DOJ files brief in support of health care reform law

[JURIST] The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] on Friday filed a brief [text, PDF] with the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit [official website], arguing that the health care reform law [HR 3590; JURIST news archive] is constitutional. In January, a judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of Florida struck down the law [JURIST report] as a violation of the Commerce Clause [Cornell LII backgrounder] of the US Constitution. In its brief, the DOJ argued that the interstate health market can be regulated by Congress because it is fundamentally different from other markets due to the pervasive government involvement in health care spending. It also argued that the minimum coverage provision, which is the focus of the litigation, is constitutional because it regulates only economic activity, disputing the lower court's finding that failure to purchase health insurance could not be regulated as interstate commerce. Citing to the US Supreme Court case of Gonzales v. Raich [JURIST report], the brief argued that there only needed to be a rational basis [Cornell LII backgrounder] for Congress to believe that the regulated conduct substantially affects interstate commerce, which was met here.

Congress's findings and the legislative record leave no doubt that the minimum coverage provision—which regulates the way people pay for services in the interstate health care market—is a valid exercise of the commerce power under the standards established by the Supreme Court. It regulates activity that is commercial and economic in nature, and that substantially affects interstate commerce. First, Congress found that people who consume health care without insurance shift billions of dollars of costs annually to other participants in the interstate health care market. Second, Congress found that the minimum coverage provision is key to the viability of the Act's regulation of medical underwriting, which guarantees that everyone will be insurable regardless of illnesses or accidents.

The DOJ also argued that the law was constitutional as an exercise of Congress's taxing power, and that plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the suit in the first place. The Eleventh Circuit denied the petition for initial hearing en banc [JURIST report] in the appeal. The order confirmed that the appeal will nonetheless be expedited. Oral arguments are currently scheduled for June 8 before a randomly-selected three-judge panel. The identities of the panel members will not be disclosed until at least 14 days before the arguments. Last month, the Obama administration filed a brief with the court contesting the plaintiff states' request [JURIST report] to have the appeal heard by an en banc court. Last month, Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli filed a petition for a writ of certiorari [JURIST report] with the US Supreme Court asking the court to rule on the constitutionality of the law on an expedited basis, before the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit rules on the issue, but the Obama administration opposes the petition [JURIST report]. In January, a judge for the US District Court for the Western District of Virginia dismissed a lawsuit [JURIST report] challenging a provision of the health care reform law. In October, a federal judge in Michigan ruled that the law is constitutional [JURIST report] under the Commerce Clause as it addresses the economic effects of health care decisions, and that it does not represent an unconstitutional direct ta

Read More

DOJ files brief in support of health care reform law

[JURIST] The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] on Friday filed a brief [text, PDF] with the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit [official website], arguing that the health care reform law [HR 3590; JURIST news archive] is constitutional. In January, a judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of Florida struck down the law [JURIST report] as a violation of the Commerce Clause [Cornell LII backgrounder] of the US Constitution. In its brief, the DOJ argued that the interstate health market can be regulated by Congress because it is fundamentally different from other markets due to the pervasive government involvement in health care spending. It also argued that the minimum coverage provision, which is the focus of the litigation, is constitutional because it regulates only economic activity, disputing the lower court's finding that failure to purchase health insurance could not be regulated as interstate commerce. Citing to the US Supreme Court case of Gonzales v. Raich [JURIST report], the brief argued that there only needed to be a rational basis [Cornell LII backgrounder] for Congress to believe that the regulated conduct substantially affects interstate commerce, which was met here.

Congress's findings and the legislative record leave no doubt that the minimum coverage provision—which regulates the way people pay for services in the interstate health care market—is a valid exercise of the commerce power under the standards established by the Supreme Court. It regulates activity that is commercial and economic in nature, and that substantially affects interstate commerce. First, Congress found that people who consume health care without insurance shift billions of dollars of costs annually to other participants in the interstate health care market. Second, Congress found that the minimum coverage provision is key to the viability of the Act's regulation of medical underwriting, which guarantees that everyone will be insurable regardless of illnesses or accidents.

The DOJ also argued that the law was constitutional as an exercise of Congress's taxing power, and that plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the suit in the first place. The Eleventh Circuit denied the petition for initial hearing en banc [JURIST report] in the appeal. The order confirmed that the appeal will nonetheless be expedited. Oral arguments are currently scheduled for June 8 before a randomly-selected three-judge panel. The identities of the panel members will not be disclosed until at least 14 days before the arguments. Last month, the Obama administration filed a brief with the court contesting the plaintiff states' request [JURIST report] to have the appeal heard by an en banc court. Last month, Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli filed a petition for a writ of certiorari [JURIST report] with the US Supreme Court asking the court to rule on the constitutionality of the law on an expedited basis, before the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit rules on the issue, but the Obama administration opposes the petition [JURIST report]. In January, a judge for the US District Court for the Western District of Virginia dismissed a lawsuit [JURIST report] challenging a provision of the health care reform law. In October, a federal judge in Michigan ruled that the law is constitutional [JURIST report] under the Commerce Clause as it addresses the economic effects of health care decisions, and that it does not represent an unconstitutional direct ta

Read More

Health Care’s Strain on Environment Could Be Less

A new study suggests health IT systems can help reduce negative impacts on the environment. Photo: Wikimedia Commons, Norbert Kaiser

A Kaiser Permanente study into the use of health information technology concludes that electronic health records could lower carbon dioxide emissions by as much as 1.7 million tons if used across the whole U.S. population.
Health care-related activities contribute as much as 8 percent of the total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, but the study suggests this can be curtailed with greater adoption of technology within the healthcare system.
READ: Health Care Reform’s Eco Impact
The study also went in depth on Kaiser Permanente’s existing health IT systems. It found that the health insurance company saved 1,044 tons of paper for medical charts; reduced toxic chemicals by 33.3 tons from X-ray machines by digitizing and archiving scans; and saved up to 92,000 tons of CO2 emissions by replacing face-to-face patient visits with virtual ones.
In 2004, President Bush signed an executive order to establish this kind of technology in hospitals, not only for the environmental benefits, but also for the improved efficiency and economic value. A RAND Health study found that widespread adoption of health information technology could save the U.S. healthcare system $81 billion annually.
But until recently, adoption numbers have been low.
Last year, the top five medical groups, including Kaiser Permanente, banded together to create a patient information exchange consisting entirely of electronic health records.
Obama administration incentives, up to $44,000 per physician, may have helped spur the endeavor, but health information technology has a long way to go before all of the potential benefits are see

Read More

Health Care’s Strain on Environment Could Be Less

A new study suggests health IT systems can help reduce negative impacts on the environment. Photo: Wikimedia Commons, Norbert Kaiser

A Kaiser Permanente study into the use of health information technology concludes that electronic health records could lower carbon dioxide emissions by as much as 1.7 million tons if used across the whole U.S. population.
Health care-related activities contribute as much as 8 percent of the total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, but the study suggests this can be curtailed with greater adoption of technology within the healthcare system.
READ: Health Care Reform’s Eco Impact
The study also went in depth on Kaiser Permanente’s existing health IT systems. It found that the health insurance company saved 1,044 tons of paper for medical charts; reduced toxic chemicals by 33.3 tons from X-ray machines by digitizing and archiving scans; and saved up to 92,000 tons of CO2 emissions by replacing face-to-face patient visits with virtual ones.
In 2004, President Bush signed an executive order to establish this kind of technology in hospitals, not only for the environmental benefits, but also for the improved efficiency and economic value. A RAND Health study found that widespread adoption of health information technology could save the U.S. healthcare system $81 billion annually.
But until recently, adoption numbers have been low.
Last year, the top five medical groups, including Kaiser Permanente, banded together to create a patient information exchange consisting entirely of electronic health records.
Obama administration incentives, up to $44,000 per physician, may have helped spur the endeavor, but health information technology has a long way to go before all of the potential benefits are see

Read More

FDA to ban caffeine in alcoholic beverages

Alcoholic drinks
with a shot of caffeine have become more and more popular on college campuses and also among underage teen drinkers. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not yet okayed caffeine for use in alcoholic drinks nor have they found it to be dangerous.

Some of the businesses targeted are Constellation Brands Inc (STZ.N), which makes the drink Wide Eye, and the North American unit of Diageo plc (DGE.L) (DEO.N), which makes Smirnoff Raw Tea
.

The companies have been given 30 days to show that their drinks are not dangerous to their customers, or the FDA will be obligated to take additional legal action. The beverages have been marketed using social media sites like Twitter, says The New York Times. These drinks have already been approved by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade bureau and will provide the beverage companies with a defense against the allegations.

“Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, a substance added intentionally to food (such as caffeine in alcoholic beverages) is deemed “unsafe” and is unlawful unless its particular use has been approved by FDA regulation, the substance is subject to a prior sanction, or the substance is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS),” says the alert.

College drinkers are the primary demographic for marketing of highly caffeinated drinks like Red Bull. Caffeine has not been approved for use at any level in alcoholic beverages, the FDA noted. Caffeine has been approved for use in soft drinks in concentrations of no greater than 200 parts per million. The market for caffeinated alcoholic drinks is about 1 percent of the total beer industry

The FDA also noted that in the past year, Anheuser-Busch and Miller agreed to stop selling their popular caffeinated alcoholic beverages — Tilt, Bud Extra, and Sparks — and agreed not to produce any caffeinated alcoholic beverages in the future.

Read More

Helicopter Crash Leaves Three Dead Near Reno

Reno, NV (AHN) – A medical helicopter crashed early Saturday morning near the California-Nevada border, leaving three dead.

After dropping off a patient in Reno, the Mountain Lifeflight helicopter 3 was on its way back to Susanville when the crash occurred about 2 a.m., the Reno Gazette-Journal reported.

The Federal Aviation Administration reported that the crash and the resulting fire destroyed the helicopter, an Aerospatiale AS350. At the time of the accident, the pilot was not in communication with air traffic controllers.

In a statement, Mountain Lifeflight confirmed that the crewmembers aboard had died.

Read More