�Թϲ�����

Things could go well for the Democrats in next year’s midterm elections — if they don’t Bern out. ... Bernie Sanders’s advisers are promoting a “litmus test” under which Democrats who don’t swear to implement single-payer health care would be booted from the party in primaries. Sanders pollster Ben Tulchin penned an op-ed with a colleague under the headline “Universal health care is the new litmus test for Democrats.” Nina Turner, head of the Sanders group Our Revolution, told Politico this week that “there’s something wrong with” Democrats who won’t “unequivocally” embrace “Medicare-for-all.” (Dana Milbank, 8/11)

If you’re a normal person who doesn’t have much time to burrow into the details of policy, you can be forgiven for thinking that the health care choice we face in this country is between the current improving but still inefficient and dissatisfying status quo and a single-payer system. After all, single payer, in which the federal government acts as every American’s insurance provider, is the only alternative that ever gets discussed. But that isn’t the case. Single payer is a policy choice, not a principle. The principle is universal coverage. Single payer is one way to get there. It’s how Britain and Canada do it. But there are other ways. (Michael Tomasky, 8/14)

Dreaming of a state-run single-payer healthcare system? Wake up and enter the real world. Want universal healthcare for all Americans? Medicare for all is the solution. Not this year or next, but possibly in the future — when Democrats recapture the presidency and Congress. That’s the clear-eyed, pragmatic fight to engage in, and one advocated by U.S. Rep. John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove), a longtime healthcare warrior. “Medicare is far, far more efficient than private insurance companies,” he said. “Using the tax system to collect money for healthcare delivery is extremely efficient. No profits. No commissions. No advertising.” (George Skelton, 8/14)

The chaos that continues to engulf the health care debate in Washington, D.C.. reaffirms the assertion that states must forge their own paths to protect the most vulnerable people in their communities. But too many states have turned to an expansion of Medicaid through Obamacare as a solution — putting their truly needy at risk and leaving taxpayers with surging costs as a result. (Jason Spencer, 8/13)

Regardless of whether Congress enacts health care reform, the private sector isn’t waiting. Health care for our employees is too expensive, and the employer-based system must be reformed. ... The United States government defines health care as “affordable” if it costs less than 9.7 percent of a household’s income. By that standard, in less than 10 years more than half of employees who are heads of families are projected to be unable to afford their health care costs, creating a significant problem for everyone. (Robert Andrews, 8/11)

With flimsy justification, and in small type buried in routine documents, the Trump administration has informed 81 local governments and health groups that it will end grants they have received to run teen pregnancy prevention programs, two years before the grants are scheduled to end. The decision is unsettling even by the disquieting standards of this anti-science administration. (8/11)

Trump focused instead on stepping up law enforcement and border security, leading many to fear he is more interested in a taking an old-school “war on drugs” approach than treating the epidemic appropriately as a public health issue and addicts as people who are sick. ... The LA Times’ editorial board has some suggestions for the feds and states on how to do this: First and foremost, do not treat this as a law enforcement problem. The nation’s “war on drugs” was an expensive failure that didn’t stop drug abuse. It just filled up jails and ruined lives. Let’s not repeat that mistake. In that same vein, please don’t criminalize addicts. Help them. Especially if they are pregnant women. (Mariel Garza, 8/11)

With some apprehension, I agreed to join colleagues from the Maryland General Assembly on a tour of the Maryland Office of the Chief Medical Examiner to learn about forensic investigations, evidence collection and cause and manner of death, issues relevant to topics debated in the House Judiciary Committee. They also are relevant to the state’s opioid epidemic. (Del. Pamela E. Queen, 8/12)

Just as we don’t confuse toddlers with teenagers, or young adults with their middle-age parents, so, too, are we able to distinguish 70-year-olds from the nonagenarians a generation ahead of them. Those two groups — the “young old” and the “old old” — don’t just differ in how they look and spend their days; they also differ biologically. As a result, it’s likely that we are incorrectly vaccinating a significant number of the 47 million Americans over 65. (Louise Aronson, 8/11)

While much of the nation appears to be adjusting to the transgender rights movement, social conservatives in the Texas Legislature — prodded by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, a Republican — continue their obsessive campaign to restrict the bathroom rights of transgender citizens. They are fighting to the very end of the current special session, in the face of a storm of powerful opposition that ranges from the state’s Fortune 500 companies and business leaders to police chiefs, sports and tourism executives, concerned parents, and pastors in an evangelical community divided over the lack of basic charity underlying the anti-transgender legislation. (8/11)

The best laid plans of politicians often go awry, and then there’s Philadelphia’s soda tax. A new Tax Foundation report finds that the 1.5-cent-an-ounce levy that took effect in January is hurting low-income workers and producing less revenue than promised, but at least it’s helping beer sales. (8/13)

There may be some folks receiving disability benefits fraudulently, but I do know I got a good going over. A few weeks after my stroke, when I realized I wasn’t going to be able to work, my wife drove me to the Social Security office to apply for benefits. ... Months on, I still haven’t received a single check. Without help from family, I would be homeless, despite over forty years in the work force. To them, I am forever grateful, but also deeply ashamed. (Robert Fowler, 8/10)

The scourge of type 2 diabetes across the United States costs American taxpayers billions of dollars every single year. Diabetes and diabetes-related treatment is one of the biggest drivers of rising healthcare costs for every payer — with Medicare spending more on treating those with the disease every year. ... Last month, for the first time in the agency’s history, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services laid out proposed rules to reimburse providers to proactively prevent chronic disease by paying for the evidence-based Diabetes Prevention Program for eligible beneficiaries. ... But unfortunately, the proposed rule missed a huge opportunity to extend access to this benefit to the area most in need: rural America. (Sean Duffy, 8/14)