In the health reform debate, there is widespread confusion over the definition of cost--a confusion that has been hanging over this debate for the last few months and is continuing to distort it.
When it comes to making medical care not only cheaper but also better, reducing hospital infections is among the easiest changes to make--something reform really should be able to do, even in this political universe of such limited possibility.
The House health overhaul bill is a great start. It should just be faster, stronger and--really--bigger.
Lately conservatives have been making an argument you should hear. It’s about whether we can believe Congress when it promises to raise taxes or cut spending--and, as such, whether we can believe that health care reform can actually be fiscally responsible.
Buried inside the insurers' new piece of propaganda were two perfectly valid arguments--arguments that advocates of reform would be foolish to ignore.
Exchange design doesn't get the attention of controversies like the public option, abortion, or supposed death panels. In the long run, though, it could be far more decisive in whether reform works.
This week, just maybe, we’ll learn whether the Democrats and their allies can come up with the money to pay for health reform.
A look at Republican efforts to drastically change Medicare in the 1990's shows that the Democratic health reforms plans aren't the real threat to the program.
The pundits are busy filing their reports on how President Obama blew it on health care reform. And while the health care fight is far from over--I remain convinced the Democrats will pass a bill, maybe even a good one--the pundits have a point.