The April 2019 KFF Health Tracking Poll examines the public’s position on the future of ACA and its protections for people with pre-existing medical conditions, in light of the ongoing legal battle which may end up in the Supreme Court. With lawmakers proposing legislation to address surprise medical bills, this month’s survey also measures the public’s support for federal government action to protect patients from having to pay the cost incurred from an inadvertent out-of-network provider.

A federal district court has set aside the HHS Secretary’s approval of Medicaid waivers with work and reporting requirements and other eligibility and enrollment restrictions in Kentucky and Arkansas. For context as this all develops, we asked MaryBeth Musumeci, Associate Director at the Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured, three questions about the implications of the decisions.

At a time when debate is beginning about a national Medicare-for-all plan and other approaches to expanding coverage through public programs, this month’s KFF Health Tracking poll examines Americans’ early opinion on a range of options under consideration. The poll finds majority support for four different approaches: 77 percent of…

This month’s KFF Health Tracking Poll finds that about four in ten are aware of the federal judge’s ruling that the ACA is no longer valid but once made aware, most disapprove of the ruling. This poll also examines the public’s favorability toward expanding the role of public health care programs, and majorities across partisan groups have a favorable opinion of programs such as Medicare buy-in and Medicaid buy-in, with a national Medicare-for-all being less popular but still receiving a majority of support overall.

In this June 2018 post for The JAMA Forum, Larry Levitt examines the potential impact of the Trump Administration’s legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

A new issue brief from the Kaiser Family Foundation explains the June 29 federal court ruling invalidating the Kentucky HEALTH Medicaid waiver program and its implications for other states. The DC Federal District Court decision in Stewart v. Azar blocked Kentucky from implementing the waiver on July 1, including its…

This issue brief summarizes the DC federal district court’s June 29, 2018 decision in Stewart v. Azar, the lawsuit brought by Medicaid enrollees challenging the HHS Secretary’s approval of the Kentucky HEALTH Section 1115 waiver program, which includes a work requirement, premiums, coverage lockouts, and other provisions that the state estimated would lead 95,000 people to lose coverage.

The latest Kaiser Health Tracking Poll examines the public’s attitudes, with a focus on views of women ages 18-44, toward several key women’s issues including workplace protections and reproductive health – as well as the role that these issues may play in the 2018 midterm elections.

In an Axios column, Drew Altman analyzes the narrowing gap between growth in health spending and GDP and discusses why it matters. The big question, he says, is will the narrowing have staying power?

Before the ACA was passed, many states had enacted contraceptive equity laws that required plans to treat contraceptives in the same way they covered other services. In addition, since the ACA was passed, a number of states have enacted laws that basically codify in state legislation the ACA benefit rules. This issue brief provides an update on the status of the continuing litigation on the federal contraceptive requirement and explains the interplay between the federal and state contraceptive coverage laws and the implications for employers and women.