U.S. Appeals Florida Health Care Ruling

The Justice Department filed notice on Tuesday that it was appealing a decision by a federal judge in Florida who struck down the new health care law, saying it was unconstitutional for the federal government to require Americans to obtain health insurance. The judge, Roger Vinson of Federal District Court in Pensacola, voided the entire law after finding that the insurance requirement was “inextricably bound” to other provisions of the statute. The Justice Department said it was asking the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, in Atlanta, to provide an “expedited review” of the decision.

Simplyhealth unveils health plan to support over 70s

Affordability is crucial to maintaining the health and wellbeing of the nation's ageing population, according to the results of a recent survey carried out by health insurance provider Simplyhealth .

Almost 45 per cent of over 70s said that if access to healthy living was more affordable, it would help them keep fit and active. With 16 per cent of the UK's population aged 65 and over, its necessary for improvements to be made to the affordability of healthy living if Britain is to manage this growing demographic. Paying heed to this, Simplyhealth has introduced a new health plan, the Simply Cash Plan 70 Plus, for individuals aged 70 and over.

Clare Lee, spokesperson for Simplyhealth, said: "According to our research, 58 per cent of over 70s do attend regular health appointments. Yet, 26 per cent of those surveyed said that they needed extra encouragement to regularly attend routine health appointments. That's why we've launched Simplyhealth's new Simply Cash Plan 70 Plus, to help those over the age of 70 better budget for their everyday healthcare needs."

Repeal The Health Care Law? Not So Fast

Republicans regained control of the House on Tuesday in part with a pledge to "repeal and replace" the new health law. But carrying out that campaign promise won't be as easy as making it was.

"Republicans cannot repeal Obamacare with President Obama wielding the veto pen," says Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies for the libertarian Cato Institute. "I mean that's not within a set of possible outcomes."

That's because as large as the new GOP majority will be come January, it's still not large enough to override a presidential veto. In addition, the Senate will still be controlled by the Democrats, who are unlikely to go along with the repeal effort.

But Cannon, who is no fan of the new law, says House Republicans are not without weapons to do battle with the measure. "They're going to do everything they can to try to cripple the law, throw sand in the gears and make it even more unpopular than it has been for the pass 18 months," he says.

One major way they can do that is by holding oversight hearings. Using subpoena power if necessary, Republicans could end up forcing Obama administration health officials to spend nearly as much time on Capitol Hill as they do in their offices actually trying to implement the law.

Cannon says a barrage of hearings and investigations by Republicans could help solidify public opinion against the measure. "The more they keep the law in the news and the more of a steady drumbeat of bad news they create about this law, the more likely it is that eventually someone with the power to overturn or repeal this law will do so," he says.

Threats Could Backfire

But all those hearings could also have the opposite effect — giving the administration a chance to make its case in favor of the law, a case that often got drowned out during the election campaign.

"The next round of this, while there will continue to be the broad sloganeering on both sides, will presumably get a little bit more into the detail," says Martin Corry, a health care lobbyist and former official at the Department of Health and Human Services during the Bush administration. "So if you're a family with a 22 year old still in college, you may not want to see that provision [that lets grown children stay on their parents' health plans] repealed."

Corry says other threats — such as trying to starve the new law by holding back its funding or preventing agencies from writing regulations needed to implement it — could also backfire.

That's because, he says, "many provisions in the law take effect, regulations or not, implementation dollars or not," so simply cutting off the money or the regulations could end up leaving those who must still comply with the law with even less certainty about what they should do.

Former Republican Sen. Dave Durenberger of Minnesota says he thinks the Democratic-led Senate could try to dampen the House repeal efforts by holding a series of hearings of its own. Among other things they could give health care groups a chance to tell Congress what things in the law they want to see fixed.

"And just putting that 'here are some things that could be improved' on the table, takes some of the wind out of the sail for repeal," Durenberger says.

At a news conference Wednesday, President Obama signaled he was open to some changes to the health law. He even suggested one of his own — repealing an unpopular provision increasing the number of 1099 forms small businesses must file with the IRS.

"It was designed to make sure that revenue was raised to help pay for some of the other provisions," the president said, "but if it ends up just being so much trouble that small businesses find it difficult to manage, that's something that we should take a look at."

Health Reform to Cover Most Young Adults by 2014

More than 12 million of the nation's 15 million uninsured young adults ages 19 to 29 may be able to get health insurance in 2014 as a result of the healthcare reform law, according to a report released Friday by the Commonwealth Fund.

"By providing multiple insurance options for young adults at key life transition points, including graduation from high school and college, the law will significantly reduce both the short- and long-term gaps in health insurance that have historically plagued this age group at all income levels," wrote Sara Collins and Jennifer Nicholson, both of the Commonwealth Fund.

The number of uninsured young adults rose from 13.7 million in 2008 to 14.8 million in 2009. In addition, 5 million insured 20-somethings have very high out-of-pocket costs, leaving them effectively underinsured, the authors noted.

Take a look at reality of health care reform

"A judgment is said to be true when it conforms to the external reality." - St. Thomas Aquinas

I loved the '90s supernatural drama "The X Files," with its ominous, blinking message - "The truth is out there." The "powers that be" seek to hide or distort the truth, that message whispered, but it won't stay cloaked forever.

The first round of Affordable Care Act (health reform) mandates, which took effect in September, reminded me of that message - that external realities exist, no matter how much wishful thinking or righteous indignation we throw at it.

Let's examine two sets of "external realities."

Consider first a young family without family health care coverage. According to the latest census findings, the majority of children live in households making $74,999 per year or less. Focus on the 0.7 percent who reside in households earning $35,000 to $49,999 and the 19.6 percent who live in households earning $50,000 to $74,999. These are typical middle-class households. Imagine for a moment that this family must either choose a sizable payroll deduction for family coverage or a premium for a "child-only" policy. There's the mortgage, taxes, utilities, car payments, car insurance, groceries, clothing, and a little recreation. Living paycheck to paycheck, would you choose to pay a premium for a healthy child who, at most, needs routine immunizations and the occasional office visit for colds? Or would you use that money for some other, seemingly more pressing, need? It is eminently understandable that such families would roll the dice and go without insurance. Before September, however, this was a risk with dire consequences should a child fall ill. Perhaps that risk served to pressure some families into taking the payroll deduction or buying a "child-only" policy.

Now imagine being an insurance company. By definition, insurance is an agreement that one party will assume a risk for a fee paid by the other. With life insurance, the buyer bets he will die, while the insurer, armed by the actuary, believes he will not. The few statistical aberrations are adequately paid for by the vast majority who make no claims. This majority forms a pool, which protects the solvency of the insurer and its continued ability to pay claims. With health insurance, the protective pool is formed by the healthy as a hedge against the claims of the sick. A pool composed entirely of the sick is called bankruptcy.

These two realities, of the family and of the insurer, crashed head on in September. As of Sept. 23, insurers are prohibited from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. However, the mandate that everyone must purchase insurance doesn't kick in fully until 2016. If you are the young family, there is now absolutely no reason to worry about insurance. If your child stays healthy, as most children do, you can pocket the premium without guilt. Going without is no longer a gamble, because insurers have to cover your child if, God forbid, he or she should need an organ transplant or chemotherapy or some other treatment that costs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.