We at Arnold Ventures have been highly critical when a college cedes control of tuition, standards of admission, and oversight of content to a for-profit company. Revenue sharing with an outside entity inevitably changes the incentives from student success to profit maximization.
4/4

Following a class-action suit, Caltech rightly ended its relationship with the OPM and began rethinking its certificate programs. This should serve as a wake-up call for all colleges. Diluting the brand and misleading students to make a few dollars isn't helpful to anyone.
3/4

The quality and standards fell far short of the Caltech brand. Instructors were not Caltech faculty; some were recent graduates of the same program. The university’s only real involvement was collecting a share of the revenue. Students were deceived.
2/4

The session showed the rift in the GOP between the suburban populist members and their related think tanks that are fighting a culture war vs consumers, manufacturers, land owners, rural communities (property taxes), developers, and even oil & gas community who want/need energy abundance.

Senators Cassidy and Kennedy have both introduced site neutral bills.

Getting rid of the waste fraud and abuse in Medicare is the right way to reduce healthcare costs and doesn't touch coverage. Focus on those.
8/8

Addressing these abuses could save huge money without affecting anyone's coverage. Both ideas have bipartisan support. Dr. Oz has vowed to scrutinize upcoding, saying it "is a scandal, and overall, we know that Medicare Advantage overpayments cost at least $83 billion in a single year."
7/8

More importantly, better ideas exist to save money in healthcare that don't cause people to lose coverage. There are abuses of Medicare both in upcoding (insurers making patients appear less healthy) and site-neutral (charging more for the same service after a hospital buys a doc office).
6/8

We can debate the number of people who will lose coverage solely because of failure to report and whether that makes this policy unworkable. The existing evidence from Arkansas, which briefly implemented work requirements, is thin.
5/8

The policy of work requirements is really a policy of work reporting requirement. This is nuanced distinction but very important. Inevitably, people who are engaged in work will lose healthcare coverage because they failed to properly document or report that activity. This, obviously, is bad.
4/8

Medicaid eligibility would require individuals to report their work, caregiving, education, or service activities every month. This becomes an administrative burden on individuals who often have the least ability to navigate the system.
3/8

A recent KFF poll showed 62% surveyed, including 47% of Democrats, support Medicaid work requirements in theory. But the challenge of policymaking is that what’s intended on paper often plays out very differently in practice.
2/8

Third-party payors are a necessary part of the healthcare system—that’s the core function of insurance. However, this same system also plays a major role in driving up the cost of drugs.
4/4

When insurers balked at launch prices of $1,000–$1,300 per month, many patients were forced to pay entirely out of pocket. This limited uptake. In response, Lilly and Novo Nordisk lowered prices by as much as 62 percent for cash-paying customers instead of raising them over time.
3/4

Once doctors and patients adopt the drug, manufacturers often hike prices annually (often 9.9%) knowing that payors lose leverage once the drug is entrenched in clinical practice.

GLP-1s broke this pattern.
2/4