MARCH 15, 2019
Like those of his recent predecessors,
President Donald Trump’s proposed budget for the fiscal year that starts in
October will not be adopted by Congress. Still, a presidential budget plan is
an important indicator of the administration’s priorities.
The Trump administration’s priority for health
is for the federal government to spend less. In some cases much less, as
evidenced by its proposed funding for the National Institutes of Health and
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Also this week, a federal district judge in
Washington, D.C., heard arguments in a case challenging work requirements for
some Medicaid enrollees in Arkansas and Kentucky. This is the same judge who
struck down an earlier version of Kentucky’s proposal.
Meanwhile, Food and Drug Administration chief
Scott Gottlieb is stepping down, but this week he issued more rules intended to
prevent minors from purchasing flavored e-cigarette products.
This week’s panelists are Julie Rovner of
Kaiser Health News, Stephanie Armour of The Wall Street Journal, Alice Ollstein
of Politico and Rebecca Adams of CQ Roll Call.
Among the takeaways from this week’s podcast:
·
Trump’s budget may turn
the tables on the Republican Party. It calls for more than $500 billion in
reductions to Medicare, much of that in payments to providers. That is similar
to what Democrats proposed to help fund the Affordable Care Act — a tactic that
Republicans used to whip up widespread opposition to the law and gain control
of the House of Representatives. Count on Democrats to return the favor in
coming campaigns.
·
Some Republicans,
including Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, a key Republican on the House
Appropriations Committee, signaled concerns about budget cuts recommended by
the administration, especially for NIH.
·
On Medicaid, the budget
suggests that states be allowed to administer many parts of the program as they
see fit. But opponents are likely to ask courts to stop any efforts to weaken
federal requirements for coverage.
·
House Democrats have
begun an investigation of the marketing and benefits of short-term insurance
plans to see if they are denying promised coverage to consumers. The lawmakers
are concerned that what they call “junk plans” are confusing consumers who
would be better off with policies from the ACA’s marketplace. But any efforts
to rein in the plans — which have the blessing of the Trump administration —
could run into opposition from Republicans.
·
A federal appeals court
this week ruled that Ohio may exclude Planned Parenthood from participating in
several small federal health programs that provide money to the state to
distribute. The case does not involve either Medicaid or the federal family
planning program, but the participation of four judges appointed by Trump could
signal a judicial trend.
Plus,
for extra credit, the panelists recommend their favorite health policy stories
of the week they think you should read too:
Julie
Rovner: Buzz Feed News’ “Military Doctors Told Them It Was
Just ‘Female Problems.’ Weeks Later, They Were In The Hospital,” by
Ema O’Connor and Vera Bergengruen.
AND
The New
York Times’ “Treated Like a ‘Piece of Meat’:
Female Veterans Endure Harassment at the V.A.,” by Jennifer
Steinhauer.
Rebecca
Adams: Kaiser Health News’ “’Medicare-For-All Gets Buzzy In
Unexpected Locales,” by Shefali Luthra.
Stephanie
Armour: Kaiser Health News’ “Understanding Loneliness In Older
Adults – And Tailoring A Solution,” by Judith Graham.
Alice
Ollstein: HuffPost’s “These Citizen Activists Fought
Hard to Expand Health Care. Then Their Lawmakers Rebuked Them,” by
Jeffrey Young.
To hear
all our podcasts, click here.
And
subscribe to What the Health? on iTunes, Stitcher or Google Play.
No comments:
Post a Comment