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.
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.
This article was reprinted from khn.org with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent news service, is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy research organization unaffiliated with Kaiser Permanente.