Podcasts about Affordable Care Act

Learn how to cut prescription costs and prepare for steep health insurance hikes if ACA tax credits expire. How can you make prescription drugs more affordable? What can you do if subsidies in the Affordable Care Act expire and health insurance costs spike? Hosts Sean Pyles and Elizabeth Ayoola discuss rising prescription costs and looming changes to health insurance premiums to help you find ways to save and protect your budget. Joined by Dan Weissmann, host of the podcast An Arm and a Leg, they begin with a discussion of the structural problems in the U.S. prescription drug system, with tips on comparing prices across pharmacies, using discount programs like GoodRx, and checking for manufacturer coupons. Then, personal finance Nerd Kate Ashford joins Sean and Elizabeth to discuss how ACA premium tax credit changes could impact your wallet. They explore strategies such as comparing marketplace plans carefully, shifting to different tiers of coverage, considering employer-based insurance, and preparing for open enrollment. They also highlight the risks of going uninsured, ways to use preventive care benefits to save money, and why America's healthcare system ended up so tied to employment. Want us to review your budget? Fill out this form — completely anonymously if you want — and we might feature your budget in a future segment! https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScK53yAufsc4v5UpghhVfxtk2MoyooHzlSIRBnRxUPl3hKBig/viewform?usp=header In their conversation, the Nerds discuss: prescription drug costs, how to save on prescriptions, GoodRx, Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drugs, pharmacy benefit managers, drug manufacturer coupons, ACA subsidies, ACA premium tax credits, Affordable Care Act healthcare costs, ACA marketplace plans, health insurance open enrollment, formulary, health insurance tiers, high deductible health plan, bronze vs silver plan ACA, health savings account, ACA premium increases, ACA subsidies expiring, ACA tax credits 2025, how to compare health insurance plans, employer sponsored health insurance, self-employed health insurance options, preventive care coverage, avoiding medical debt, risks of going uninsured, Vermont ACA costs, ACA premium increase by state, ACA cost saving strategies, how to check if prescriptions are covered, negotiating prescription costs, medical bankruptcy risk, Medicare and Medicaid differences, US vs UK healthcare costs, ACA income thresholds, ACA marketplace eligibility, losing ACA subsidies impact, choosing an ACA plan, and ACA open enrollment dates. To send the Nerds your money questions, call or text the Nerd hotline at 901-730-6373 or email podcast@nerdwallet.com. Like what you hear? Please leave us a review and tell a friend. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Most retirement calculators drastically underestimate what you'll need to retire comfortably at age 60, leaving many people exposed to hidden financial risks. In this episode, Adam Olson reveals why traditional tools fall short and how you can build a smarter, more secure plan for early retirement.Listeners will discover the overlooked expenses that hit hard between ages 60 and 65, like inflated healthcare costs, higher inflation impact, and elevated lifestyle spending, and why relying on the 4% rule alone can be dangerous. Adam also breaks down practical strategies from his Red Zone Retirement Planning process to help safeguard your nest egg through your most active retirement years.Key Takeaways:Most calculators ignore key factors like healthcare gaps, inflation, and sequence-of-returns risk.Early retirees need 18–24 months of cash reserves to weather downturns and maintain Affordable Care Act coverage.Planning Go-Go, Slow-Go, and No-Go phases helps avoid running out of money later in life.Smart Social Security timing and diversified income sources are crucial for long-term success.Want personalized help? Fill out the questionnaire below to receive a custom video analysis of your retirement readiness.“Don't risk your future on outdated assumptions; know the real numbers before you retire.” – Adam OlsonLearn more about Adam Olson by visiting the following links:FacebookPersonal WebsiteBusiness WebsiteRetirement QuizHow Much Do I Need To Retire Article--Investing involves risk, including loss of principal.   Be sure to understand the benefits and limitations of your available options and consider all factors prior to making any financial decisions.  Any strategies discussed may not be suitable for everyone. Securities and advisory services offered through Mutual of Omaha Investor Services, Inc. Member FINRA/SIPC.  Adam Olson, Representative.  Mutual of Omaha Investor Services is not affiliated with any entity listed herein. This podcast is for educational purposes only and may include references to concepts that have legal and/or tax implications. Mutual of Omaha Investor Services and its representatives do not offer legal or tax advice. The information presented is subject to change without notice and is not intended as an offer or solicitation with respect to the purchase or sale of any security or insurance product.Mutual of Omaha Investor Services and its various affiliates do not endorse or adopt comments posted by third parties.  Comments posted by third parties are their own and may not be representative or indicative of other's opinions, views, and experiences.

This Day in Legal History: Social Security ActOn August 14, 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law, establishing the foundation of the modern American welfare state. The legislation was a centerpiece of Roosevelt's New Deal and aimed to address the widespread economic insecurity caused by the Great Depression. For the first time, the federal government created a structured system of unemployment insurance and old-age pensions, funded by payroll taxes collected from workers and employers. The law also introduced Aid to Dependent Children, a program designed to support families headed by single mothers, later expanded into Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC).The Act marked a major shift in federal involvement in individual economic welfare and signaled a broader acceptance of the idea that the government bears some responsibility for the financial well-being of its citizens. Though limited in scope at first—agricultural and domestic workers, for example, were excluded—the framework it established would evolve through amendments and court challenges over the following decades.The Social Security Act was challenged on constitutional grounds shortly after its passage, but the Supreme Court upheld its key provisions in Helvering v. Davis (1937), affirming Congress's power to spend for the general welfare. Over time, the Social Security program expanded to include disability insurance, Medicare, and Medicaid. While the structure and funding of these programs remain a subject of political debate, the 1935 Act remains one of the most enduring and significant pieces of social legislation in U.S. history.A Texas state court has appointed a receiver to take control of Alex Jones' company, Free Speech Systems LLC, the parent of his Infowars show, in an effort to collect on $1.3 billion in defamation judgments related to his false claims about the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting. Judge Maya Guerra Gamble granted the request from families of victims in the Connecticut case, authorizing receiver Gregory S. Milligan to manage and potentially liquidate the company's assets. Another hearing is scheduled for September 16 to determine whether the Texas-based judgments should also be placed under receivership.Jones, who has been in personal bankruptcy since 2022, has been shielded from immediate collection on many of these judgments, but his company's Chapter 11 case was dismissed in 2024, giving a separate bankruptcy trustee limited control over its assets. The receiver now has authority, subject to that trustee's approval, to pursue the sale of Infowars' media assets, access financial records, and initiate legal actions to recover property.Attorneys for the Sandy Hook families hailed the order as a major step toward accountability. Meanwhile, Jones' legal team plans to appeal, arguing the court was misled about prior bankruptcy rulings. Jones is also seeking U.S. Supreme Court review of the Connecticut judgment, with a filing deadline set for September 5.Alex Jones' Infowars Assets to Be Taken Over by Receiver (1)A federal judge in Philadelphia struck down Trump administration rules that allowed employers to deny birth control coverage based on religious or moral objections. U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone ruled that the 2018 exemptions were not justified and found a disconnect between the sweeping scope of the rules and the limited number of employers likely to need them. The ruling came in a case brought by Pennsylvania and New Jersey, which previously reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court upheld the rules on procedural grounds in 2020 but did not evaluate their substance.The Affordable Care Act mandates contraception coverage in employer health plans, with narrow exemptions for religious organizations. The Trump administration expanded this to a broader class of employers, arguing that even applying for exemptions could burden religious practice. Judge Beetlestone disagreed, saying the administration failed to show a rational link between the perceived issue and its response.The Biden administration had proposed reversing the Trump-era policy in 2023, but that effort stalled before Biden left office. The Little Sisters of the Poor, a Catholic group involved in defending the rules, plans to appeal the new decision. The Department of Justice has not yet commented on the ruling.US judge blocks Trump religious exemption to birth control coverage | ReutersPresident Trump revoked a 2021 executive order issued by then-President Joe Biden that aimed to promote competition across the U.S. economy. Biden's order targeted anti-competitive practices in sectors such as agriculture, healthcare, and labor, and was a key element of his economic agenda. It included efforts to reduce consumer costs by curbing monopolistic behavior and increasing oversight of mergers.Trump's administration criticized the Biden-era approach as overly restrictive and burdensome. The Justice Department, under Trump, endorsed the revocation, stating it would pursue an “America First Antitrust” strategy focused on market freedom and less regulatory interference. Officials also announced plans to streamline the Hart-Scott-Rodino merger review process and reinstate targeted consent decrees to address specific anti-competitive behavior.Critics argue the revocation will weaken protections for consumers and small businesses. A June 2025 report by advocacy groups estimated that dismantling consumer protection policies, including those from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, has cost Americans at least $18 billion through higher fees and lost compensation. Trump has also taken steps to drastically reduce the CFPB's workforce.Former Biden competition policy director Hannah Garden-Monheit condemned the move, claiming it contradicts Trump's promise to support everyday Americans and instead benefits large corporations.Trump revokes Biden-era order on competition, White House says | ReutersA federal judge in Texas dismissed a lawsuit filed by video-sharing platform Rumble, which had accused major advertisers—Diageo, WPP, and the World Federation of Advertisers—of conspiring to boycott the platform by withholding ad spending. U.S. District Judge Jane Boyle ruled that the Northern District of Texas was not the appropriate venue for the case, as the defendants are based in the UK and Belgium. Her decision did not address the substance of Rumble's antitrust claims.Rumble's lawsuit alleged that the advertisers participated in a “brand-safety” initiative through the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, which it claims was used to pressure platforms like Rumble—known for minimal content moderation—into compliance or risk being excluded from ad budgets. The defendants countered that business decisions not to advertise on Rumble were based on brand protection and had nothing to do with collusion or a boycott.Judge Boyle noted it remains an "open question" whether the Texas court is the right venue for a similar lawsuit brought by Elon Musk's social media platform X, which is also pending. The advertisers argued Rumble's legal action was a misuse of antitrust laws intended to force companies to do business with it.US judge tosses Rumble lawsuit claiming advertising boycott | ReutersA federal appeals court ruled in favor of President Donald Trump, allowing him to halt billions in foreign aid payments that had been previously approved by Congress. In a 2-1 decision, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted an injunction issued by a lower court that had ordered the administration to resume nearly $2 billion in aid. The aid freeze was initiated on January 20, 2025—Trump's first day of his second term—through an executive order and followed by significant staffing and structural changes to USAID, the government's main foreign aid agency.The lawsuit challenging the freeze was brought by two nonprofit organizations that depend on federal funding: the AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition and Journalism Development Network. The appeals court, however, ruled that the groups lacked legal standing to challenge the freeze and that only the Government Accountability Office, a congressional watchdog, had authority to do so.Judge Karen Henderson, writing for the majority, explicitly stated the court was not deciding whether Trump's actions violated the Constitution's separation of powers or Congress's control over federal spending. In a sharp dissent, Judge Florence Pan argued the decision undermined the Constitution's checks and balances and enabled unlawful executive overreach.A White House spokesperson praised the ruling, framing it as a victory against "radical left" interference and a step toward aligning foreign aid spending with Trump's "America First" agenda.US appeals court lets Trump cut billions in foreign aid | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

As President Trump orders federal troops into the streets of Washington, D.C. to “do whatever the hell they want” to stop crime, Sen. Peter Welch is traveling across Vermont to share what he insists is the real news that Trump is trying to divert attention from.Welch has tallied the impact of President Trump's economic policies and determined that they will cost families in Vermont an average of $2,120 each year. He says that 99.5% of all Vermont families will lose money as a result of Trump's tariffs and his budget reconciliation bill, which the Senate narrowly passed in early July after Vice President J.D. Vance cast a tie-breaking vote.The Vermont Conversation caught up with Welch at Snow Farm Vineyard in South Hero, where Welch held a listening session attended by about 150 people.Welch conceded that even he is “shocked” by the devastating impact of what he calls the “big ugly bill.” His office released a list of those impacts, including:As many as 45,000 Vermonters will lose health care As much as $1.7 billion in lost revenue for Vermont hospitals Over 26,000 Vermonters will lose access to discounted premiums on the Affordable Care Act marketplace 6,000 Vermonters are at risk of losing SNAP assistance Annual energy bills for Vermonters will rise by $290 The state will lose 1,400 jobs by ending green energy projects Mortgage payments will rise by $1,060 annually 78,000 Vermonters with student loans will pay $3,694 more over the course of their loansThese cuts will shred the country's social safety net, undoing social programs that date back to President Roosevelt's New Deal and President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.“There (were) a lot of lies that were peddled by the administration and frankly by many of my Republican colleagues about how great the bill was," Welch said, while "ignoring the concrete reality” of how it will hurt the people they represent. Welch said Trump's budget will add about $4.5 trillion to the federal deficit.In a rare criticism of Governor Phil Scott, Welch slammed the governor's recent decision to provide the Trump administration sensitive data on thousands of Vermonters who receive nutrition assistance. “We should not be providing the private information of our citizens to the federal government,” said Vermont's junior senator. “We should be protecting the privacy of Vermont citizens.”All together, Welch said Trump's actions are part and parcel of an authoritarian push. He accused the president of employing a “dual standard” around crime in the nation's capital. “You had a riot that was inspired and incited by President Trump and those folks who were intent on doing real violence and hurt many of these law enforcement officers have been pardoned by the president.” Welch was in Congress hiding from mobs of Trump supporters who rampaged through the Capitol on January 6, 2021.Abroad, Sen. Welch was also sharply critical of Israel's war in Gaza. Since the October 7, 2023 attack in which Hamas killed some 1,200 Israelis and took hostage some 250 soldiers and civilians, Israel has killed over 61,000 Palestinians, detained about 3,000 people — none of whom have been charged with a crime — and waged a campaign of starvation against a desperate population. In response, Welch has called for a ceasefire, the return of hostages, and a cutoff of sales of offensive weapons to Israel.“Being against starvation is not at all being against the endurance of the democratic Jewish state of Israel. It's about being against starvation and that starvation being inflicted by the authority of the state.”American democracy is “fragile," Welch said.

Dr. Anthony DiGiorgio, a neurosurgeon at UCSF with a strong interest in healthcare policy, joins the show to unpack the complex and often misunderstood world of Medicaid. In a wide-ranging and nuanced discussion, he explores who qualifies for coverage, why most Medicaid spending goes to groups people don't typically expect, and whether the system should be expanded or fundamentally reformed. Dr. DiGiorgio outlines his support for a robust safety net, emphasizing targeted subsidies over a government-run program, and offers his take on the proposed “Big Beautiful Bill” currently in Congress. Along the way, the conversation touches on broader healthcare issues including the 340B drug discount program, the Affordable Care Act, and the role of the free market in ensuring access to care. Check out Chadi's website for all Healthcare Unfiltered episodes and other content. www.chadinabhan.com/ Watch all Healthcare Unfiltered episodes on YouTube. www.youtube.com/channel/UCjiJPTpIJdIiukcq0UaMFsA

Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute and Forbes columnist, provided a comprehensive overview of recent public policy changes affecting older adults. Drawing from his expertise in aging and tax policy—stemmed from personal caregiving experiences—Gleckman analyzed the implications of the Trump administration's "big beautiful bill" and related executive actions as of August 2025. The focus was on Medicaid and Medicare reforms, which could reshape long-term care, costs, and access for millions of seniors and people with disabilities.Medicaid, which supports about 7.2 million seniors and 4.8 million younger disabled individuals (dual eligibles), faces a $1 trillion reduction in federal spending over the next decade. Key changes include:Work Requirements and Paperwork: Starting potentially in December 2026, states must impose work mandates, though older adults and those with disabilities are exempt. Family caregivers' status remains unclear, risking benefit loss for those quitting jobs to provide care. Recertification is now required at least twice yearly, increasing administrative burdens and potentially deterring eligible recipients.Funding Reductions: Limits on state provider taxes (e.g., on nursing homes) will cut federal contributions by about $120 billion starting in 2028. Expansion states under the Affordable Care Act lose extra funding from January 2026, forcing tough choices: cut benefits, limit eligibility, or raise taxes. Gleckman warned that optional home and community-based services (HCBS) are most vulnerable, as nursing home care remains mandatory. While the bill allows states to expand HCBS for less needy individuals without lengthening waitlists, funding cuts make this unlikely.Staffing and Workforce Impacts: The bill repeals Biden-era minimum staffing rules for nursing homes until 2034. Combined with mass deportations, this exacerbates shortages of direct care workers, driving up costs for facilities and families.Gleckman emphasized that states may prioritize institutional care over community-based options, potentially worsening outcomes for older adults preferring to age at home.Despite campaign promises to protect Medicare, changes aim to curb fraud, boost efficiency, and emphasize prevention—but at the risk of higher costs and reduced access:Prior Authorization Expansion: For the first time, traditional fee-for-service Medicare will require prior approval for 17 procedures (e.g., back surgeries, pain injections) in a six-state demo (New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Arizona, Washington). CMS plans to use AI for reviews, with human oversight.Payment Adjustments: Skilled nursing facilities see a 2.8% payment increase for 2026, deemed insufficient by the industry. Home health agencies face a 6.4% cut ($1 billion+), sparking bipartisan opposition. The Labor Department repealed Obama-era rules, allowing home care workers to earn below federal minimum wage ($7.25/hour) and exempting them from overtime, per state laws.Enrollment and Programs: Easier enrollment in Medicare Savings Programs (for low-income beneficiaries) is delayed until 2034. The GUIDE program for dementia care navigation continues but with penalties if it fails to improve outcomes or save money. Value-based care is expanding, rewarding providers for quality over volume.Drug Pricing and Hospice: Trump favors "most favored nation" pricing to align U.S. drug costs with foreign markets, potentially supplementing Biden's negotiations. Hospice faces crackdowns on alleged fraud, though details are pending.Gleckman noted deregulation of nursing homes (e.g., rolling back transparency rules) and potential reductions in Medicare Advantage supplemental benefits like gym memberships due to insurer financial pressures.

Prescription drug costs are rising, and employers are feeling the pressure. In this episode of The Moneyball Podcast, Scott Wham and Richard Lo, Director of Clinical Services, tackle the complex world of prescription drug pricing, pharmacy benefit management, and healthcare policy. With Richard's background as a community pharmacist and Scott's strategic insights, they explore how employers can navigate rising costs, ensure ethical practices, and prepare for future growth.

How has the landscape of legal education shifted, and what ramifications has that already started having? How do politics factor into judicial appointments more than ever before, and how did we get to this point?Ilya L. Shapiro is a senior fellow and the director of Constitutional Studies at the Manhattan Institute. He's also the author of several books, including Lawless: The Miseducation of America's Elites and Supreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the Politics of America's Highest Court Cato Supreme Court Review.Greg and Ilya explore issues related to Supreme Court nominations, cancel culture, and the impact of bias in legal education. Their conversation also addresses the longstanding politicization of judicial appointments, challenges within legal academia such as DEI and student activism, and the broader implications for law and society. Ilya also shares potential reforms for improving the legal profession and education system.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:When the law becomes just another form of activism35:49: Another failure of our systems of legal education or of the culture of the legal profession. Young lawyers seeing themselves as the law or their legal tools as just another part of activism, rather than as a profession. Or law schools not teaching lawyers the same way. The way to be a good lawyer is to be able to understand and see all sides of a given argument or issue or dispute. That is how you can best advocate your own sides, your own client's position. Well, if half of that 360 degrees is illegitimate, or you cannot even discuss beyond the pale, outside the Overton window, as they say, then you are going to be a much less effective lawyer. And yes, I think the legal profession has suffered, in general, its credibility, its reputation.What universities were meant to be43:19: It is the purpose of universities to develop, to have free inquiry, to have civil debate, to confront new ideas. And if universities have not been doing that for a whole host of reasons, then I think that is a level of criticism—something that they should be held to account for.On judges and legal objectivity04:36: You would hope that law and policy are different things, because there is a reason why we separate out the judicial power, and that reason is for it to be a counter-majoritarian check. You do not need judges to buttress popular opinions. You need judges to protect against abuses of power by elected officials. You need judges to protect individual rights against mob rule. And so, it cannot be the case that what is right on the law is always going to be what the majority of policy views. When fear shapes the future of the legal profession30:27: Most students just want to get their degree, get their credential, get a job, have some fun while they are at it, and that is about it. They are not politically motivated or philosophically motivated. They are just there because—especially when we are talking about law schools, rather, or some other professional school as opposed to college—they are there because this is the next step on their career trajectory, and they are just trying to keep their head down so as not to be caught in the cancellation crossfire. And it is fear, and this is how I counsel students, is that you do not have to be a martyr. You do not have to stand up and be an individual, objecting to every injustice you face.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Ketanji Brown JacksonBurwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.Robert BorkTheodore RooseveltJames MadisonAlexander HamiltonJohn JayMancur OlsonWilliam TreanorThe Paper ChaseLewis F. Powell Jr.John Paul StevensGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at The Manhattan InstituteProfile at the CATO InstituteProfile for Burke Law GroupLinkedIn ProfileSocial Profile on XGuest Work:Substack - Shapiro's GavelAmazon Author PageLawless: The Miseducation of America's ElitesSupreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the Politics of America's Highest CourtCato Supreme Court ReviewReligious Liberties for Corporations?: Hobby Lobby, the Affordable Care Act, and the ConstitutionAmicus Brief -- Alvarez v. Smith

fWotD Episode 3013: 2020 Missouri Amendment 2 Welcome to featured Wiki of the Day, your daily dose of knowledge from Wikipedia's finest articles.The featured article for Monday, 4 August 2025, is 2020 Missouri Amendment 2.2020 Missouri Amendment 2, also known as the Medicaid Expansion Initiative, was a ballot measure to amend the Constitution of Missouri to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The initiative was on August 4, 2020, primary ballot and passed with 53.27% of the vote. Following previous successful Medicaid expansion initiatives in other states, Republican lawmakers in Nebraska and Utah added work requirements to their states' Medicaid expansions, which supporters aimed to prevent by proposing state constitutional amendments for future Medicaid expansion initiatives.Opponents sued to prevent the initiative from being voted on, but courts ruled in the measure's favor. The measure was supported most in urban areas and opposed in rural areas. After a delay due to a lack of funding from the Missouri General Assembly and resulting litigation, the initiative was implemented in October 2021, albeit slowly. Republican lawmakers attempted to roll back the program and add a work requirement through a state constitutional amendment, which failed after the United States Supreme Court effectively prevented the implementation of one.This recording reflects the Wikipedia text as of 01:07 UTC on Monday, 4 August 2025.For the full current version of the article, see 2020 Missouri Amendment 2 on Wikipedia.This podcast uses content from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Visit our archives at wikioftheday.com and subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Follow us on Mastodon at @wikioftheday@masto.ai.Also check out Curmudgeon's Corner, a current events podcast.Until next time, I'm generative Joanna.

Subscribe to UnitedHealthcare's Community & State newsletter.Health Affairs' Jeff Byers welcomes Dr. Aaron Carroll, President and CEO of AcademyHealth, to the pod to discuss his recent Forefront article that takes a closer look at the disappearance of public health information and how this could have an impact on infrastructures that scientists, clinicians, health policy makers, and community leaders rely on daily. Become an Insider today to get access to our trend reports, events, and exclusive newsletters.Related Links:AcademyHealth Situation ReportsPRESS RELEASE: AcademyHealth Joins Lawsuit to Restore Public Health Data Removed from Federal WebsitesBecome an AcademyHealth Member Subscribe to UnitedHealthcare's Community & State newsletter.

Recorded in November, 2024, Meg welcomes Dr. Monica Soni, Chief Medical Officer of Covered California, a free service that connects Californians with brand name health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Dr. Monica Soni is the Chief Medical Officer of Covered California and a practicing primary care physician. She is a board member at Mercy Housing California and previously served on the Los Angeles County Hospital and Healthcare Delivery Commission. Dr. Soni holds a medical degree from Harvard Medical School and is deeply committed to improving population health, reducing disparities, and ensuring healthcare is accessible and affordable for all.In this episode of Game-Changing Women of Healthcare, Monica speaks about driving meaningful healthcare reform from within one of the country's largest health insurance marketplaces. With nearly 1.8 million Californians enrolled, Covered California is tackling some of the system's toughest challenges: provider shortages, cost barriers, health plan accountability, and fragmented care. Dr. Soni opens up about launching statewide initiatives that link financial incentives to quality improvement, reducing deductibles for enrollees, and holding health plans to a higher standard.A practicing primary care physician and former commissioner for the Los Angeles County Hospital and Healthcare Delivery Commission, Dr. Soni brings a unique, on-the-ground perspective to policy leadership. This is a must-listen for anyone passionate about the future of equitable, high-quality, and sustainable care.Further Reading: -Dr. Monica Soni's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drmonicasoni/-Covered California: www.coveredca.com-Mercy Housing California: https://www.mercyhousing.org/california/-The California Kids Investment and Development Savings Program (CalKIDS): https://calkids.org/about/-California Child Savings Account Program: https://www.capta.org/child-savings-account-UCLA: https://www.ucla.edu/-Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science: https://www.cdrewu.edu/Episode Credits: The Game-Changing Women of Healthcare is a production of The Krinsky Company. Hosted by Meg Escobosa. Produced by Meg Escobosa, Calvin Marty, Chelsea Ho, and Wendy Nielsen.Edited, engineered, and mixed by Calvin Marty. All music composed and performed by Calvin Marty. ©2025 The Krinsky Company

On this episode of Chit Chat Stocks, Brett gives a research report on Oscar Health (ticker: OSCR). We discuss:(03:05) Understanding the Affordable Care Act(05:57) Oscar Health's Business Model and Market Position(09:03) User Experience in Health Insurance(12:15) Profitability Challenges in Health Insurance(15:42) Oscar Health's Growth and Market Share(18:42) Management Changes and Leadership Impact(22:42) Market Opportunities and Competitive Landscape(33:12) Navigating Financial Headwinds in Healthcare(38:27) The Rise of Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Arrangements(41:41) Profitability Uncertainty in the Health Insurance Sector(46:30) +Oscar: A Moonshot for Oscar Health(50:44) Valuation Challenges and Market Perception(59:01) Emerging Moats in Health InsuranceSubscribe to our Substack and read the full report: https://chitchatstocks.substack.com/****************************************************JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER AND FREE CHAT COMMUNITY: https://chitchatstocks.substack.com/ *********************************************************************Chit Chat Stocks is presented by Interactive Brokers. Get professional pricing, global access, and premier technology with the best brokerage for investors today: https://www.interactivebrokers.com/ Interactive Brokers is a member of SIPC. *********************************************************************Fiscal.ai is building the future of financial data.With custom charts, AI-generated research reports, and endless analytical tools, you can get up to speed on any stock around the globe. All for a reasonable price. Use our LINK and get 15% off any premium plan: ⁠https://fiscal.ai/chitchat *********************************************************************Disclosure: Chit Chat Stocks hosts and guests are not financial advisors, and nothing they say on this show is formal advice or a recommendation.

We dive into the Affordable Care Act enrollment periods and how to help your clients navigate them!   Contact the Agent Survival Guide Podcast! Email us ASGPodcast@Ritterim.com or call 1-717-562-7211 and leave a voicemail.   Resources: ACA Basics - Knight School Training Takeaways From the 2025 Marketplace Integrity and Affordability CMS Final Rule Register with Ritter Insurance Marketing The Complete Guide to Selling Affordable Care Act Insurance Plans FREE eBook Download The Pros and Cons of Selling Insurance What is the Health Insurance Marketplace?   References: “CMS Finalizes Major Rule to Lower Individual Health Insurance Premiums for Americans.” CMS.Gov, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid, 20 June 2025, https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/press-releases/cms-finalizes-major-rule-lower-individual-health-insurance-premiums-americans. “Cost Changes for Pennie Enrollees Coming in 2026.” Pennie, https://pennie.com/costs/. Accessed 2 July 2025. “Getting Health Coverage Outside Open Enrollment.” HealthCare.Gov, https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage-outside-open-enrollment/special-enrollment-period/. Accessed 2 July 2025. “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Marketplace Integrity and Affordability.” Federal Register, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/06/25/2025-11606/patient-protection-and-affordable-care-act-marketplace-integrity-and-affordability. Accessed 2 July 2025. “When Can You Get Health Insurance?” HealthCare.Gov, https://www.healthcare.gov/quick-guide/dates-and-deadlines/. Accessed 2 July 2025.   Follow Us on Social!  Ritter on Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/RitterIM Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/ritter.insurance.marketing/ LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/company/ritter-insurance-marketing TikTok, https://www.tiktok.com/@ritterim X, https://x.com/RitterIM and YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/user/RitterInsurance     Sarah on LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/in/sjrueppel/ Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/thesarahjrueppel/ and Threads, https://www.threads.net/@thesarahjrueppel  Tina on LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/in/tina-lamoreux-6384b7199/   Not affiliated with or endorsed by Medicare or any government agency.

On a recent night in the town of Kerman in Fresno County, hundreds of people gathered at the local football field. They were there for an event that has happened in Kerman only twice before. And it left the community star-struck. Reporter: Samantha Rangel, KVPR California will deploy almost $2 million to prevent thousands of people from losing their health insurance, as White House cuts hit the Affordable Care Act marketplace. Reporter: Carly Severn, KQED Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

We finally circle back to the two big structural constitutional law cases from the last day of the term. First is Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, which upheld the appointment structure of the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force under the Affordable Care Act. Then is FCC v. Consumers' Research, which upheld the universal-service contribution scheme against a pair of non-delegation challenges. Our second-longest episode of the season.

A new bill in the House would guarantee parity between traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage reimbursements. Analysis from health insurer filings signals a spike in premiums for Affordable Care Act plans. And, a national hospital operator is selling its outpatient lab services in a multimillion-dollar deal. Those stories and more coming up on today's episode of the Gist Healthcare podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Medicaid may have monopolized Washington's attention lately, but big changes are coming to the Affordable Care Act as well.Meanwhile, Americans are learning more about what's in the big budget bill President Donald Trump signed into law this month, and polls suggest many of them don't like what they see.Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico, Jessie Hellmann of CQ Roll Call, and Julie Appleby of KFF Health News join KFF Health News' Julie Rovner to discuss these stories and more.Also this week, Rovner interviews historian and University of North Carolina health policy professor Jonathan Oberlander to mark Medicare's 60th anniversary. Visit our website for a transcript of this episode.Plus, for “extra credit” the panelists suggest health policy stories they read this week that they think you should read, too: Julie Rovner: KFF Health News' “Republicans Call Medicaid Rife with Fraudsters. This Man Sees No Choice but To Break the Rules,” by Katheryn Houghton. Jessie Hellmann: Roll Call's “Kennedy's Mental Health Drug Skepticism Lands at FDA Panel,” by Ariel Cohen. Julie Appleby: NPR's “Many Beauty Products Have Toxic Ingredients. Newly Proposed Bills Could Change That,” by Rachel Treisman. Alice Miranda Ollstein: The Associated Press' “RFK Jr. Promoted a Food Company He Says Will Make Americans Healthy. Their Meals Are Ultraprocessed,” by Amanda Seitz and Jonel Aleccia. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Rahm Emanuel is giving every indication that he's running for president in 2028—including by coming on Honestly yesterday. Emanuel, now 65 years old, has spent decades making a name for himself as one of the Democratic Party's fiercest and most effective partisans—a true knife fighter, and you'll see that spiciness in this interview. But can the dealmaker, the guy so adept at pulling the levers of power behind the scenes, really become the front man? And as the party continues to pull leftward, is there really room for an old-school moderate liberal like Rahm to be the standard-bearer? And lastly, but perhaps most importantly, does he have the bedside manner to be president? Or will people love his blunt nature and find it refreshing? He certainly has a résumé to run on. While still in his early 30s, he became a key adviser to Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign, and before he was 40, his career was already the stuff of legend, thanks to stunts like sending a dead fish to a Democratic pollster who had upset him. And after Clinton won the White House in 1992, when staffers met around a picnic table to celebrate their accomplishments, Rahm instead picked up a knife and began listing Democrats he felt were insufficiently supportive of the campaign. “Dead man!” he yelled after each name, jabbing the knife into the table. His nickname—“Rahm-bo,” after Sylvester Stallone's fearsome commando—became so pervasive that even his mom started calling him that. Meanwhile, in Hollywood, Rahm became the inspiration for a leading character on The West Wing, Josh Lyman. He spent five years as a top White House aide following Clinton's victory. Rahm then returned to his native Illinois and was elected to Congress in 2002. In 2006, he was the mastermind of the Democratic Party's wildly successful effort to retake the House of Representatives, making Nancy Pelosi speaker. In 2008, Barack Obama made Rahm his first White House chief of staff. He guided the new president through his tumultuous first two years in office, a period when Obama signed Dodd-Frank, a massive stimulus package, and the Affordable Care Act, into law. Then, in 2011, Rahm was elected to the first of his two terms as Chicago's mayor. And when Joe Biden won the White House, he made Rahm his ambassador to Japan, giving the maybe–presidential contender direct foreign policy experience in what some would argue is America's most important ally. Now the question is whether a man who ran Chicago and served every living Democratic president is too conservative for Democrats. Today on Honestly, Bari asks Rahm how moderates on the left and the right can get elected, about free trade, China, Israel, Iran, Trump, Biden, Obama, Zohran Mamdani, and the American dream—and what his party needs to do to win back Congress in the midterms next year, and the White House in 2028. And more deeply, if the Democrats can ever win a national election again after losing the trust of the American people. It's a fascinating conversation with one of the most unique, knowledgeable, and—dare we say—zesty figures in politics today. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

States sue the Trump administration over an Affordable Care Act eligibility and enrollment rule. Two large northeastern health systems explore a possible merger. And, Humana sues the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services again over the drop in its Medicare Advantage star ratings. Those stories on today's episode of the Gist Healthcare podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Federal cuts to Medicaid reimbursements and subsidies on the Affordable Care Act marketplace policies will impact everyone because everyone gets sick sometime. If people don't have preventive healthcare, or medical management of their chronic conditions, people will inevitably show up at an emergency room, increasing medical costs and crowding ER's for everyone.

LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/watchdog-on-wall-street-with-chris-markowski/id570687608 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2PtgPvJvqc2gkpGIkNMR5i WATCH and SUBSCRIBE on:https://www.youtube.com/@WatchdogOnWallstreet/featuredAre we finally at the moment Barack Obama predicted—the point where Obamacare paves the way for full-blown government-run health care? With insurers seeking double-digit premium hikes for 2026 and coverage costs rising across the board, Americans are paying more and getting less. Republicans talked repeal and replace but delivered nothing. The result? A health care system lurching toward collapse by design. As frustration mounts and subsidies shrink, the “Affordable” Care Act looks more like a political Trojan horse for Medicare for All. The question isn't if anymore—it's when. www.watchdogonwallstreet.com

Black women in Mississippi have a 1 in 4 chance of developing postpartum depression, according to new research.Then, Alcorn State University is partnering with a casino in Natchez to house students during the fall semester.Plus, a health official shares what reductions in subsidies for the Affordable Care Act premiums could mean to rural Mississippi hospitals and the communities they serve. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on A Mental Health Break, we're tackling one of the most frustrating and overwhelming hurdles to mental well-being: health insurance coverage. We're honored to welcome Louise Norris, a nationally recognized health policy analyst who has been expertly tracking and writing about health insurance and reform since 2006. With hundreds of educational articles for healthinsurance.org to her name, Louise is renowned for making complex topics like the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid, and Medicare understandable and actionable for everyday consumers.Louise brings a unique "broker's perspective" to the conversation, drawing from over two decades of experience helping consumers in Colorado navigate their health plans. Her extensive knowledge and insights are especially valuable when it comes to mental health coverage, an area often riddled with confusion and mixed messages. What happens when someone finally reaches out for help, only to be overwhelmed by confusing restrictions and insurance barriers? Louise has the answers.In this vital episode, Louise will help you understand what your insurance plans actually cover and why individuals with the same diagnosis can face vastly different hurdles depending on their plan type, state, or provider network. We'll delve into critical questions like what to ask your insurer before seeking therapy or substance use treatment, why coverage rules differ across various plan types (employer, Marketplace, Medicare, Medicaid), and how short-term or limited benefit plans can leave consumers exposed.You'll gain crucial insights into why even mental health parity laws don't always guarantee access and learn practical steps to find out if your health plan truly covers the mental health treatment you need. If you've ever felt lost or frustrated trying to access mental health care, this episode is your essential guide to understanding your rights and making informed decisions.Support the showHave a question for the host or guest? Want their freebee? Are you looking to become a guest or show partner? Email Danica at PodcastsByLanci@gmail.com.This show is brought to you by the Empathy Set and Coming Alive Podcast Production.CRISIS LINE: DIAL 988

After a lot of back and forth, Republicans in Congress have passed President Trump's mega tax and spending package, aka the “One, Big Beautiful Bill.” At almost a thousand pages, the law fulfills a range of Republican campaign promises, from protecting tax cuts to turbo charging immigration enforcement. But many Democrats have called its cuts to programs like Medicaid and food aid 'cruel.' And now, state lawmakers will have to grapple with what the new reality means for Colorado's safety net.CPR's Bente Birkeland and CPR's Caitlyn Kim bring this all home, diving into the many ways the law represents a shift in direction for U.S. policy and priorities and how people will feel it in Colorado. CPR health reporter John Daley joins to discuss the implications on healthcare, in particular the cuts to Medicaid and the more immediate effects on the Affordable Care Act insurance marketplace.Further reading: Congressional Republicans defy expectations and send megabill to Trump The federal government temporarily cut taxes on tips and overtime. What does that mean for Colorado state taxes? One big beautiful special session? Colorado lawmakers still aren't sure Colorado health insurance rates expected to skyrocket after budget bill slashes health spending Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains resumes scheduling for patients enrolled in Medicaid, for now Purplish is produced by CPR News and the Capitol News Alliance, a collaboration between KUNC News, Colorado Public Radio, Rocky Mountain PBS, and The Colorado Sun, and shared with Rocky Mountain Community Radio and other news organizations across the state. Funding for the Alliance is provided in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.Purplish's producer is Stephanie Wolf. This episode was edited by Megan Verlee and sound designed and engineered by Shane Rumsey. Our theme music is by Brad Turner.

Health Affairs' Jeff Byers welcomes Ryan Golden, Senior Reporter at HR Dive, to the pod to discuss workforce trends within the health care space pertaining to artificial intelligence, recruitment, overtime eligibility requirements, pay transparency, noncompete agreements, remote work, RTO policies, and more.This week, Health Affairs released their second Insider trend report focusing on the health care workforce, titled "The Health Care Workforce: A Challenge In Sustainability."Become an Insider today to get access to our trend reports, events, and exclusive newsletters. Related Links:What HR pros need to know about AI in the workplace (HR Dive)

In this case, the court considered this issue: Does the structure of the U-S Preventive Services Task Force violate the Constitution's Appointments Clause, and if so, is the provision that insulates the task force from the Health & Human Services secretary's supervision severable from the rest of the statute?The case was decided on June 27, 2025.The Supreme Court held that members of the U-S Preventive Services Task Force are inferior officers whose appointment by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is consistent with the Appointments Clause. Art. II, §2, cl. 2. Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the 6-3 majority opinion of the Court.The Secretary of HHS can remove Task Force members at will, which provides “a powerful tool for control” because officers' “presumed desire to avoid removal” creates “here-and-now subservience.” Since Congress granted the Secretary appointment power and placed no statutory restrictions on removal, the Secretary may remove Task Force members at will. Additionally, the Secretary has statutory authority to review and block Task Force recommendations before they take effect through his general supervisory authority over the Public Health Service under 42 U-S-C § 202, Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1966, and his rulemaking authority under § 300gg-92. The Affordable Care Act requires a minimum one-year interval before recommendations become binding, during which the Secretary can direct that recommendations not be “in effect” or establish formal review processes. Task Force members therefore “have no power to render a final decision on behalf of the United States unless permitted to do so by” the Secretary.Congress vested appointment authority in the Secretary through two statutes read together. First, the 1999 statute gives the AHRQ Director power to “convene” the Task Force, which naturally includes appointment authority given the requirement to ensure members have “appropriate expertise.” Second, Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1966, ratified by Congress in 1984, transfers “all functions” of Public Health Service officers to the Secretary, including the AHRQ Director's appointment power. The statutory requirement that Task Force members be “independent and, to the extent practicable, not subject to political pressure” does not create for-cause removal protection or prevent secretarial supervision, but rather ensures members are not unduly influenced by outside professional affiliations and can exercise independent judgment in formulating initial recommendations, consistent with the standard model of Executive Branch adjudication.Justice Clarence Thomas authored a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, arguing that Congress has not explicitly vested appointment authority in the Secretary and that Task Force members are principal officers who must be appointed by the President with Senate confirmation.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

What is next in the fight to manage waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicaid now that the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) is law?  Join AnneMarie Schieber, managing editor of Health Care News and Devon Herrick, of the Goodman Institute Health Blog as they discuss the latest headlines in health care from a free market perspective. Will there be an effort to make states more financially responsible for their Medicaid programs outside the OBBB?  How will states manage Medicaid work requirements and will work requirements ultimately eliminate Medicaid waste? Also, it appears Congress is ready to tackle  “site neutral payments” under Medicare, the latest Supreme Court decisions impacting “Medicaid Provider of Choice” and required preventative screenings under the Affordable Care Act. And, did the 2020 No Surprises Act make an impact in surprise medical bills and balance billing? Plus, health savings account expansion and what this means to patients. In The Tank broadcasts LIVE every Thursday at 12pm CT on on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Tune in to have your comments addressed live by the In The Tank Crew. Be sure to subscribe and never miss an episode. See you there!Climate Change Roundtable is LIVE every Friday at 12pm CT on The Heartland Institute YouTube channel. Have a topic you want addressed? Join the live show and leave a comment for our panelists and we'll cover it during the live show!

Comprehensive coverage of the day's news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice. UN Photo/shareef sarhan Vote on cuts to foreign aid, public broadcasting delayed over “Epstein files” dispute that split MAGA movement; California, other states sue to stop rule undermining health coverage under Medicaid and Affordable Care Act; Israeli strike hits only Catholic church in Gaza, as half of housing in Gaza has been destroyed in Israel-Hamas conflict; Trump administration officials visit Alcatraz in push to turn former prison into jail for “dangerous criminals and illegals”; National Urban League declares “state of emergency” for civil rights in US Florida “Alligator Alcatraz” immigrant detention center sparks controversy over use of FEMA funds The post States sue to stop rule undermining Medicaid and Affordable Care Act; Israeli strike hits only Catholic church in Gaza – July 17, 2025 appeared first on KPFA.

What is next in the fight to manage waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicaid now that the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) is law?  Join AnneMarie Schieber, managing editor of Health Care News and Devon Herrick, of the Goodman Institute Health Blog as they discuss the latest headlines in health care from a free market perspective. Will there be an effort to make states more financially responsible for their Medicaid programs outside the OBBB?  How will states manage Medicaid work requirements and will work requirements ultimately eliminate Medicaid waste? Also, it appears Congress is ready to tackle  “site neutral payments” under Medicare, the latest Supreme Court decisions impacting “Medicaid Provider of Choice” and required preventative screenings under the Affordable Care Act. And, did the 2020 No Surprises Act make an impact in surprise medical bills and balance billing? Plus, health savings account expansion and what this means to patients.

The Senate narrowly advanced the White House's $9 billion rescissions package late Tuesday night, but the bigger story: who opposed the procedural votes and why. Anna and Jake discuss the trio of GOP appropriators who voted against moving forward with the Republican-only effort.   Plus, another huge, politically charged deadline looms at the end of the year: the Affordable Care Act's enhanced premium tax credits are set to expire. The stakes? 4.2 million Americans could lose health insurance coverage. Punchbowl News is on YouTube! Subscribe to our channel today to see all the new ways we're investing in video. Want more in-depth daily coverage from Congress? Subscribe to our free Punchbowl News AM newsletter at punchbowl.news. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SummaryThis lecture discussion explores the evolution of the Commerce Clause, located in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, which empowers Congress to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several states, and with Indian tribes. Initially intended to prevent economic fragmentation among the states under the Articles of Confederation, the clause has since become a cornerstone of federal legislative authority. The lecture traces the doctrine's development from early cases like Gibbons v. Ogden, which established a broad interpretation of interstate commerce, through periods of judicial contraction during the Lochner era, and into its expansive use during the New Deal era with cases like Wickard v. Filburn. It also covers the modern Court's retrenchment in United States v. Lopez and Morrison, reaffirming limits on federal power. The lecture concludes with analysis of Gonzales v. Raich, the Affordable Care Act case (NFIB v. Sebelius), and the interplay between the Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the Tenth Amendment, providing students with a framework to understand the clause's reach and limitations in contemporary constitutional law.Key TakeawaysCommerce Clause Authority: Congress has the power to regulate channels, instrumentalities, and activities substantially affecting interstate commerce.Early Interpretations: Gibbons v. Ogden broadly defined “commerce” and Congress's authority over it.Judicial Contraction: Cases like E.C. Knight and Hammer v. Dagenhart restricted commerce power by excluding manufacturing and production.New Deal Expansion: NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel and Wickard v. Filburn upheld federal regulation of intrastate activities with substantial economic effects.Civil Rights and Commerce: Heart of Atlanta Motel and Katzenbach v. McClung affirmed Congress's authority to address racial discrimination through commerce power.Modern Limits: Lopez and Morrison reasserted that non-economic activities and areas of traditional state concern fall outside commerce power.Necessary and Proper Clause: Raich shows Congress may regulate intrastate activity if essential to a broader regulatory scheme.Tenth Amendment Constraints: Federal power under the Commerce Clause cannot commandeer state governments (New York v. United States, Printz).Affordable Care Act: In NFIB v. Sebelius, the individual mandate exceeded commerce power but was upheld under the taxing power.Doctrinal Framework: The three-category test for Commerce Clause regulation guides constitutional analysis post-Lopez.

This Day in Legal History: “A Friend of the Constitution”On July 15, 1819, Chief Justice John Marshall took the unusual step of anonymously defending one of the most consequential Supreme Court decisions in American history—McCulloch v. Maryland. Writing under the pseudonym A Friend of the Constitution, Marshall authored a series of essays published in the Philadelphia Union and the Alexandria Gazette, responding to public criticism of the Court's expansive interpretation of federal power. The decision, issued earlier that year, had upheld Congress's authority to establish a national bank and struck down Maryland's attempt to tax it, solidifying the doctrine of federal supremacy.Marshall's public defense was significant because it revealed the political sensitivity of the ruling and the extent to which the legitimacy of the Court's reasoning was contested. The McCulloch opinion laid out the principle of implied powers under the Necessary and Proper Clause, asserting that the federal government could take actions not explicitly listed in the Constitution if they furthered constitutionally enumerated powers. The decision also famously stated, “the power to tax involves the power to destroy,” rejecting state efforts to control or burden federal institutions.Critics, particularly from states' rights factions, argued the decision centralized too much power in the federal government and eroded state sovereignty. Marshall's essays, though unsigned, were unmistakably in his judicial voice and aimed to calm anxieties about federal overreach by appealing to reason, constitutional structure, and the logic of a functioning union. His public engagement reflected an early awareness of the need to build public confidence in the judiciary's authority.This episode was rare in that a sitting Chief Justice chose to participate in public constitutional debate beyond the bench. It also underscored the foundational role McCulloch would come to play in defining the American system of federalism. The decision has remained a touchstone in constitutional law for over two centuries, cited in debates over congressional authority ranging from the New Deal to the Affordable Care Act.Marshall's intervention on July 15, 1819, was both defensive and visionary—a recognition that legal rulings do not exist in a vacuum and often require articulation beyond the courtroom to be enduring.The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to proceed with its plan to dramatically reduce the size and scope of the Department of Education. In a brief unsigned order, the Court lifted a lower court's injunction that had temporarily reinstated about 1,400 laid-off employees and blocked the transfer of key department functions to other agencies. The decision marks a major victory for President Trump, who has pushed to return educational control to states and fulfill a campaign promise to minimize federal involvement in schools.Three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor warning that the ruling effectively grants the president power to dismantle congressional mandates by eliminating staff necessary to carry them out. The Biden-appointed district judge who had issued the initial injunction found the layoffs would likely paralyze the department. Critics of the plan, including 21 Democratic attorneys general, school districts, and unions, argue that the move could delay federal aid, weaken civil rights enforcement, and harm disadvantaged students.Trump has stated that vital services like Pell grants and special education funding will continue, though responsibilities would shift to agencies such as the Small Business Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services. Education Secretary Linda McMahon praised the Court's decision, calling it a win for students and families. The legal battle continues in lower courts, but the Supreme Court's decision enables Trump to move forward with an aggressive downsizing strategy that would cut the department's staff by half compared to its size at the start of his presidency.US Supreme Court clears way for Trump to gut Education Department | ReutersGermany's Federal Constitutional Court dismissed a lawsuit brought by two Yemeni nationals seeking to hold the German government accountable for U.S. drone strikes conducted from Ramstein Air Base. The plaintiffs, whose relatives were killed in a 2012 strike, argued that Germany shared responsibility because Ramstein served as a key communications hub for U.S. drone operations. They claimed that Germany failed its duty to protect life by allowing the base to be used in actions that allegedly violated international law.The court ruled that while Germany has a general obligation to protect human rights, especially regarding foreign policy, this duty was not activated in the case. The judges found no clear evidence that the U.S. was applying unlawful criteria in distinguishing between legitimate military targets and civilians in Yemen. They also concluded that the German government had acted within its discretion by relying on the U.S. interpretation of international law.The decision reaffirmed Berlin's broad latitude in conducting foreign and security policy, including alliance cooperation. Germany's foreign and defense ministries welcomed the ruling, stating it validated their legal position. The plaintiffs criticized the outcome as setting a dangerous precedent by shielding states that facilitate U.S. drone operations from accountability when civilians are harmed. The case reignited debate over Germany's role in supporting U.S. military actions from its territory.Germany's top court dismisses complaint against US drone missions | ReutersThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit temporarily blocked the Trump administration's attempt to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for thousands of Afghans living in the United States. The court issued an administrative stay through July 21 in response to a request from the advocacy group CASA, which is challenging the Department of Homeland Security's April decision to revoke TPS for Afghans and Cameroonians. CASA argues the move was arbitrary, discriminatory, and would cause irreparable harm to those affected.TPS allows individuals from countries facing conflict or disaster to stay and work legally in the U.S. for renewable periods, typically between six and eighteen months. The lawsuit is part of broader resistance to Trump's long-standing efforts to roll back TPS protections, many of which were halted by courts during his first term. Afghan advocates say ending TPS now would put lives at risk, particularly among those who supported U.S. operations in Afghanistan and women facing repression under the Taliban.The court's stay is not a final ruling but gives time for the legal challenge to proceed. The administration has until July 17 to respond. AfghanEvac, a coalition of veterans and resettlement advocates, supports the legal fight and urges the administration to restore TPS protections. Over 70,000 Afghans were admitted to the U.S. under temporary parole following the 2021 Taliban takeover, many of whom could be deported without continued legal status.US appeals court temporarily upholds protected status for Afghans | ReutersCongress has finally corrected the costly mistake it made with Section 174, restoring immediate expensing for research and development. But I don't view this as a victory—it's a reset. For three years, businesses operating at the forefront of innovation were forced to amortize R&D costs, a move that was not only economically damaging but entirely unnecessary. While lawmakers delayed fixing their own error, peer nations like China and Singapore advanced forward-looking tax regimes that actively incentivize both research and commercialization.Restoring immediate expensing brings us back to where we were before 2017, but stability in the tax code shouldn't be treated as a favor to innovators—it should be the baseline. R&D thrives on long timelines and clear signals, not temporary fixes and partisan reversals. If Congress wants to take innovation seriously, it needs to treat R&D expensing like core infrastructure and embed automatic responsiveness into the tax code. For example, if GDP growth stalls or domestic R&D spending drops below a certain threshold, the deduction should automatically increase—just as China did with 120% expensing for integrated circuits and industrial machinery.Beyond that, we need to rethink what we're rewarding. Under current rules, companies receive tax breaks for spending on research whether or not those ideas ever generate revenue, jobs, or real-world application. I'm not arguing against basic research, but I believe we should offer enhanced incentives for firms that meet defined commercialization benchmarks—like securing patents, licensing products, or manufacturing IP domestically.Repealing amortization was the right move, but the three-year delay already did serious harm to sectors both parties claim to support. Immediate expensing should now be seen as the floor—not the ceiling—of effective R&D policy. We can't afford to let innovation incentives swing with the political winds. That's why I believe Congress should require full economic scoring from the Joint Committee on Taxation or CBO before any future attempt to undo R&D expensing. You can't bind future lawmakers—but you can make them confront the cost of setting another fire.Fixing the R&D Tax Code Blunder Isn't a Victory, It's a Reset This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Have no fear! Lizz and Moji are BACK this week and bringing you a big beautiful breakdown of all the ways the Big Bullshit Bill is coming for our abortion rights, even when abortion isn't explicitly mentioned… because why not be as sneaky as possible, amirite? AND we spill the tea on this week's crop of anti-abortion schemes to ruin our reproductive lives.  GUEST ROLL CALL!FBK bestie Pamela Merritt, Executive Director of Medical Students for Choice, is in the house to talk about what demonizing DEI and closing rural hospitals means for med students and overall healthcare disparities. Spoiler alert: it ain't great. PLUS!! Here to lift our pro-abort spirits is none other than Iranian and Muslim political comedian and host of the Fake The Nation pod, Negin Farsad!! She yaps with us on what brings her joy, staying positive, and fighting TF back. You won't want to miss Negin lay out exactly what's got her boob sweat boiling these days! Scared? Got questions about the continued assault on your reproductive rights? THE FBK LINES ARE OPEN! Just call or text (201) 574-7402, leave your questions or concerns, and Lizz and Moji will pick a few to address on the pod! Times are heavy, but knowledge is power, y'all. We gotchu.  SAVE THE DATE: OPERATION SAVE ABORTION: Sign up for virtual 2025 OSA workshop on August 9th! You can still join the 10,000+ womb warriors fighting the patriarchy by listening to our past Operation Save Abortion pod series and Mifepristone Panel by clicking HERE for episodes, your toolkit, marching orders, and more. HOSTS:Lizz Winstead IG: @LizzWinstead Bluesky: @LizzWinstead.bsky.socialMoji Alawode-El IG: @Mojilocks Bluesky: @Mojilocks.bsky.social SPECIAL GUESTS:Pamela Merritt IG/Threads: @PamelaMerritt_Sharkfu Bluesky: @Sharkfu.bsky.social Substack: @SharkfuNegin Farsad IG/TikTok/Patreon/Youtube: @NeginFarsad Bluesky: ‪@NeginFarsad.bsky.social‬ GUEST LINKS:Medical Students for Choice Website IG/TikTok: @MSFChoice Bluesky: @MSFChoice.bsky.social‬DONATE: Medical Students for ChoiceNegin Farsad WebsiteNegin Farsad LinktreeREAD: Negin's Column in The Progressive MagazinePODCAST: Fake the Nation NEWS DUMP:Texas Court Overturns Biden Administration's Expansion of Abortion PrivacyMan Goes in for a Vasectomy & This Is the Pamphlet He's GivenNew Book Confirms Trump Avoided Abortion Stance Because He Knew He'd LoseWith Trump's “One Big Beautiful Bill,” Congress Traded Your Pap Smear for a Billionaire's Tax BreakJudge Temporarily Blocks Trump Administration From Enforcing Funding Ban Against Planned ParenthoodExplaining Cost-Sharing Reductions and Silver Loading in ACA MarketplacesLISTEN: FBK Episode on Medina v Planned Parenthood Case EPISODE LINKS:TICKETS: Netroots Nations in New Orleans (use the code “BUZZKILLS” for 10% off)SIGN UP 8/9: (VIRTUAL) Operation Save Abortion at Netroots 2025 Our Amazing Moji in Nigeria6 DEGREES: The “Wednesday” Season 2, Part 1 TrailerJack Nicholson is Anti-AbortionBUY AAF MERCH!Operation Save AbortionSIGN: Repeal the Comstock ActEMAIL your abobo questions to The Feminist BuzzkillsAAF's Abortion-Themed Rage Playlist SHOULD I BE SCARED? Text or call us with the abortion news that is scaring you: (201) 574-7402 FOLLOW US:Listen to us ~ FBK Podcast Instagram ~ @AbortionFrontBluesky ~ @AbortionFrontTikTok ~ @AbortionFrontFacebook ~ @AbortionFrontYouTube ~ @AbortionAccessFront TALK TO THE CHARLEY BOT FOR ABOBO OPTIONS & RESOURCES HERE!PATREON HERE! Support our work, get exclusive merch and more! DONATE TO AAF HERE!ACTIVIST CALENDAR HERE!VOLUNTEER WITH US HERE!ADOPT-A-CLINIC HERE!EXPOSE FAKE CLINICS HERE!GET ABOBO PILLS FROM PLAN C PILLS HERE! When BS is poppin', we pop off!

Abdul and Katelyn catch up on a harrowing week in public health, after Republicans passed Trump's mega bill. They discuss: New work requirements for Medicaid and SNAP beneficiaries Why rural hospitals risk closure due to the upcoming changes to Medicaid New renewal requirements for people who buy health insurance on the Affordable Care Act marketplaces A new high in measles cases, which now jeopardize our “elimination status” distinction A recent court ruling that halts RFK Jr's plans to restructure HHS Then Abdul talks to Dr. Andres Lopez from the Coalition of Communities of Color about their organization's innovative work in community data collection. This interview was produced in collaboration with our sponsor deBeaumont Foundation. Check out our shop at store.americadissected.com for our new America Dissected merch – including logo shirts, hoodies and mugs. And don't miss our “Vaccines Matter. Science Works.” t-shirts! This show would not be possible without the generous support of our sponsors. America Dissected invites you to check them out. This episode was brought to you by: Quince: Go to Quince.com/AD for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Boll & Branch: Get 20% off plus free shipping on your first set of sheets at BollAndBranch.com /AD. 

It's hard to take in all the horrific news of the past week alone. As if the first months of this regime had not already been defined by a relentless torrent of bad news and outright monstrosities, this week saw the formerly Supreme Court of the United States give the orange man carte Blanche to dismantle the federal government. In the same week, we've already also seen mounted military incursions into Los Angeles– and all this before the recently passed big ugly bill snatches healthcare from tens of millions of Americans and makes ICE a nationwide secret police with a budget to operate within the United States that dwarfs the budget of most countries' militaries.Meanwhile, the White House is playing defense against their own political base. They now claim that Jeffery Epstein, the famous pedophile with a network of powerful and wealthy friends, including none other than the Donald himself, never had a secret client list. For those playing along at home, this is the same Epstein who had been the subject of intense fascination by the very same conspiracy theorists who now make up this administration. Dan Bongino in particular profited from speculation about Epstein's relationships and the circumstances of his death, along with many other conspiracy theories.Don't get me wrong: Epstein's death is suspicious, especially since the cameras trained on his cell were not functioning for one reason or another when he died. I can understand how the speculation could take off in every direction from there. I also don't doubt that this man, who was arguably the world's most famous pedophile, was good friends with Donald Trump. We've all seen the video of them partying together and we've all heard the clips in which DJT had lusted after his own daughter and bragged about assaulting women. The fact that he became so defensive when pressed about the “Epstein file” this week doesn't exactly seem like the behavior of an innocent man either.It's not really the circumstances of this one case that matter. It's the fact that people who rode hype and more often than not, misinformation, exploited their audiences for profit and political power. Now that they're in power and can't deliver the constant stream of speculation to their base or the conclusion to the story they've told for years, there could be a rift growing. I'm not terribly optimistic in the short run. The fever has yet to break for adherents within the core of the cult. Yet every time the fictions they've heard come crashing against reality, the more the illusion cracks.One disagreement with the leader won't be enough. It will take many successive acts that bring intense hardship and disillusionment. Their dear leader will never make their lives easier. He'll never bring back the manufacturing jobs they lost somewhere between Reagan and Clinton. He'll never replace the Affordable Care Act with something bigger and better. He's already taken the healthcare they had, even if they don't know if yet. Even on something as relatively small by comparison as this one, admittedly horrific criminal case, he can't deliver. They won't admit it now, and they may never. But their devotion will eventually prove to be more conditional than their leader ever believed.Thanks for reading Keep it in Perspective! This post is public so feel free to share it. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit christianhanley.substack.com

LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/watchdog-on-wall-street-with-chris-markowski/id570687608 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2PtgPvJvqc2gkpGIkNMR5i WATCH and SUBSCRIBE on:https://www.youtube.com/@WatchdogOnWallstreet/featuredBarack Obama is back—touting the so-called Affordable Care Act like it hasn't wrecked the American healthcare system from top to bottom.In this episode of Watchdog on Wall Street:The real reason healthcare costs have exploded since ObamacareWhy finding a doctor today is harder than everThe corporate takeover of your local doctor's officeWhat Republicans won't admit about healthcare reformPlus: why “free stuff” is destroying incentive! www.watchdogonwallstreet.com

In this episode of the Bill Press Pod, Bill reconnects with Carl Hulse, Chief Washington Correspondent for the New York Times, to discuss The Big Beautiful Bill recently forced through Congress. They compare it to the fights around the passage of The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and highlight the legislative muscle required, including Vice President's critical tie-breaking votes. The bill, encompassing Medicaid cuts to border security, faced criticism for bypassing traditional processes. They delve into the political ramifications, with Republicans like Josh Hawley and Tom Tillis grappling with the bill's implications while nearly all Republicans caved to political pressure from Trump. The pod also addresses the bill's potential impact on the national deficit and how Democrats could leverage this in future elections. Additionally, the influence of figures like Elon Musk on the legislative process and Trump's ongoing impact on the Republican Party are examined.Today Bill highlights the work of Jose Andres and the World Central Kitchen now providing food to the people in the Texas Hill Country recovering from the flash flood disaster. More information at WCK.orgSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On July 4th, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” into law. In this “minisode,” host Rachel (Rae) Woods unpacks the sweeping implications of the most significant healthcare legislation since the Affordable Care Act. From enhanced subsidies expiring to major cuts to Medicaid and ACA marketplace coverage on the horizon, Rae explores what this legislation means for providers, payers, and the broader healthcare ecosystem. Listen to this short policy update for strategic steps leaders must take to manage the cascading impacts of the Act's implementation. This episode was recorded on July 7th, 2025. We're here to help: Healthcare Policy Updates Timeline Ep. 256: How you can prepare for the financial impacts of Trump-era policies A transcript of this episode as well as more information and resources can be found on RadioAdvisory.advisory.com.

We are so excited to have our sister Caya Lewis Atkins, stopping by the class today. Caya is the founding principal of global DC Strategies and her resume reads like a masterclass of health equity Advocacy. Her early days at NAACP Health Division to literally being in the room where the Affordable Care Act was drafted and implemented to her more recent work as Chief Advisor for Policy and Strategy at Health and Human Services, office of Global Affairs. At the Global Fund fighting hiv, aids, tuberculosis, and malaria and zombie, and other places throughout the world, this sister has been moving mountains for our community.Protect Our Care https://www.protectourcare.org/join-the-movement/ Kaiser Family Foundation https://www.kff.org/tracking-the-medicaid-provisions-in-the-2025-budget-bill/ Black Women's Health Imperative https://bwhi.org/ NAACP http://naacp.org/issues/health-wellbeing Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/teach-the-babies-w-dr-david-j-johns--6173854/support.

From Skrmetti to Medina to Mahmoud, the Supreme Court has been busy issuing devastating rulings on cases that carry profound implications for LGBTQI+ health and rights and reproductive health and rights. Chris Geidner, author of Law Dork, sits down to talk with us about these recent cases out of the Supreme Court, and what these rulings mean for our rights and wellbeing.United States v. Skrmetti was a challenge of Tennessee's Senate Bill 1, which prohibits gender-affirming care for transgender minors. By a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court ultimately upheld the state's ban on gender- affirming care for transgender minors. Medina v. Planned Parenthood of South Atlantic was another case heard this term—in fact, it was a culmination of decades of attacks to Planned Parenthood and other providers, specifically targeting efforts to kick these providers out of Medicaid. In another devastating 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court sided against reproductive health care. Mahmoud v. Taylor was a case related to LGBTQI+ inclusive textbooks in Maryland. If parents had a religious objection to anything in the curriculum, they fought to exempt their children from the lesson. By a 6-3 ruling, the Court ruled in favor of the Maryland parents. Lastly, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management Inc. upheld a key Affordable Care Act provision requiring health insurance companies to cover certain care cost-free, but also allows the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services –Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—more autonomy to reshape the provision.For more information, check out Aborsh: https://www.aborsh.com/Support the showFollow Us on Social: Twitter: @rePROsFightBack Instagram: @reprosfbFacebook: rePROs Fight Back Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.comRate and Review on Apple PodcastThanks for listening & keep fighting back!

A conversation with Rob Andrews“A rising tide lifts all boats.” - President KennedyChannelling the heart of this message in his words, actions, and distinguished career, is former Congressman and CEO of the Health Transformation Alliance (HTA), Rob Andrews.As one of the original authors of the Affordable Care Act, Rob has set his sights on driving value-based healthcare reform through data, analytics, and employer-led innovation.To Rob, our healthcare system isn't poor - it just sits upon an irrational infrastructure. It's time to fix that infrastructure!——We spoke about his lessons from inside Congress, his work with HTA, the meaning of value-based care, numerous analogies of successful value-based systems, and why fixing American Healthcare requires both political vision and market-based action.Follow me on Instagram and Facebook @ericfethkemd and checkout my website at www.EricFethkeMD.com. My brand new book, The Privilege of Caring, is out now on Amazon! https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CP6H6QN4

Julie Rovner, chief Washington correspondent at KFF Health News and host of the What the Health? podcast, talks about the House and Senate budget bills and what they would mean for Americans' access to healthcare.

The Senate has passed the One Big Beautiful Bill, which includes significant cuts to Medicaid. The Supreme Court upholds the Affordable Care Act's preventive services mandate. And, Novo Nordisk inks a new direct-to-consumer partnership. Those stories and more coming up on today's episode of the Gist Healthcare podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Monday, June 30th, 2025Today, Republicans advance the Billionaire Bailout Bill in the Senate after promising hold-outs they could gut a provision of the Affordable Care Act as Tommy Tuberville calls for the parliamentarian to be fired; the Supreme Court kills the lower court's ability to issue universal injunctions AND allows parents to opt their kids out of LGBTQ books; Donald Trump threatens to withhold payments to Israel unless their courts drop the charges against Bibi Netanyahu; Cuomo will stay in the New York City mayoral race after conceding to Zohran Mamdani; Don Bacon of Nebraska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina say they will not run in 2026; the President of the University of Virginia has resigned because of pressure from the Trump administration; Republicans in the Senate have blocked the Iran war powers resolution; the Trump administration has freed a three time felon and five time deported migrant in exchange for his testimony against Kilmar Abrego; Governor Gavin Newsom sues fox news for 787M dollars for defamation; over 100,000 people marched in a Budapest Pride event in defiance of Hungary's ban; and Allison delivers your Good News.Thank You, Helix27% Off Sitewide, when you go to HelixSleep.com/dailybeansThank You, Mint MobileGet this new customer offer and your 3-month Unlimited wireless plan for just $15 a month at  MINTMOBILE.com/DAILYBEANS.Check out Dana's social media campaign highlighting LGBTQ+ heroes every day during Pride Month - IG|dgcomedy, Dana Goldberg (@dgcomedy.bsky.social)John Roberts: "I Never Thought the Leopards Would Eat *My* Judiciary"  | MuellerSheWrote.comGuest: Noah Widmann - Candidate for FL-7Noah Widmann for Florida - campaign website@noahforflorida on Bluesky, NoahforFlorida - twitter, @noahforflorida | TikTok, Noah Widmann @noahforflorida - Instagram, @NoahForFlorida - Youtube StoriesStar witness against Kilmar Abrego García was due to be deported. Now he's being freed. | The Washington PostSenate Republicans advance Trump's tax and spending cuts bill after dramatic late-night vote | AP NewsSenate rulekeeper deals blows to revised ‘big, beautiful bill' | POLITICORepublicans scramble to save Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill' | The HillSupreme Court backs parents seeking to opt their kids out of LGBTQ books in elementary schools | NBC NewsCourt cancels Israel PM Netanyahu's trial hearings this week | ReutersSenate blocks Iran war powers resolution | The HillCuomo will stay on NYC mayor's ballot after conceding Democratic primary to Mamdani, sources tell CNN | CNNRepublican Rep. Don Bacon, a vocal Trump critic, won't seek reelection | The Washington PostSen. Thom Tillis announces he won't seek reelection after Trump threatens primary challenge | CBS NewsUniversity of Virginia president, pressured over DEI, resigns rather than 'fight federal government' | AP NewsCalifornia Gov. Gavin Newsom sues Fox News over alleged defamation in story about call with Trump | AP NewsAround 100,000 march in Budapest Pride event in defiance of Hungary's ban | NPR ‘GO **** YOURSELVES': National park visitors slam feds in leaked park comments | SFGate From The Good NewsTrump apparel store in Huntley reaches settlement in eviction case, agrees to vacate building by next monthIndivisibleUnited Against Hate Shop - HRC2025-2026 Bill 3457: Human Life Protection Act - South Carolina Legislature OnlineReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good Trouble Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewrote , Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote,Dana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

We are joined by CNN Anchor and Chief National Affairs Analyst Kasie Hunt for her first time on the podcast! It's a very fun conversation covering her work and what inspired her to follow her passion for journalism. She discusses the early days of her career covering Obama, Congress, and the passage of the Affordable Care Act. We also talk about how much Congress and the information ecosystem has changed over the years. And Kasie shares her thoughts about watching Donald Trump pardon the rioters on his first day back in office after being present in the Capitol that day.  Plus, immigration raids, tariffs and the Big, Beautiful, Bill. Trump and the Republicans might actually pass the BBB, but at what cost to working Americans? WATCH Kasie on CNN, weekdays at 4pm ET: https://www.cnn.com/profiles/kasie-hunt 

Subscribe for $5.99 a month to get bonus content most Mondays, bonus episodes every month, ad-free listening, access to the entire 800-episode archive, Discord access, and more: https://axismundi.supercast.com/ In this weekly roundup, Dan begins with the escalating tensions between the U.S., Iran, and Israel, examining recent airstrikes and the Trump administration's controversial military decisions. Dan breaks down the fractured response within the MAGA coalition, uncovering the religious and ideological fault lines behind the debate. The episode then turns to the Supreme Court's latest rulings, including: Gender-affirming care for minors Deportation policy limits The reach of nationwide injunctions Parental rights around LGBTQ+ inclusive education Dan highlights the Christian nationalist undertones shaping public discourse and judicial outcomes. He ends with a rare note of optimism, pointing to a surprising cross-ideological ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act as a sign that compromise is still possible. Linktree: https://linktr.ee/StraightWhiteJC Order Brad's book: https://bookshop.org/a/95982/9781506482163 Check out BetterHelp and use my code SWA for a great deal: www.betterhelp.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Affordable Care Act faces significant rollbacks if President Trump’s big spending and tax cut bill is approved by the Senate. The proposed changes could affect many of the 24 million Americans enrolled in that insurance marketplace and could leave millions of people without coverage. Sarah Kliff, health policy reporter with The New York Times, joins Geoff Bennett for more. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

Chris Hamilton is a finance expert with 15 years of experience, on a mission to expose how the healthcare system is stealing from the middle class. Chris uncovered a harsh reality: insurance brokers and companies have zero incentive to lower your costs. Brokers even make commissions on rising premiums, sometimes earning bonuses for keeping prices high. The Affordable Care Act, rather than boosting competition, turned healthcare into big business. What was once a market of 12-13 insurance companies has now consolidated to just 4 major players, dominating the industry. With fewer choices and rising costs, the average family is paying $24k in premiums annually, plus another $5-6k out of pocket—all while the healthcare giants profit. That money, which should be building the American dream—going toward college savings, a home, or retirement—is being swallowed by a broken healthcare system. For the middle class, these rising costs are an invisible thief, robbing families of financial security. Hotchkiss Insurance: https://hotchkissinsurance.com/ Today's Sponsors: Black Rifle Coffee: https://blackriflecoffee.com Truewerk: Check out the full lineup and get 15 percent off your first order at https://TRUEWERK.com/clearedhot.