Ruling upends the ACA; and Kansas wants to own that?

By

Editorials

December 17, 2018 - 11:34 AM

Kansas has the shameful honor of being part of a successful lawsuit that will rob up to 17 million Americans of their only viable course to health insurance.

Why would we want to sign on to such a thing?

Because Kansas officials swallowed the argument that the Affordable Care Act was rendered unconstitutional when the financial penalty for non-participation was eradicated in the 2017 tax overhaul.

Never mind that it saves lives. Being “right” is more important.

If allowed to take effect, Friday’s decision by federal judge Reed O’Connor  would mean insurance companies could return to deciding who they want to insure.

Those with pre-existing conditions? Um, no thanks. And the same could go for pregnant women and their newborns, those who require prescription drugs, and those with mental health and substance abuse problems.

The ruling also negates coverage for states that have expanded Medicaid as well as the mandate that large employers provide health insurance to employees.

If allowed to stand, millions of Americans can expect to see their insurance premiums skyrocket.

Despite President Donald Trump’s praise of the decision, White House administrators recognized its dangers and said current law will stand until the expected appeals process has run its course.

Many Republicans were re-elected in November on their promise that Americans would not lose these valuable provisions.

As Congress must now revisit the health care law over the next few months, we’ll see whether Republicans will keep their word.

This will also be an opportune time to address a major flaw of Obamacare — the cost of prescription drugs. They are simply too high.

Congress’s refusal to set a ceiling on prices means those with chronic diseases such as diabetes, cancer or heart disease are especially vulnerable to rising costs.  

In testimony before the Senate Special Committee on Aging last May, Dr. Jeremy Greene said a vial of insulin produced in 1996 cost $21. Ten years later that one-month supply costs $275. Dr. Greene couldn’t explain the price jump, but said it “has real consequences,” for the 30 million diabetics in the U.S. who are being forced to either ration or skip their doses.

The United States stands alone among its peers in that it allows pharmaceutical companies to dictate the price of prescription drugs. Everywhere else — Canada, England, Spain, Australia, etc. — the government negotiates with pharmaceutical companies on what it will pay for insulin, lipitor, etc.

Our Congress, however, is in a tight spot.

How so?

They are on the take with Big Pharma.

So far this year, lobbyists with PhRMA, the industry’s leading trade group, have spent more than $21 million wooing members of Congress to go easy on the idea of price controls or the push to make more generic versions available.

So when a member of Congress accepts contributions from lobbyists, they simply don’t have the stomach to enact legislation that works against them.

Related
May 21, 2021
February 27, 2019
October 18, 2018
January 20, 2011