phenomenalplace

Reading page 75 of today's Florida opinion it sounds like that is his intent:(5) InjunctionThe last issue to be resolved is the plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief enjoining implementation of the Act, which can be disposed of very quickly.Injunctive relief is an “extraordinary” [Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456U.S. 305, 312, 102 S. Ct. 1798, 72 L. Ed. 2d 91 (1982)], and “drastic” remedy [

We all knew the question of the constitutionality over the new health care law was going to be taken up by the Supreme Court.We knew that because the law inexplicably lacked a severability clause a judge could throw the whole thing out if the individual mandate were to be found unconstitutional and critical to the legislation.And, we expected this Florida judge would likely rule against the law

I wrote this Kaiser Op-Ed before today's federal court ruling, that held the entire health care law unconstitutional because of the individual mandate. Now that two federal judges have held the individual mandate unconstitutional, this one overturning the entire law because of it, I have to wonder just how long the Democrats are going to wait before they try to amend the Affordability Act in

Brian Klepper and David Kibbe have a notable column at Kaiser Health News arguing that the American Medical Association's Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) is specialist dominated and steers health care resources away from primary care:Not surprisingly, the Committee’s payment recommendations have consistently favored specialists at the expense of primary care physicians. More

This week's House health care repeal vote is little more than a political stunt--everyone knows the effort will die in the Senate.But, when the day is done the only way for the Republicans to do anything with the new health law will be to work out a compromise—repeal before the 2012 elections is impossible and it isn’t very likely after the 2012 elections. Even if the Republicans sweep the

Readers of this blog have often heard me say that a bipartisan agreement on a health care bill was possible in 2009--driven from the Senate Finance Committee. I have continually made the point that the two sides were much closer than is commonly believed--or partisans are willing to concede.Every time I post this, the overwhelming reaction is that I am wrong--with one side inevitably blaming the

Readers of this blog know that I am willing to call AARP out when I think they deserve it. Witness my recent post criticizing their reaction to the chairs of the Deficit Commission and their preliminary report when AARP acted more like a narrow minded advocate than an enlightened organization that understands the inevitability of fundamental reform to the entitlements.And, I have never been

This post originally appeared at Kaiser Health News.The new health care law can be changed in ways that would make it acceptable to a bipartisan majority in the new Congress -- and, therefore, to the American people. But to find this elusive middle ground requires consideration of the competing philosophies at the heart of the nation's political divisions regarding this sweeping measure.For