chats with Emily Miller and Chris Jacobs on this week’s big stories.
The executive order did not change regulations on its own. Rather, it instructed cabinet departments to propose changes to regulations in the near future.
‘I don’t want to live in an America where nuns have to sue for the right to not pay for birth control because that is a moral concern for them.’
Former Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Harry Reid (D-Nevada) set up a meeting for her and Sen. Bob Menendez in 2012 to discuss his wealthy friend’s legal woes.
In fact, Sen. Bernie Sanders is one of the most blatantly dishonest politicians on either side of the aisle, particularly on health care.
Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner said he would sign a bill allowing taxpayer dollars to fund abortions for women enrolled in Medicaid.
On the two critical questions—will it lower insurance premiums, and will it generate a system that works for states?—a textual analysis of Graham-Cassidy yields significant doubts.
Lost in the political drama is why health-care reform legislation is so difficult to pass in the first place and why the solution to the problem, which is exceedingly simple, is being ignored.
Which states will end up the proverbial winners and losers under the Graham-Cassidy bill? The answer is simple: Nope.
The Graham-Cassidy proposal does not break ‘The Jimmy Kimmel Test.’ If anything, it more fairly divvies up federal dollars to the states.
We could have increased access, improved quality, and decreased costs with better medical licensing, prescription drug regulation, Food and Drug Administration approval, and patent law.
What is unique about health care is not fee-for-service, but third-party payment. Only in health care is someone else picking up the tab for our spending.
- 6 Reasons Your Right-Wing Friend Isn’t Coming To Your Side On Gun ControlThere are several reasons Second Amendment advocates arcontinue reading >
- How The Media Enable Rep. Adam Schiff’s Russian Bot Conspiracy TheoriesFor more than a year, Adam Schiff has been hopping to acontinue reading >
- On Russia, Democrats Try To Rewrite HistoryThere is a strong case to be made that in nearly every continue reading >