"Massachusetts has long given the U.S. a glimpse of what the future of American health care might look like.

See more here:

Other Views: Health care takeover costs

Health care spending has eased up recently, a welcome respite for government and corporate budgets. But why has it? And will relief last or are medical costs on a roller coaster, like gas prices?

Go here to see the original:

A welcome let-up in health costs that may not last

June 17, 2012

By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Some are already anticipating the Supreme Court's ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law as the "decision of the century." But the justices are unlikely to have the last word on America's tangled efforts to address health care woes. The problems of high medical costs, widespread waste, and tens of millions of people without insurance will require Congress and the president to keep looking for answers, whether or not the Affordable Care Act passes the test of constitutionality.

With a decision by the court expected this month, here is a look at potential outcomes:

Q: What if the Supreme Court upholds the law and finds Congress was within its authority to require most people to have health insurance or pay a penalty?

A: That would settle the legal argument, but not the political battle.

The clear winners if the law is upheld and allowed to take full effect would be uninsured people in the United States, estimated at more than 50 million.

Starting in 2014, most could get coverage through a mix of private insurance and Medicaid, a safety-net program. Republican-led states that have resisted creating health insurance markets under the law would face a scramble to comply, but the U.S. would get closer to other economically advanced countries that guarantee medical care for their citizens.

Republicans would keep trying to block the law. They will try to elect presidential candidate Mitt Romney, backed by a GOP House and Senate, and repeal the law, although their chances of repeal would seem to be diminished by the court's endorsement.

Obama would feel the glow of vindication for his hard-fought health overhaul, but it might not last long even if he's re-elected.

More:

Possible outcomes in health care law case

As the country awaits and debates the Supreme Court's pending decision on health care reform, about the only thing insurers, providers and patients can agree on is the need for clarity.

The court's decision, expected within the month and perhaps as soon as today, could give direction to a health care system that has been in a holding pattern since challenges to the law's constitutionality were heard in March.

Some aspects of the Affordable Care Act that passed in 2010 have already launched, such as extended coverage for young adults on their parents' insurance. Others, like the more controversial requirement for all Americans to buy insurance, would take effect in 2014. Most states are waiting on the court's move to start organizing insurance markets as called for by next year.

"Everybody is ready for this decision to come down," said Ryan Barker, director of health policy for the Missouri Foundation for Health. "Regardless of what the decision is, we need to move forward."

The ruling is certain to produce a torrent of reaction and election-year posturing no matter what the decision. Both political parties have been preparing for the possible outcomes, distributing talking points and laying contingency plans for piecemeal legislation if all or part of the law is struck down.

Some experts believe that the potential of a split decision striking down the individual insurance mandate while leaving other portions of the law intact would trigger an especially chaotic political situation.

"It would be a colossal mess, even if we assume good faith on the part of our elected officials," remarked Gregory Magarian, a law professor at Washington University. "As a practical matter, it would be almost the worst of all political worlds."

Insurance companies have rushed to ease fears about the more popular aspects of the law. Several of the industry's major players have vowed to continue covering dependents until age 26 and free preventive care such as immunizations, regardless of the court's decision.

"Health plans' top priorities are providing peace of mind and continuity of coverage to their beneficiaries," said Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, in a statement. "No matter what the Supreme Court decides, individuals and families should rest assured that their current coverage will remain in effect."

What's less clear is how much the cost of insurance premiums will change if any or all of the law is tossed out.

Read the original here:

Counting down to a healthcare decision

WASHINGTON

Some are already anticipating the Supreme Court's ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law as the "decision of the century." But the justices are unlikely to have the last word on America's tangled efforts to address health care woes. The problems of high medical costs, widespread waste, and tens of millions of people without insurance will require Congress and the president to keep looking for answers, whether or not the Affordable Care Act passes the test of constitutionality.

With a decision by the court expected this month, here is a look at potential outcomes:

---

Q: What if the Supreme Court upholds the law and finds Congress was within its authority to require most people to have health insurance or pay a penalty?

A: That would settle the legal argument, but not the political battle.

The clear winners if the law is upheld and allowed to take full effect would be uninsured people in the United States, estimated at more than 50 million.

Starting in 2014, most could get coverage through a mix of private insurance and Medicaid, a safety-net program. Republican-led states that have resisted creating health insurance markets under the law would face a scramble to comply, but the U.S. would get closer to other economically advanced countries that guarantee medical care for their citizens.

Republicans would keep trying to block the law. They will try to elect presidential candidate Mitt Romney, backed by a GOP House and Senate, and repeal the law, although their chances of repeal would seem to be diminished by the court's endorsement.

Obama would feel the glow of vindication for his hard-fought health overhaul, but it might not last long even if he's re-elected.

Read this article:

Possible outcomes in pending health care law case

Associated Press

(AP) Congressional Republicans intend to seek quick repeal of any parts of the health care law that survive a widely anticipated Supreme Court ruling, but don't plan to push replacement measures until after the fall elections or perhaps 2013.

Instead, GOP lawmakers cite recent announcements that some insurance companies will retain a few of the law's higher-profile provisions as evidence that quick legislative action is not essential. Those are steps that officials say Republicans quietly urged in private conversations with the industry.

Once the Supreme Court issues a ruling, "the goal is to repeal anything that is left standing," said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., a member of the party's leadership.

Beyond that, "we ought to go step by step to lower the cost" of health care, he added, a formula repeated by numerous other Republicans interviewed in recent days.

Across the political aisle, neither President Barack Obama nor congressional Democrats have said how they will react to a high court ruling that could wipe out the legislation they worked so hard to enact.

"We're not spending a whole bunch of time planning for contingencies," Obama said this spring at the annual meeting of The Associated Press. He expressed confidence the court would uphold the law, and neither he nor his aides have said what fallback plans are under discussion. "We will be prepared in any eventuality," White House aide David Plouffe said Sunday on ABC's "This Week," although he declined to elaborate.

Among Republicans, aides to Speaker John Boehner, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and other key lawmakers have convened a series of meetings in recent weeks to plan a post-ruling strategy.

A Supreme Court ruling is expected within the next two weeks on a challenge to the law, which has drawn fierce opposition among most Republicans for its requirement that most individuals carry health insurance.

While three big insurance companies announced plans this past week to retain certain protections for an estimated 40 percent of all individuals who receive their coverage through work, there has been no advance word from the drug industry on how prescription costs for older people might be affected by a finding that the law is unconstitutional.

See more here:

GOP on health care: No quick replacement

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Washington (CNN) -- Winners and losers are the natural consequence of the American legal system. In the Supreme Court, five majority votes among the nine members are enough to fundamentally change lives and legacies.

The high court in coming days will issue rulings in perhaps its most important appeal in a dozen years: whether the sweeping health care law championed by President Barack Obama will be tossed out as an unconstitutional exercise of congressional authority.

The stakes cannot be overstated -- what the justices decide on a quartet of separate questions will have immediate and long-term impact on every American, not only in the field of medicine but in vast, untold areas of "commerce." Health care expenditures alone currently make up 18% of the U.S. economy, and the new law promises to significantly expand that share.

Five scenarios: Health care options before the justices

"I think the justices probably came into the argument with their minds made up. They had hundreds of briefs and months to study them," said Thomas Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog.com and a prominent Washington attorney. "The oral arguments [in March] might have changed their minds around the margin. But we won't find out until the end of June."

A century of federal efforts to offer universal health care culminated in the 2010 passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. After months of bare-knuckled fights over politics and policy, the legislation signed by Obama reached 2,700 pages, nine major sections and 450-some provisions.

At issue is the constitutionality of the "individual mandate" section -- requiring nearly all Americans to buy health insurance by 2014 or face financial penalties. Twenty-six states in opposition say if that linchpin provision is unconstitutional, the entire law must go. The partisan debate around such a sweeping piece of legislation has encompassed traditional hot-button topics: abortion and contraception funding, state and individual rights, federal deficits, end-of-life care, and the overall economy. The high court now has the final word.

The court will not say precisely when the health care opinions will be released, but the last scheduled public session of the term is set for June 25. Depending on how long it takes the justices to finish up, that deadline could easily slip a few days.

The justices have already secretly voted on the health care cases, as well as a dozen or so other separate appeals. They met privately as a group just days after the late March arguments, voting preliminarily. Individual justices were assigned to write the one or more opinions, as well as separate dissents. Only they and their law clerks know how this will end.

Continue reading here:

Health care ruling will affect all of us

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Washington (CNN) -- Winners and losers are the natural consequence of the American legal system. In the Supreme Court, five majority votes among the nine members are enough to fundamentally change lives and legacies.

The high court in coming days will issue rulings in perhaps its most important appeal in a dozen years: whether the sweeping health care law championed by President Barack Obama will be tossed out as an unconstitutional exercise of congressional authority.

The stakes cannot be overstated -- what the justices decide on a quartet of separate questions will have immediate and long-term impact on every American, not only in the field of medicine but in vast, untold areas of "commerce." Health care expenditures alone currently make up 18% of the U.S. economy, and the new law promises to significantly expand that share.

Five scenarios: Health care options before the justices

"I think the justices probably came into the argument with their minds made up. They had hundreds of briefs and months to study them," said Thomas Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog.com and a prominent Washington attorney. "The oral arguments [in March] might have changed their minds around the margin. But we won't find out until the end of June."

A century of federal efforts to offer universal health care culminated in the 2010 passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. After months of bare-knuckled fights over politics and policy, the legislation signed by Obama reached 2,700 pages, nine major sections and 450-some provisions.

At issue is the constitutionality of the "individual mandate" section -- requiring nearly all Americans to buy health insurance by 2014 or face financial penalties. Twenty-six states in opposition say if that linchpin provision is unconstitutional, the entire law must go. The partisan debate around such a sweeping piece of legislation has encompassed traditional hot-button topics: abortion and contraception funding, state and individual rights, federal deficits, end-of-life care, and the overall economy. The high court now has the final word.

The court will not say precisely when the health care opinions will be released, but the last scheduled public session of the term is set for June 25. Depending on how long it takes the justices to finish up, that deadline could easily slip a few days.

The justices have already secretly voted on the health care cases, as well as a dozen or so other separate appeals. They met privately as a group just days after the late March arguments, voting preliminarily. Individual justices were assigned to write the one or more opinions, as well as separate dissents. Only they and their law clerks know how this will end.

More here:

Health care ruling will be among high court's most important

By Anna Edney - 2012-06-18T04:00:01Z

Venture capitalists seeking to profit from innovations in health care are turning to startups that make smartphone and tablet applications for doctors and hospitals.

Two years ago, patients would be surprised to see their doctors pulling out an Apple Inc. (AAPL) iPhone to check their blood sugar, or cardiogram results. Now theyre finding such practices commonplace as investment in the kinds of companies that make health information apps rose 78 percent in 2011 to $766 million. Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM) has started a $100 million fund, Insight Venture Partners is putting $40 million into a startup and Oprah Winfrey is dipping in as well, with her company investing in a website that helps doctors and patients interact.

Were at a sea change, said David Jahns, managing partner of Galen Partners LP, a Stamford, Connecticut-based private equity firm that invested in a company called Sharecare.

Demand for apps that let doctors and nurses see test results quickly and monitor vital signs remotely, combined with a push from government and insurers to collect better data to contain rising medical costs, is propelling investor interest in an array of health information technology, Jahns said.

We really have to improve our costs, he said. The best thing that our country can do is invest in technology that gets better outcomes with fewer procedures.

Timothy Kreth, a cardiologist at TriStar Summit Medical Center in Hermitage, Tennessee, uses an application from AirStrip Technologies that lets him view emergency room patients electrocardiograms on his iPhone.

Its more convenient for the patient, Kreth said in a telephone interview. I can look at it and determine some of the subtle nuances the emergency room doctor maybe could not. It gives us the opportunity to make diagnoses quicker.

Kreth and the five other cardiologists have used the AirStrip technology for about six weeks at his hospital, which is part of HCA Holdings Inc. (HCA) Previously, emergency room doctors faxed cardiologists the EKGs, Kreth said.

AirStrip, based in San Antonio, Texas, was the first investment from the $100 million Qualcomm Life Fund that formed in December. Qualcomm Life doesnt disclose how much it invests, though typically puts down $2 million to $5 million, Jack Young, who manages the fund, said by telephone.

The rest is here:

Oprah Aids Doctors as App Investments Soar: Health