FROM Linda Feldman
Healthcare Reform: Should Obama Have Fought for Single-Payer? The US Supreme Court opened a new session today with an unexpected challenge. The Obama Justice Department has asked that it resolve differences between lower courts on the President’s controversial healthcare reform, specifically the mandate for all Americans to buy health insurance whether they want to or not. What could that mean for next year's elections? Is a "single payer" plan providing "universal coverage" still a live issue after all?
The President, the US Supreme Court and Healthcare Reform The US Supreme Court opens a new session today with an unexpected challenge. President Obama's healthcare reform requires all Americans to buy health insurance, but 26 states have sued, claiming that's unconstitutional. The federal courts are so divided that the Obama Justice Department has now asked the Supreme Court to resolve the issue once and for all. That could be a major gamble for his re-election campaign, depending on whether the court takes the case, what it decides and when. With health costs and premiums rising, it also poses a lingering question: should the President have proposed a single-payer plan in the first place?
Replacing Obamacare: Now you see it… now you don’t As the Senate deliberates replacing Obmacare, health coverage for millions of people is at stake. There've been no public hearings, and a draft measure won't be made public. Is the House version so unpopular that that Senate is hiding a version that looks much the same?
Ex-FBI Director Comey tells his side of the story Today, former FBI Director James Comey came close to calling the President who fired him a liar. The White House denied the claim and called it insulting, but Republican Senators did not challenge Comey’s truthfulness. Many questions remain: did the President try to obstruct a federal investigation? Later, we’ll go behind the “velvet rope” for a look at 5-Star health care for the richest Americans.
Terrorism and tweets, hate speech and murder Just days before an election, Britain is coping with a rash of deadly terrorism, and Prime Minister Theresa May is on the defensive. And again today, President Trump has tweeted criticism of the Mayor of London. Later, a double murder in Portland, Oregon has revealed the ugly past of a supposedly “progressive” city. One immediate question: is “hate speech” protected by the First Amendment?
Is the threat from Russia missing from the Russia meddling probe? There's much being made about the Trump administration's possible ties with Russia. But the bottom line is Russia's effort to influence American democracy. Do the President and his aides care enough to take action before voters go back to the polls?