Robert McNamara, who served as secretary of Defense in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, stated in a 2003 documentary: “Never answer the question that is asked of you. Answer the question that you wish had been asked of you.”
When the Supreme Court issues its decision on the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the debate will not stop. The ACA brought about immediate relief from some of the worst outcomes of for-profit healthcare, but it is by no means sufficient to temper the rapacious conduct of insurance companies who are determined to make money by not providing healthcare.
As they prepare to wrap up their current term, the nine justices of the Supreme Court hold in their hands the fate of one of the most important pieces of legislation passed in a generation, the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
In a matter of weeks, the Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of the major aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the landmark healthcare reform law passed by Congress in 2010.
All the pacing and worry leading to anticipation of this month’s Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act has the characteristics of the waiting area outside a hospital delivery room. Everyone has strong opinions about what this ruling born of the court should look like. Why the acrimony? The high degree of concern is understandable when you consider how personal healthcare is to each of us and how widespread the law’s impact is on one-sixth of our economy. Yet, as experts line up and pundits weigh in, the hard-set opinions leave little room to operate.
For many people, Mondays have now become the most highly anticipated day of the week. Americans across the country are looking to the Supreme Court each Monday at 10 a.m. to see how it will rule on the president’s healthcare law. After more than two years of enduring the costs and consequences of the law, a majority of the American people wants the court to throw out this failed and unconstitutional law.
The medical device industry has brought incredible advances to the practice of medicine in recent decades. This diverse industry, ranging from CT and MR machines to laboratory diagnostic instruments and pacemakers, is a source of extraordinary medical innovations as well as thousands of well paying jobs in the U.S.
Unfortunately, this innovative industry is under threat due to the Medical Device Tax, a 2.3% excise tax on the U.S. sale of medical devices. This tax is a significant burden on the industry and will amount to an even more substantial impact than first estimated. The true cost of the tax over the next 10 years is estimated at $30 billion.
As a small business owner, I know a thing or two about taking risks. In a city known for its coffee (Seattle), I went all in on cupcakes when I opened my first bakery in 2003. My business – Cupcake Royale – was the country’s first cupcake bakery outside the Big Apple.
That risk paid off. Our made-from-scratch-daily cupcakes were an instant hit and we’ve since grown to five locations and employ 72 people. This year, I was honored as the Small Business Person of the Year by the Greater Seattle Business Association.
I’ve built my business on the notion that a good business supports a strong local economy and gives back to the community. I’ve also built it on a commitment to treating my workers like family, and that includes offering health care coverage.
The opponents of reproductive rights have been trying rather desperately in recent months to turn around the perception that they’re engaged on a “war on women”—and, rather counter intuitively, to suggest that it’s actually the proponents of women’s fundamental rights who are out to harm women.
Clearly they believe they’ve found a winner by ginning up the issue of about abortion in the U.S. as a means of sex selection, diverting the attention of the U.S. House of Representatives today to a full vote on a measure to ban this purported epidemic.
But this is just another attempt by anti-choice congressmen to roll back the clock on women’s health.
Ethical considerations are the primary reason that experiments on chimpanzees have been ended around the world—and are now facing substantial public and political opposition here in the U.S.—yet this issue was wholly ignored in a recent column defending the cruel and archaic practice.
Over the past year, I have been observing and documenting the psychological health of chimpanzees who have been rescued from laboratories and have seen first-hand the lasting damage that life in a laboratory causes these sensitive, intelligent individuals.
Most chimpanzees in laboratories are forcibly separated from their mothers at an early age. Many go on to experience prolonged social isolation and intense confinement in tiny steel cages. And they all too often endure mental trauma and physical abuse.