World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Issues of cost of living and higher taxes in states in the northeastern US and California vs the lower taxes and lower cost of living in the Southern States of the US. Whose side each of the two main parties are on in the US has switched in the period since Harry Truman and FDR in the 1940's. The Republicans represent small business and the less educated in society, the Democrats represent the more educated, affluent sections, and women, the black minority, with Hispanics divided between the two parties. Unions are now neutral and workers in factories lean more towards Republicans. On health care there is a failure for both parties. Both parties have failed miserably with all the lobbying creating obstacles-- to provide cost of living in healthcare. In comparing healthcare and the wealth of societies, it can now be noted that a well funded healthcare system with medicine within reach of the entire population of 1.4 billion people in a poor country like India does better than that of a rich society like the US with 350 million people. This makes a huge difference in the quality of life. Infrastructure investments in relatively far less affluent countries like China and now India make it possible to have better conditions of living relative to the US with infrastructure and transportation from the 19th century still awaiting rebuilding. ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Where do you place a winner of the Democratic primary in Maine, Graham Plattner, an oyster farmer who dropped out of college at George Washington University, served briefly in the Middle East wars of Bush and Obama, and had PTSD. Is he working class, middle working class or is he from a downwardly mobile professional class considering he has parents who are well educated and father a prominent lawyer in Maine? Plattner easily defeated a 3 term governor of Maine with his average working class demeanor and language. He is for universal health care, (Medicare for All) universal child care, affordable housing, affordable college. Politics in the US has been moving away from the simple divisions before 1950 created by the Industrial Revolution- the workers in factories and the owners of capital allied with the professional middle class. The few owners of capital mostly college educated allied with people from the non college educated workers in factories who are conservative in their values and beliefs and on the other side the college educated professional middle class now downwardly mobile because of the many recessions and high unemployment from frequent financial crises, with college costing $80,000 a year putting them in deep debt. There is today in the WSJ a story of a professional worker who at $194,000 a year salary is not able to payoff $15000 debt which owners of capital have set at 26% interest and is in downward spiral. Some of this comes from large college and other debt. There is says WSJ Analysis $1.25 trillion in credit card debt alone with highest delinquency rates in decades in 2026. Cost of living has only made things worse and some of this happened as Biden poured money into the economy to help people hurt by the pandemic, yet with some short run consequences with demand strong businesses including hotels, restaurants and grocery stores, auto dealers, jacking up their prices by over 20% in 1 year and Biden failing to respond, getting overwhelmed by open borders migrants under Mayorkas and Harris (also hit by a sudden Venezuelan migrant influx). This is the America one has today- a confusing mix. This in reality means Democrats may take issue with Democrats, Republicans take issue with Republicans, and Democrats join with Republicans on issue by issue basis. It might actually be rational than irrational. On cultural issues if the country has gone over its head and moved too fast on some issues that are not for the general public good, people of different backgrounds can come together to get the best path. On economic issues things are never so straightforward, there are unpredictable consequences and the rules of economics are really not so straightforward either.  Providing relief can mean the government shouldering the burden as during the pandemic which it should, yet with caution as businesses can use the excess demand to raise prices and one is back to square one with everybody worse off as happened with Biden. Migrant flows and fears of insecurity in public spaces can lead to a severe public "discomfort that can waylay the best intentions of a Harris or Biden, leading to public "backlash." In fact the title of a recent book is "Whiplash." Current books include Floridan Marco Rubio's "Decade's of Decadence- How our Spoiled Elites Blew America's Inheritance of Liberty, Security and Prosperity." Rubio means it. Its authentic because as Rubio says repeatedly, his parents could make a living in the 1960's working in a factory with decent wages, low cost of living and low cost of college, the arithmetic between salaries and what you needed for decent home in suburbs and sending children to good public schools, then to college, all adding up. The result is that Rubio could go to college and serve in the Florida legislature. Rubio says in 2026, after the elites under Bush and Obama and faulty economic theory shipped all of our factories to China, that the story of his parents and his education would simply be impossible. This is what he told people in India on his first visit last week. His parents were Cuban immigrants, yet he identifies with Spain and with western civilization, a devout Roman Catholic. Rubio is a Republican, and is in large contrast with Alejandro Mayorkas, also from Cuba, and Biden's Head of Homeland Security. This is the mix of people and representatives in Congress,  business people, small business owners, professionals, that we have today in 2026 in the US. Plattner and Rubio, one a Democrat and one a Republican- both have something in common. Plattner also has general disdain for "the corporate interests, the billionaires, the Washington DC elites, and the establishment politicians."  The winds are blowing in the direction of getting things right- remembering that Eisenhower continued the work of the Kennedy and LBJ administrations (Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System for instance, and LBJ gave America Social Security and Medicare). Before that Franklin Roosevelt a Democrat built on the work of his uncle Republican Theodore Roosevelt (TR gave America the idea of good governance and built the US Navy, FDR fought the Depression and stabilized a faltering economy after mistakes made by Republican Herbert Hoover could have happened even if Hoover was a Democrat. FDR was himself from a wealthy New York family and when he first met fellow New Yorker Frances Perkins before his struggle with polio, a haughty New York gentleman. That was before Frances Perkins as FDR's Labor Secretary joined forces with Roosevelt to give New York a modernized administration governance structure by 1940 that was applied to all 51 states after 1950. It allied labor with capital with fairness for all, and was the first such modern structure of this size the world had ever seen, which was the fundamental strength of the United States of America. It was imitated in Asia, first in the Shanghai region then China, and first in the Ahmedabad region and now India. The US is faced with the challenge of recreating and rebuilding this today, as first China, then India remind America of its roots which they have followed in their own style and culture.  First good governance, then good institutional structures, alligning labor and capital with fairness for all, strong affordable + accessible educational and healthcare systems, and investments of capital and labor for infrastructure + industrial development. ...
Harvard Medicine magazine Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Obama Affordable Care Act ACA and its downfall are covered by two experienced authors over 2 book written over 2 decades. The authors are James Morone and David Blumenthal followed the healthcare issue over 25-30 years through the Clinton, Edward Kennedy and Obama efforts and wrote two books. The first was "The Heart of Power" on the healthcare situation from FDR to 2008. The last titled "Whiplash" in 2026, for which the authors are interviewed in Harvard Medicine magazine. C-SPAN has a book program on this book at a Washington DC bookstore. From the discussion on C-SPAN between Senator Michael Blumenthal, borther of one of the authors, James Morone and David Blumenthal physician, couple of conclusions are seen that may be new to readers. Q. What was the one single factor that doomed the Affordable Care Act? A. The deep antipathy towards the Obama administration influenced the response to the Obama handling of healthcare. The likelihood of Republicans accepting healthcare from a black person was simply not there say the book's authors in the discussion and Q&A on C-SPAN. Yet there were other reasons for the ACA failing. Obama had not gauged the mood of the nation well. UK Labour's Starmer won by a big majority in 2024 yet that does not reflect the mood of the British nation just 2 years later- by election year 2012 Obama's campaign was faltering and had to be rescued with Hispanic votes and a weak candidate in Utah's Mitt Romney. Obama lacked maturity and came in the way Bush came in when the list of candidates were mediocre in the US, similar to the period in the UK with David Cameron and Boris Johnson. To take on the health care issue required someone with the experience and caliber of LBJ, which Obama clearly lacked, coming from the minority community was not going to help in credibility. Obama's presidency was thus premature and to gain experience he would have done better in a key cabinet position such as at Department of State where an intellectual could have influenced world opinion in favor of emerging countries, a doable and necessary. Obama's lack of experience showed when he told Republicans two words in the first months in 2008- "We Won," perceiving arrogance it would set Republicans against him. The years 2008-2016 cost the US dearly in that the US needed a withdrawal from all of the Middle East which would require a strong president  with deep roots of support in all parts of the country including the south, to avoid recriminations. In the end by continuing the wars Obama weakened the US and let China move ahead. Q. Did Obama consider Medicare for All? A. Obama told Congressmen of his party according to Morone- if you can get 60 votes in the Senate for Medicare for All we can try.  Q. Would it take a major upheaval for Medicare for All to be accepted now that the health system is failing all Americans in 2026? A. It will take a world war or a economic depression- some major disaster for Medicare for All to be accepted in the US, say the authors. A pandemic happened in 1918 and again in 2019 the results were not positive, as the authors believe it unleashed the war on science after the vaccination for and against camps, leading to the culture wars in America seen today. Q  Obama's analytical mind thought he learned from the Clinton efforts in healthcare that failed. But he did not see things from the heart. There is good reason to think that the lessons learned of moving fast, letting Congress write the legislation, settling for what can be done not what needs to be done, were exactly the wrong lessons to be learned as opposed to writing off the Clinton experience entirely as Clinton's, and starting from scratch without preconceptions. In the end Obama if he was older, had more experience, and listened to the mood of the country would have realized that healthcare was for another day, and got right down to the most difficult challenge, to end the wars in the Middle East. Even small steps in the right direction would still have earned appreciation him today. Instead Bush and Obama, the most inexperienced of presidents will be remembered for wars they continued that weakened America.       ...
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT covers the GAESA tourism enterprise of Cuba (that operates independent of the government of Cuba) that overinvested in Tourism at the expense of agriculture industry and infrastructure during the Obama administration, leading to collapse with Trump's 2014 embargo on Cuba. GAESA controls about 50% of Cuba's economy, run by military and people from Castro's family.  That left 121 hotels built in the boom years of tourism at 30 percent occupancy. The Iberostar high rise hotel is one of these hotels that rises over dilapidated housing in Havana, the Cuban capital. The investment in tourism by the GAESA enterprise that runs about 50% of the Cuban economy is 13 times what is spent on healthcare and education, says the NYT. The Castro family, Raul Castro family, runs this business venture that was started when the Soviet Union as sponsor of Cuba had collapsed by 1991. The NYT says this 'devolved' the ideas and promise of the revolution. "Devolved?" What kind of word to describe a complete loss of faith, and enormous failure with severe hardship for the Cuban people? It means the whole idea of communism or Marxist revolution has been proven false, even as it survives in Mexico and parts of Latin America. One can be against the Batista regime- similarly against corrupt regimes in Latin America or Asia- that ruled Cuba before the Castro Cuban revolution and still look for better choices and alternatives than what Castro came up with as an answer to Cuba's needs. Much of Latin America is suffering from the same problems of dictatorships and turning to Marxist alternatives - particularly the alternative put forward by Castro in Cuba- that has also destroyed the Venezuelan economy with Chavez's turn to Castro's Cuban revolutionary slogans and ideology. That came up with temporary solutions for the poorer sections of society, yet failed badly for all sections of society in the long term. How else can one explain one fourth of Venezuela's population and about the same of Cuba's leaving the country, some of those who left the critical human capital that would form the core of the human input to combine with capital and technology for advancing the economy. If Cuba were like the Dominican Republic or other parts of the Caribbean to depend on tourism for its national income then would it not be better to have friendly relations with the US, the main source of tourism revenue. The Obama administration was only holding up a failed idea by holding out a helping hand to tourism in Cuba knowing full well that a change to a Republican administration would simply lead to heavy investments in tourism at the neglect of infrastructure, public services and the economy, of health and education, to become large economic losses. This is what has happened.  As China and India have proven and are proving there are no magical ways to economic development- the same route that was traveled by the nations of Northern and Western Europe with scientific advances, technological advances, have to be taken, the same route that was traveled by the US in its industrial revolution and building of infrastructure, that same route has to be taken by all nations. It does not have to take a time period of centuries as in Europe. The US accomplished it faster with new technologies and vast human and natural resources over 100 years, Japan in 50 years, China in 30 years. India in 25 years ongoing.There is room for intelligent solutions to problems, for speed and tapping into new technologies, yet the same inputs of land, labour, capital and technology have to be put together for development. For states or regions, cities, within China and India, the same inputs, the same access to foreign investment and new technologies is the only route to rapid development. Long range plans are set in motion, decades of stable efficient, clean governance is put in place, and alliances are built with the nations of Europe and with the US. This road is traversed though hard work as Japan and China have done, and India today is thoroughly engaged in. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Weigel of the Washington Post compares how the Affordable Care Act was passed in Congress in 2012 with the push by Speaker Ryan and the Trump administration for the American Health Care Act in 2017. Republicans he says are making the same mistake as Democrats by rushing this through Congress. There is no broad consensus on whether all Americans should be entitled to health care as in Europe and Japan for their citizens, and health care is priced in a way to make it expensive for the state to provide- until the twin problems are solved by creating a new culture in the U.S. that sees things differently, politicians will come up with their own plans based on their interests and which groups they serve.

Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This article in the NYT provides a look at the features of the Republican House Health Care Plan- Both the Affordable Health Care Act and the House Plan provide incentives for buying insurance- the ACA bases these incentives on income levels whereas the House Plan does not provide additional help for low incomes or elderly. Incomes at $20,000 would see a loss greater than  $2000 under the House Plan and as many of the elderly poor living in high cost areas may not have the resources to make up for this loss of subisidies they may forgo buying insurance or have insurance coverage that protects only in a limited way. President Trump has given assurances that all will be covered. For people with incomes of $50,000 or $75000 the loss of $2000 subisidies would also have some impact. At larger incomes or the well to do the subsidies are not handed out under either plan. Under the ACA the emphasis was on income levels and high cost insurance areas the subsidies were greater, under the House Plan the subisidies would be higher for the elderly compared to the young but very low income levels are not given additional help.     ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Senators Mike Lee of Utah and Jerry Moran of Kansas declare their opposition to the Republican Health Care bill proposed by Senator McConnell. This decision by the two senators makes it impossible to begin debate on the bill. Earlier two other senators, Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky announced their opposition. This means the Republican health care bill has no chance in the Senate even after changes to the bill passed by the House of Representatives. Republicans have a thin majority in the Senate make it difficult to pass legislation. Collins met with residents in Maine and Moran with people in his home state of Kansas, and both senators heard a lot about the negative effects of the Republican bill on people in their state. The bill is seen as hurting people in rural areas, elderly, and not likely to do enough to bring down premiums. Its plan to slash Medicaid spending has drawn strong opposition from all Democrats.

Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
Original article ›
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
NYT reports show the Republican health care bill AHCA 33 votes short of passing the House and likely to fail. Conservative Republicans were looking to whittle down the safety net in the Affordable Care Act, and moderate Republicans could not stomach the whittled down bill removing guarantees of essential benefits for instance. The basic problem- no real consensus among Americans about providing health care to all Americans, and no real solutions possible as long as there is acceptance of disproportionately high levels of medical care costs for treating each disease in the U.S. compared to Europe and other countries.

The Economist Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Economist magazine editorial says the Republican plan for health care with its roll back of Medicaid expansion by limiting funding to states after 2020, and by scaling back subsidies especially for older Americans and not basing them on income levels, is likely to have its own problems just as the Affordable Care Act. One concern is that keeping healthy people in the market with a mandate that everyone have insurance is present but in a milder form with premiums going up by 30% in one year if they change their mind. There is concern that this may not work among insurers leading to an increase in premiums, pricing people out of the market in "a death spiral." This could lead to more people being priced out of the market as premiums rise. About 12 million people were added to Medicaid by increasing eligibility level to $16400, or 138% of poverty line- this reduced the uninsured from 16% in 2010 to 8.8% today. The Economist concludes that the Republican health care bill has its own problems, and that this bill does not clear up the problems in Obamacare by substituting Ryancare as the Republican bill is called. Peggy Noonan writing in the WSJ says this may have negative consequences for the new Republican base shift to populist support. Critics on the right like Rand Paul see even the reduced subsidies as an entitlement program, yet the Republicans can only change parts of the Affordable Care Act as they need 60 votes in the Senate where they only have a small majority.   ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
In this insightful essay Peggy Noonan, former spokesperson for president Reagan, says that Republicans like Speaker Ryan with the Republican Health Care bill are making the same error made by president Obama.. Noonan says she had suggested a different way for president Obama to show compassion for the uninsured- first wait till the 2008 financial crisis was tackled, tackled waste and fraud in Medicare first, then look at the option of expanding Medicare to help the uninsured, and not the approach taken of swiftly focussing on the Affordable Care Act early in the first term disregarding Republican objections. She says Republicans are making the same mistake now by ignoring the impact the bill would have on Trump's base of working class Americans who may be affected by the bill's provisions not taking into account incomes in offering incentives or subsidies. Noonan says Trump did get one thing right in calling it a "carnage" for the worsening opioid epidemic in America which has hit rural areas and parts of the midwest hard. Noonan says Eberstadt has correctly documented the collapse in working class Americans wages and standard of living, and Caldwell the opioid epidemic at another level to their health. She also supports journalist Carlson who questioned Speaker Paul Ryan's judgement about eliminating the tax on wealthy investors in new legislation in a Fox News interview, as she says responding to the sense of America at the moment means listening to the sense of being left out of ordinary Americans, who have done not as well as the wealthy who have benefitted from a surging stock market.  ...
The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Flat payment rates for Medicare Advantage to Insurers by the DJT administration which is questioning how health care needs of the country remain unmet and US healthcare comparing very unfavorably with other advanced countries in Europe and Japan and also in India. Some of this is because of the behaviour and practices of the health and pharmaceutical industries in the US. The 2027 payment by government for Medicare Advantage is 0.09 percent. In 2026 it was about 5%. In 2025 it was -0.16 percent and in 2024 it was -1.12% under the Biden administration showing a great deal of dissatisfaction with funding Medicare Advantage. Medicare Advantage was set up by the Bush Republicans in 2003 who set it up with the nice sounding name Medicare Modernization Act. It was an effort to help the insurance companies with government money. Today in the second term of DJT in 2026 affordability is what American people care about most and the DJT administration is unhappy with the insurance companies. Dr. Mehmet Oz is in charge of Medicare and Medicaid Services Agency of the federal government and he says about Medicare Advantage and new policy to save “taxpayers from unnecessary spending (on Medicare Advantage) that is not oriented towards addressing real health needs.” The DJT Kennedy-Oz approach is for comprehensive digital information linking all medical providers, making America healthy again, cutting through the dense fog created over the last 2 decades, making pharmaceutical costs as affordable as the best in European nations, and refusing to subisidize if delivery is poor and health results are poor.   ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With the rushed approach adopted by the Trump administration not enough consideration was given to winning support in the House from 25 conservatives in the Freedom Caucus. Without their support the bill cannot be passed in the House of Representatives. The fight also includes one over what are essential health benefits including whether  maternity care would be included. As a result some moderate Republicans are also expressing opposition on the grounds that less people will be covered and fewer benefits will be provided under the Republican House plan called AHCA. President Trump has not involved himself in the details, and the bill comes very early in the first 100 days, leading to the perception that health care has become a partisan conflict without really grappling with the problems of high cost of health care and creating a solution that all can support. Democrats are seen as having made the same error early in Obama administration's first term. President Trump sees this as a much needed win with a drop in his approval ratings, making this even less of an effort to come out with a good plan.  ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Republican House Health Care pLan in 2017 relies on tax credits of between $2000 and $4000 based on age. Under the Affordable Health Care Act the elderly poor in high cost insurance areas received additional help. These people would lose over $2000 per person and may forgo full coverage or coverage entirely under the Republican House Health Care Plan. A report by Standard & Poor's estimates about 2 to 4 million people who are in 50's and 60's not yet qualifying for Medicare might lose their coverage they now have under ACA. The Republican plan also gives incentives through tax credits higher for older people, $4000 for a 60 year ol and $2000 for a 25 year old. Under the ACA the insurers are not allowed to charge more than three times what is charged for younger people, under the Republican plan this goes up to five times. 

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Washington Post survey of 1200 readers on how the Republican healthcare plan of Speaker Ryan and the House of Representatives looks to them, how it affects them in their lives. Here Somasekhar of the Post gives the stories of 5 Americans. Some see the prospect of losing their insurance under the Republican plan even as they reach an older age, others a smaller segment says the Post, whose premiums jumped under the Affordable Care Act say they faced high premiums and high deductibles. The Post says the large majority of opinions have expressed anxiety over the proposed Republican Ryan House plan for healthcare. One of them is an uninsured poor farmer, Mr. Woosley,  income about $18000 who gained benefit from expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act,  one Mr. Smith, 32 years, a personal injury attorney who faces paying $10,000 if he did not take insurance and $10,000 if he took insurance because of high premiums so a wash either way deciding to do without it, one a tech worker Mrs. Powers, 62 years, income $22,000 on year and $4000 the next, from middle class during the tech boom but facing fewer opportunities and uncertain income from part time work, hit by the deep recession facing fewer opportunities as she gets older and now the prospect of losing insurance without government subsidies, one who is from the middle class who sees little benefit from the Affordable Care Act and is forgoing insurance because of the high premiums yet faces a penalty for not being insured under the ACA, another Mr. Blanchard, 52 years, is from the middle class, a computer programmer who lost his job in downsizing, earns $100,000 as a consultant self-employed, pays $767 in premium a month and relies on the Affordable Care Act which helps him gain freedom from working at a company that could downsize,  another is a middle class programmer Mr Riffle,age 44, and his wife, who does not qualify for a subsidy with a $71,000 family salary from working 4 jobs between himself and his wife- this person finds it too expensive for his salary to buy insurance $900 a month and $14,000 deductible under the Affordable Care Act. His views are worth listening to as they go to the crux of the problem- he says he may not be any better with the Republican plan. He sees the real problem as the high cost of health care in the U.S. and the only way this can be fixed is for members of Congress to be asked to use the insurance exchanges they create. If this sample is representative it shows that there are real problems with both the Affordable Care Act and the Republican plan, that the high cost of health care the problem lurking behind every plan that does not squarely address this, and till that happens and members of Congress experience what ordinary people face, this problem can never by fully solved.   Woosley, Smith, Powers, Blanchard, Riffle, and their personal experience is at the crux of what is right and wrong  with the Affordable Care Act, and also with the new Republican plan of Speaker Ryan and the House of Representatives. For every Woosley, Powers and Blanchard who benefit, there is a Smith and a Riffle who are indifferent or are affected by the high cost under Affordable Care Act and the current system of medical care with its high cost. The Affordable Care Act does not  tackle high cost, for that to happen the culture in America that makes it possible and acceptable to charge high prices must change. Another problem apart from bringing health care costs is that any solution needs to have the whole country behind it. If the notion that all people are entitled to basic health care is to stand, the whole country needs to believe it as they do in countries like France, Britain, Germany and Japan. If this has to be made a workable proposition health care has to be offered at a price that makes this possible to achieve, and that idea also needs the deep and broad sense of support from the culture in America similar to that in these other countries. Until that happens politicians in America will get elected and turned out of office in turns on issues such as health care, based on which side they take and which problems they choose not to face squarely and responsibly. ...
Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Republican House health care bill AHCA  keeps some some of the more popular parts of the Affordable Care Act such as not taking pre-existing conditions to deny insurance, keeping children covered on parents insurance till age 26, and increase contributions to Health Savings accounts. It is different in that the expansion of Medicaid at 138% of poverty rate threshold is rolled back. Age is used for tax credits instead of income, hitting those approaching Medicare age harder. The maximum charged to older people is now set at  5 times compared to 3 times what young have to pay. In general the Republican bill is seen as targeting the elderly to keep premiums down. The elderly on low incomes are hit hardest. Fox News O'Reilly Show showed the host questioning House Republicans, citing the CBO estimates that elderly on low incomes may have to pay as much as $14,000 a year for insurance making it basically unaffordable, and 52 million Americans would be affected adversely. Large companies are no longer required to offer mandatory health insurance under the new bill. Conservatives from Freedom Caucus wanted to see the essential areas of benefits covered by the law limited to fewer than the ten areas in the Affordable Care Act. The ACHA Republican bill leaves to states to determine what are required essential benefits. At one point maternity benefits were to be dropped but this was changed to let states decide. As a result the bill is 33 votes short of the number needed for passing the house in March 2017.   Neither the Democrats Affordable Care Act or the Republican House bill of Speaker Ryan do much to tackle the real problem- the absolute amount and increases for health care dollars for treating each disease in the U.S. compared to European and other countries. As a result health care has become more of a partisan struggle between the two parties than a real effort by all to overcome the problems that have to be tackled. Republicans want to see premiums drop and keep the burden on the deficit down- but with the level of U.S. health care costs disproportionately high compared to Europe and the rest of the world the arithmetic is tough and ends up leaving out vulnerable groups such as the elderly on low incomes, thus making the whole proposition prone to fail. For the same reason the Democrats failed to keep premiums down with a wider safety net leading to calls for repeal of their version.   ...
BBC News Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Congressional Budget Office analysis that shows 14 million more people uninsured in 2018 under the Republican House health care plan, this increases to 24 million by 2026.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ by Peterson and Hackman shows how the American Health Care Act proposed by Speaker Paul Ryan provides less financial support and allows premiums to go higher for seniors approaching retirement in the 50-64 year age group. Premiums are allowed to go up 5 times that of premiums of young people in the Ryan House  plan compared to 3 times in the Affordable Care Act. Subsidies in the form of tax incentives provide $2000 to younger people going up by age not income to $4000 in the Ryan House plan. By contrast someone 60 years old making $20,000 a year can get Affordable Care Act credit of $9874, and making $40,000 a credit of $6752, according to analysis by Kaiser Family Foundation. The Ryan plan makes health care costs lower for young people in an effort to bring more young people who use less services into the system to support its overall financial condition. Another feature of the Ryan Plan is that it allows only for CPI index +1% even if health care costs are rising faster. Deep cuts to Medicaid affect lower income seniors on Medicare. As a result the AARP organization representing seniors has come out in opposition to the Ryan bill. The GOP plan wants to reduce premium costs yet in the process it makes vulnerable seniors with lower incomes pay more, which is likely to hurt Republicans who won by winning a large part of the senior vote. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. House of Representatives votes to repeal and replace the Affordable care Act 217-213. Moderates were won over by an addition of $8 billion  to add coverage for a popular feature of the ACA that covered people for pre-existing conditions.  The bill that passed gives credits of $2000 to $4000 a year, depending mostly on age, upto $14,000 for a family. Credits are reduced for individuals making over $75,000 a year or families making over $150,000. There is no mandated insurance coverage. This trims the federal budget deficit, yet also is expected to keep 24 million more Americans without health coverage after 10 years. The bill now goes to the Senate where moderate Republicans are worried that this may increase premiums for older people, one of the drawbacks of the earlier version of the House Republican bill.

WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Senate passes a motion that allows the chamber to proceed with a debate on a health care bill. The motion passed 51-50 with Vice President Mike Pence casting the deciding vote. Republican Senators Collins and Murkowski voted against the motion. This report in the WSJ says this sets in motion a process in which debate will take place and amendments will be made. It is not clear what shape the bill will take. Under the process used only a simple majority is needed in the Senate, yet this allows for many amendments to be made.  Only hours after this motion passed by one vote, a bill replacing major parts of the Affordable Care Act failed to pass 57 votes against and 43 in favor. Senator John McCain who arrived in Washington from Arizona following brain tumor surgery, delivered strong criticism of the way the Republican healthcare bill was rushed through allowing very little debate. Experts have commented on the way the bill was rushed through with a thin majority for passage, with very little debate, first by Democrats in 2009 and now in the House by Republicans. With the same pattern now followed in the Senate by Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader in the Senate. A backup bill would remove just the individual and employer mandates and a tax on medical devices- the elements Republicans agree on, if no majority can be put together for the healthcare bill. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Congressional Budget Office analysis of the Republican House health Care bill shows 24 million Americans would lose health insurance over 10 years. In terms of budget savings the bill saves $337 billion over 10 years. The increase in uninsured comes from the roll back of expansion of Medicaid under the House plan, the reduction of tax credits, plus the removing of income based credits replacing it with tax credits based on age. President Trump is promoting the bill saying it will reduce the premiums that have gone up since Affordable Care Act was passed and increase competition. House Speaker Ryan in promoting his plan says he is not in "some coverage beauty contest." The House Plan says Ryan, does not mandate that all be covered, but simply says coverage is in a free market giving people the option to buy insurance that they want, so that the numbers of insured would not be as many as under a mandate.

The Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Republicans wanted to see money spent in the states on the idea that states best knew where needs were. Democrat Clinton called it "ending welfare as we know it," and signed the bill for TANF where $16 billion was sent to states in anti poverty programs and $15 billion added to this by the states. This is how TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) started under Clinton in 1996. It was put under Department of Health and Human Services. A lot of latitude was given to states on how to spend the money. In 2026 much of this money is not spent wisely. GAO government agency audits show 37 states had 56 severe deficiencies with "opaque accounting practices." This includes Florida, Louisiana, and Connecticut. The Government Accountability Foundation calls the lack of accountability "fraud by design," saying that one fifth of the $31 billion never reaches the people it was intended to benefit. Both Republican and Democratic states are not using the funds the way they were meant to be used. Needy families getting help have come down from 1.9 million in 2010 to 850,000 in 2025.  ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bump in the Washington Post cites the weekly poll from Gallup showing Trump's job approval rating with Republicans is at 84% among Republicans. Another poll from Survey Monkey shows 75% of Republicans are fine with the firing of FBI Director Comey by Trump. Republicans at this time see the firing as a distraction from other issues on the Republican agenda. Fox News presents a very different version of the story and it is what most Republicans watch. The health care bill from Republicans in Congress and the tax plan are also favored by a majority of Republicans in the polls, says Bump. Independents are wary and skeptical, Republicans see Trump as a way to get their own agenda implemented, and Democrats have serious issues with Trump.


Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us