Showing 1361 - 1366 of 1366 results

Showing Results for: “diabetes”

Patient Groups Disappointed by Ongoing Uncertainty in Wake of Supreme Court’s Decision Not to Expedite Health Care Case

Supreme Court’s Decision Leaves Patients in Limbo Patient and health advocacy groups representing millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions are disappointed over the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today not to immediately take up the case of Texas v. United States. The groups, which include the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Diabetes Association, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, and the National Multiple Sclerosis Society along with more than a dozen others, filed an amicus curiae, or friend of the court brief, last week urging the Court

25 Patient and Consumer Groups Celebrate the ACA on its 10th Birthday

25 patient and consumer groups representing millions of people nationwide with pre-existing health conditions issued the following statement in celebration of the 10th anniversary of the Affordable Care Act (ACA): ”Now it is more important than ever to acknowledge and celebrate the significant coverage gains and protections for patients as a result of the Affordable Care Act. Today, the nation faces significant challenges as the result of the COVID-19 pandemic, but as a result of the ACA, more than 20 million additional Americans have access to high-quality, affordable health insurance. In the

Statement of Support for H.R. 6514, the Worker Health Coverage Protection Act

The undersigned 29 organizations, representing millions of American patients and consumers with chronic and serious illnesses offer their strong support of H.R. 6514, the Worker Health Coverage Protection Act. “Last month, several of our organizations sent a letter to Congress encouraging lawmakers to extend high-quality coverage options for individuals who may have lost their employer sponsored health insurance as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. We therefore applaud the introduction of H.R. 6514, which would provide subsidies to furloughed or terminated employees for the full cost of

U.S. Appeals Court Strikes Individual Mandate; Directs Lower Court to Reconsider Broader Health Care Law

Seventeen of the nation’s leading patient advocacy groups are remaining steadfast in their commitment to protecting patients throughout the next phase of legal proceedings involving the health care law known as the Affordable Care Act. Today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck down the individual mandate without a tax penalty as unconstitutional. It sent the case back to the District Court to determine if the mandate can be “severed” from the rest of the law and to consider whether a ruling should be limited to just the plaintiff states or apply to all states. The Attorney

29 Patient Organizations Urge Lawmakers to Take Bold, Immediate Action to Protect Those Most Vulnerable to COVID-19

Twenty-nine organizations representing millions of patients diagnosed with serious health conditions urge the U.S. Senate to immediately pass the U.S. House-approved coronavirus bill and take additional critical steps. In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the organizations emphasize the importance of enacting the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (H.R. 6201). Public health experts warn that patients with serious, chronic conditions face heightened risk of sickness and death if infected with the novel coronavirus. For these

17 Patient Groups Urge Appeals Court to Uphold Health Care Law

Seventeen patient groups representing millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions filed an amicus curiae ("friend-of-the-court") brief today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in the case Texas v. United States, citing the devastating impact patients would face should the court uphold the District Court ruling to invalidate the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The case is pending before the Fifth Circuit after District Court Judge Reed O'Connor ruled in favor of plaintiffs who argued the entire health care law should be struck down because Congress repealed the individual