HARRIS AND HEALTHCARE....overview

Emily Gee, PhD, senior vice president for inclusive growth at the Center for American Progress Action Fund in Washington, D.C., anticipates that abortion will be central to Harris's campaign.

"The fact that she is a woman who takes that issue very seriously will be galvanizing," Gee told MedPage Today.

Recalling Harris's grilling of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaughopens in a during his Senate confirmation hearing, she added, "I think she does a good job of drawing the contrast and the contradiction [to highlight] how the far right is treating women differently and taking away their rights and giving them less bodily autonomy than others."

On the other side, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, blasted Harris as Biden's choice for the Democratic presidential candidate.

"Harris is so committed to abortion that she can't see anything else -- including the developmental stages of children before birth or the real needs of women," Dannenfelser said in a press release "Questioned several times on national television, Harris refused to name a single limit on abortion she supports."

"While Joe Biden has trouble saying the word abortion, Kamala Harris shouts it," she noted.

Healthcare Reform, the Affordable Care Act, Medicare

On issues of access to healthcare, Gee said of Harris, "I think she's someone who really does care about the little guy and wants to make sure that people can afford the care they need."

Harris has been criticized for vacillating on a "Medicare for All" program during her 2020 presidential campaign. She was among the first well-known Democrats to throw her support behind Sen. Bernie Sanders's (I-Vt.) proposal in 2017. However, during the Democratic primary, Harris began to ease from Sanders's camp and introduced "KamalaCare," which maintained her support for universal healthcare while preserving access to private insurance.

"I see broadly in that approach an attempt to lay out a North Star for where we need to go with coverage ... but building around an awareness that we have the system that we have," Gee said.

Harris is also a staunch defender of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Gee added.

As California's attorney general, Harris signed amicus briefs that supported the ACA's constitutionality, and urged the Supreme Court not to invalidate the law entirely if it was determined that the individual mandate was unconstitutional.

"It really is going to be this question of, 'Do you believe in going backwards and repealing the ACA and bringing back discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions?'" Gee said. "Or do you believe in protecting [people] and trying to make sure that people don't wind up with medical debt because they happen to get cancer, or got in a car accident?"

Brian Blase, PhD, president of the conservative Paragon Health Institute in Washington, D.C., argued that Harris needs to be able to explain her support for a plan under which all Americans receive coverage through the federal government and private health insurance coverage is ultimately eliminated.

More specifically, Harris must explain how she would advance such an agenda as president, Blase said in an email to MedPage Today.

"That agenda is in stark contrast to the congressional Democrats' focus the past 4 years of increasing subsidies to health insurance companies in order to prop up Obamacare," he wrote. "If Vice President Harris supports 'Medicare for All' and eliminating private coverage, endorsing more subsidies for health insurers through Obamacare is completely inconsistent with that."

Medicare funds are expected to run out in the mid-2030s according to experts. Harris previously backed President Biden's plan to increase taxes for Americanswho earn more than $400,000 annually to help keep Medicare solvent.

According to the White House, that plan would extend the life of the Medicare trust fund for another quarter-century by "closing loopholes in existing Medicare taxes," while lowering beneficiaries' costs. The Biden administration also previously declared its opposition to "any proposal to cut benefits."

Lowering Drug Prices

Gee said she anticipates that Harris would continue to defend the Biden administration's record in standing up to Big Pharma and negotiating lower prescription drug prices.

She also expects Harris to continue to advocate for lowering costs for Americans outside of Medicare, including extending the $35 monthly cap on insulin, out-of-pocket cost protections, and drug price negotiations.

In 2019, Harris's plan to lower prices for prescription drugs included giving the HHS Secretary the ability to set a maximum price for all drugs sold nationally based on drug prices in other developed countries. In addition, Harris backed "march-in rights," a controversial provision of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 that gives the government the authority, under certain circumstances, to assert control of a drug patent and license it to another company if the drug was developed with government support.

In keeping with those views, the Biden-Harris administration proposed a framework in 2023opens in a new tab or window making clear that a drug's high price, on its own, is enough to trigger march-in rights.

As California's attorney general, Harris also fought to make sure patients and consumers were protected as large healthcare systems consolidated, gaining market power and raising premiums, Gee said. Of note, Harris "laid the foundation" for a landmark antitrust lawsuito against Sutter Health, a large hospital system in Northern California.

The vice president also won other multimillion-dollar settlements from established healthcare groups, including Quest Diagnostics and McKesson, following whistleblower lawsuits.

author

Shannon Firth has been reporting on health policy as MedPage Today's Washington correspondent since 2014. She is also a member of the site's Enterprise & Investigative Reporting team. Follow


Just a reminder of wjat is at stake......review and REALLY understand.....R V W is ruling the right.

Oh, I hope so!! The abortion situation is what is ultimately going to do the fascist/ReThuglican party and TrumpleThinSkin (and his talking dummy, JD Vance, a/k/a James Donald Bowman, a/k/a James David Hamel) in.

Forced birth is NOT a winning issue and never will be.

You don't like abortion? Don't have one. Otherwise, it's none of your f**king business.

Thanks for publishing this information!

I am 100% in favor of leftists killing their babies! I’m almost to the point that I would donate to that cause.

Saw some numbers out of Britain. As birth control has become easier to get and more effective, you think the abortion rate would fall.

It is actually going up! Are humans becoming more irresponsible? And does easy access to abortion encourage couples to be not care as much about birth control?

#moralhazard

And feminists believe that their greatest achievement is the right to kill the life blooming inside their bodies up to the birth date.

A strange thing to be proud of.

They just fundamentally believe that a woman’s ability to kill the human life is more important than the human life.

Have you noticed how the population, in general, has become more selfish and narcissistic? The cell phones and selfies seem to be the flashpoint imo. “Look at me, don’t I look awesome?” People will stand by and watch someone get victimized in some way, and not step in to help.

So I get it, this push to normalize and make even easier this decision to kill a scientifically proven human life is just a natural progression of our morally bankrupt culture. But like I said before, I’m over it. Children shouldn’t have to suffer being born from someone who loves themself so much that there’s really no love left for anyone else, especially the life they can’t see inside them.

There’s a great charity called Preborn that pays for an ultrasound so the women seeking an abortion can see what is growing inside her. I really don’t know why Planned Parenthood doesn’t offer that relevant and important information every woman in that situation should have access too, especially when taxpayers are being forced to help fund the organization. Anyway, it turns out that most of the women who see that human live decide to save him or her.

I do not know why that charity isn’t being celebrated by all Americans.

RESEARCH COMSTOCK ACT 1874....AN OBSCURE, OBSCENE LITTLE ITEM.....this is becoming a
REAL Handmaiden's Tale....IT HAS TO CEASE AND NOW.......

"Fetal personhood" is a non-starter. If it's good for you, fine. But you don't get to saddle the rest of the population with your fringe beliefs.

If you don't like abortion, don't have one. Otherwise, it's none of your f**king business.

OVER AND ABOVE THAT.....what "christian/pro life entity is willing to put forth the $$$$$ TO RAISE THE
INFANT TO ADULTHOOD......(SILENCE IS DEAFENING) .....THAT IS THE REALITY OF THIS OBSCENE
CONVERSATION......jmo

I also find it funny but not surprising that killing babies in 2024 is somehow "healthcare". F#cking demons.

homeagain wrote: OVER AND ABOVE THAT.....what "christian/pro life entity is willing to put forth the $$$$$ TO RAISE THE
INFANT TO ADULTHOOD......(SILENCE IS DEAFENING) .....THAT IS THE REALITY OF THIS OBSCENE
CONVERSATION......jmo

There are plenty of people who want to adopt. Even minority children, but minority groups protest whites adopting minority children. So these minority kids remain in foster families.