Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!
SCOTUS ASKED TO WEIGH IN ON BIG HEALTHCARE ISSUES: The Supreme Court has been asked to weigh in on partisan battles over the futures of Obamacare and abortion before the November elections.
There are incredibly high stakes, both politically and legally, should the justices decide to take up the issues. On Friday, Democrat-led states who are defending Obamacare asked the Supreme Court to consider the constitutionality of the healthcare law so that a decision on the case would land this year. The states, led by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, stressed in their request that there is otherwise too much uncertainty among patients and healthcare providers.
The court tends not to take up cases that are still being litigated. And an appeals court sent this particular case back to the lower courts, making it likely to punt any decisions by the high court until far after the 2020 election. Only four justices are needed to hear a case, but the court would need to pick up a fifth conservative justice to expedite oral arguments. The letter from Democrat states asks the justices to hear the case April 29 or at a special sitting in May. That means that a decision over whether all of Obamacare would be thrown out would certainly arrive ahead of Nov. 3, 2020.
On abortion, the court has already agreed to hear June Medical Services v. Gee on March 4, to weigh in on whether Louisiana should be allowed to mandate that doctors who provide abortions also have admitting privileges at local hospitals. But at least 207 members of Congress, all of them Republicans except for Democrats Dan Lipinski and Collin Peterson, want the justices to weigh in on whether Roe v. Wade “should be reconsidered and, if appropriate, overruled.” If Roe were to be overturned, then abortion would become illegal in some states.
Abortion rights groups have been concerned about the weakening or overturning of Roe since the Republican-controlled Senate confirmed two of President Trump‘s Supreme Court appointees, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. The Louisiana case, even without a broader ruling on Roe, would provide the first big test for how the justices deliberate on abortion.
Good morning and welcome to the Washington Examiner’s Daily on Healthcare! This newsletter is written by senior healthcare reporter Kimberly Leonard (@LeonardKL) and healthcare reporter Cassidy Morrison (@CassMorrison94). You can reach us with tips, calendar items, or suggestions at [email protected]. If someone forwarded you this email and you’d like to receive it regularly, you can subscribe here.
NIH head: ‘Very premature’ to see future of medical research without animal testing: Researchers have found some ways to test drugs without using animals, such as through the use of chips that have human cells on them, but even those are far from what they need to be to make sure drugs are safe and effective, National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins said in an interview with C-SPAN “Newsmakers” that aired over the weekend. The Washington Examiner asked Collins about the future of research involving animals, and whether there were opportunities to use fewer animals or even whether it might become commonplace not to use animals at all.
“We will, I hope someday get there, but it would be very premature at the present time to say we have the kind of information we need to be able to do research that ultimately will lead to outcomes for humans that are what we need them to be, which is safe and effective,” Collins said. He noted that a treatment for Ebola was found by testing on monkeys, and stressed it was important for researchers to be able to use animals in research so that humans — such as a child with a rare disease — don’t have drugs tested on them before scientists can collect data about side effects. “If people are going to argue, ‘Let’s give up animals,’ think about the consequences. They would be major,” Collins said.
THE 2020 ELECTION RENEWS THE QUESTION OF HOW MUCH CANDIDATES SHOULD SHARE ABOUT THEIR HEALTH: Trump and presidential candidates, including Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Michael Bloomberg have released only brief summaries of their health, calling into question whether they should provide more details to show America they’re strong enough for the nation’s top job. Arthur Caplan, founding head of the Division of Medical Ethics at NYU School of Medicine, said that the existing practices for disclosing medical info appear to be “driven purely by politics, not making any medical sense.”
Doctors are prohibited from releasing medical records without consent from their patients, but University of Wisconsin bioethicist Robert Streiffer said candidates’ doctors may be morally obligated to release health records: “There is an ethical dilemma for the doctor, or there could be, because they are acting as an agent of the candidate but also an obligation to the public with who they are sharing information with.” So should candidates be required to publicize their health records? S. Jay Olshansky, a leading researcher on aging from the University of Illinois at Chicago, said he isn’t sure: “I’m a fan of privacy, but then again, we are talking about a very unique position, and maybe there should be an exemption.”
A LOOK AT HOW WARREN IS TRYING TO MANEUVER THE ‘MEDICARE FOR ALL’ DISCUSSION: Warren tried to finesse “Medicare for all” Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union when host Jake Tapper asked why her plan to phase-in changes to the healthcare system is better than what Sanders is offering. After Tapper asked initially, Warren did not answer the question directly, saying that the U.S. has plenty of money to provide coverage for all Americans, who should be able to “experience what this is about.” When Tapper followed up, Warren said her transition plan would provide the quickest possible route to getting people covered under “Medicare for all”: “Help starts on day one. And then it’s full healthcare coverage for 135 million people.”
In case you forgot: Warren released her transition plan in November, which includes pushing for a bill to provide Americans the option of buying a government insurance plan within her first 100 days. By her third year in office, Warren would complete the transition to a Medicare for all plan. Sanders, on the other hand, has pledged to introduce “Medicare for all” legislation within his first week in office.
TERMINALLY ILL TEXAS INFANT CAN STAY ON LIFE-SUPPORT, APPEALS COURT SAYS: A Texas appeals court decided Friday night that Tinslee Lewis, an 11-month-old baby with chronic lung and heart diseases, can stay on life support for a bit longer, undoing a Thursday decision to allow Cook Children’s Medical Center to take Tinslee off life-sustaining machines. The latest decision will allow her mother more time to find another hospital willing to treat Tinslee’s condition, which her doctors say will not improve, until the court issues a final ruling on the case.
Tinslee was born with a rare heart defect — Ebstein’s anomaly — that prevents one of her valves from closing properly, keeping her blood from flowing in the right direction. She was also born with chronic lung disease and is currently connected to ventilators keeping her alive. Her doctors say not only that her condition will not improve, but also that Tinslee is in constant pain, as she is hooked up to life-sustaining machines including ventilators and feeding tubes. The Cook Children’s Hospital ethics committee had decided to invoke a state law giving the family 10 days to find an alternative facility willing to treat Tinslee. So far, neither Tinslee’s mother nor Cook Children’s has been able to find another doctor to take the case.
The Rundown
Kaiser Health News Effort to control opioids in an ER leaves some sickle cell patients in pain
The New York Times What if a vaping tax encouraged cigarette smoking?
Kansas City Star ‘Build on what’s working.’ KC area Democrats opt for measured approach on health care
The Associated Press Less common flu strain prominent this year in Virginia
Boston Globe Looking into the eyes for early signs of Alzheimer’s disease
Calendar
MONDAY | Jan. 6
Senate in session.
TUESDAY | Jan. 7
Senate and House in session.
WEDNESDAY | Jan. 8
10 a.m. 2322 Rayburn. House Energy and Commerce hearing on “Legislation to Improve Americans’ Health Care Coverage and Outcomes.” Details.
10 a.m. 1225 I St. NW. Bipartisan Policy Center’s 20/20 Health Care Series: A Snapshot of Early Primary Voters. Details.
