TIME republicans

Conservatives Want Bust of Planned Parenthood Founder Removed From National Portrait Gallery

The Planned Parenthood logo
Dominick Reuter—Reuters The Planned Parenthood logo is pictured outside a clinic in Boston, June 27, 2014.

The controversy centers around her support for eugenics

A bust at a Smithsonian museum is the latest target in a heated back and forth between conservatives and Planned Parenthood.

Conservative groups are calling on the National Portrait Gallery to remove of a bust of Margaret Sanger from the Washington, D.C. museum, the Associated Press reports. Sanger, who died in 1966, founded two groups that eventually became Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood has been harshly criticized by conservatives following the release of a series of undercover videos that show employees of the healthcare organization negotiating the sale of fetal tissue. However, a group of ministers lead by former Republican politician E.W. Jackson and the conservative non-profit ForAmerica say their opposition to the bust is based on Sanger’s support of eugenics, a social movement that sought to remove undesirable traits from the gene pool through sterilization and selective breeding.

Brent Bozell, chairman of ForAmerica, told the AP that Sanger believed eugenics could be used to “sterilize out of existence the poor, the blacks.”

Republican politicians have echoed these claims. Presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas have written a letter to lawmakers that calls the sculpture’s display by the museum “an affront both to basic human decency and the very meaning of justice.”

In a statement to TIME, Planned Parenthood acknowledged Sanger’s flaws, but dismissed the attacks as motivated by anti-abortion sentiment.

“This is a group with a longstanding political agenda to ban abortion,” said spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood. “There is no doubt that Margaret Sanger made some controversial, harmful statements that Planned Parenthood does not uphold. What we do know is that her fight for birth control access for all women — and her partnership with leaders like W.E.B. DuBois, Mary McLeod Bethune and Rev. Adam Clayton Powell — has helped millions of women and people to this day.”

Officials at the National Portrait Gallery say they won’t remove the bust, which has been on display since 2010. A spokesperson for the gallery told the AP that the museum’s displays include some people with “less than admirable characteristics.”

Sanger’s bust is included in the museum’s “Struggle for Justice” exhibit, which highlights Americans who fought for the civil rights of disenfranchised or marginalized groups.

This is not the first time Planned Parenthood has had to defend Sanger. A 2004 fact sheet published by the group comes to the activist’s defense, while also separating the organization from some of her more antiquated beliefs. The fact sheet says that criticizing the family planning movement based on Sanger’s support for eugenics is like rejecting the Declaration of Independence because “it’s author, Thomas Jefferson, bought and sold slaves.”

TIME Health Care

Planned Parenthood Protesters Rally Across the Country

Protesters held signs reading 'Planned Parenthood Sells Baby Parts'

Protesters gathered at 320 Planned Parenthood clinics around the country on Saturday calling for the end to federal funding for the health care provider.

The Washington Post reports the protesters held signs reading ‘Planned Parenthood Sells Baby Parts’ and participated in prayers and chants.

Controversy over the organization, which provides health services including abortion, erupted recently when undercover videos by anti-abortion activists purported to show Planned Parenthood personnel engaging in illegal activity and selling fetal tissue for profit. Planned Parenthood has denied the allegations, arguing the videos were heavily edited and taken out of context.

MORE: Why We Still Need Fetal-Tissue Research

In a statement, Planned Parenthood vice president Eric Ferrero said, “These rallies are meant to intimidate and harass our patients, who rely on our nonprofit health centers for basic, preventive health care.”

[Washington Post]

TIME Health Care

Illinois Bans Gay Conversion Therapy for Minors

Illinois State Fair Bruce Rauner
Seth Perlman—AP Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner greets fairgoers during the Twilight Parade at the Illinois State Fair on Aug. 13, 2015, in Springfield, Ill.

The law blocks mental health providers from engaging in "sexual orientation change efforts" with a person under the age of 18

Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner on Thursday approved legislation that will prohibit doctors and therapists from trying to change a minor’s sexual orientation.

The legislation, known as the “Youth Mental Health Protection Act,” makes it illegal for any “mental health provider” to engage in “sexual orientation change efforts” with a person under the age of 18. Providers will also be prohibited from referring a patient to anyone else for purpose of attempting to change their sexual orientation.

Additionally, the law prohibits individuals from advertising conversion therapy services in a manner that represents homosexuality as a “mental disease, disorder or illness.”

The bill passed both houses of the Illinois General Assembly in May of this year, but the governor did not sign it until Thursday.

Illinois State Senator Daniel Bliss said in a statement published Friday that conversion therapies for homosexuality could be extremely harmful to young adults.

“They’re out of date and can be deeply destructive to youth,” said Bliss. “Outlawing these practices is a small step in our pursuit for LGBT rights, but it’s an extremely important step in protecting young people in Illinois.”

The new law makes Illinois the fourth state in the United States to outlaw conversion therapy for minors. In April, the Obama administration called for a nationwide ban on conversion therapy for gay and transgender youth.

 

MONEY credit cards

Should You Pay Your Medical Bill With a Credit Card?

Why it's smart to charge a payment at the beginning of your billing cycle.

Since the Affordable Care Act, the large majority of us have health insurance, which means we all have to figure out how we’ll cover co-pays, deductibles and bills for expenses not covered. While paying a co-pay with cash isn’t unheard of, you may find it more convenient to pay with a credit or debit card.

Increasingly, you’ll be asked for a co-pay when you make a scheduled health care visit (there are exceptions; certain checkups and procedures require no co-pay). In that case, a credit card may be your best bet. That should give you some time to come up with the co-pay if it’s not in your regular budget. And if you have a rewards card and will be able to pay the card off in full, some of the pain of an unexpected bill can be mitigated by a small reward. (Or, if you anticipate a large expense — think pregnancy or knee replacement — a balance-transfer card might be useful if it has a low- or zero-interest promotional rate.)

Especially in the case of non-routine care, you may also be faced with co-insurance, the amount you have to pay after insurance pays. That can be stickier, because sometimes insurance doesn’t pay as quickly or as much as you might hope, and you may be getting a bill that you have reason to believe you won’t ultimately owe. What then? Do you pay it?

It actually happened to me recently when, after nearly six months, I worried that a still-unpaid bill might be sent to collections, thus doing serious damage to my credit score. I truly believed insurance would eventually cover the expense (I had appealed a denial) … but also that the account was close to being turned over to collections. And so I put it on a credit card at the beginning of a billing cycle, to maximize the time between when I charged it and when I would have to pay it, hoping that insurance would come through and pay its share of the bill.

Eventually insurance did come through. The medical provider told me I’d be issued a refund in 4-6 weeks. Instead, I paid the provider the appropriate amount for my co-pay with a check, and successfully disputed what I charged to my credit card with the credit issuer (and thus had the charge removed).

If you’re hoping to use a credit card to buy time on a bill you don’t think you should have to pay, here’s what to know:

  • Paying carries its own risks. Once the bill is paid, health care providers may be less motivated to help you get insurance to pay. In addition, if you’ve already paid the “retail” rate, you lose the ability to negotiate a lower price. If you’ve ever looked at a bill and seen how much the “negotiated rate” your insurance company pays compared to the full retail rate, you’ll understand why it’s such a big deal to potentially lose that ability.
  • But not paying the bill is also risky. Your credit report can reflect late payments (most health care providers do not report to credit reporting agencies, but a few do). If your account is sent to collections, your credit score is likely to suffer. You could lose a good credit score that you’ve worked hard to build, and you could either not be approved for credit or you could end up having to pay more in interest if you do qualify.

For me, paying and timing it so that I had nearly two billing cycles to continue to fight with my insurer bought me time to resolve it. Disputing it (even if insurance had not eventually paid) would have resulted in a bit more time while the credit card issuer investigated. And all of that time was interest-free. (I should add that the reason I filed a chargeback is because I know that under federal law the provider couldn’t drag its feet and take “4-6 weeks” to issue a refund to my card after they agreed I was due one. It wasn’t just a stall tactic.) Most important to me, it prevented a huge hit to my credit for a bill I actually did not owe.

More From Credit.com:

MONEY Health Care

Millions of Obamacare Enrollees Are Missing Out on This Big Savings

530067419
Getty Images

Cost-sharing reductions that lower deductibles are only available to health exchange members with silver plans.

More than 2 million people with coverage on the health insurance exchanges may be missing out on subsidies that could lower their deductibles, copayments and maximum out-of-pocket spending limits, according to a new analysis by Avalere Health.

Those who may be missing out are people with incomes between 100 and 250% of the federal poverty level ($11,770 to $29,425). Under the health law, people at those income levels are eligible for cost-sharing reductions that can substantially reduce their out-of-pocket costs. But there’s a catch: the reductions are only available to people who buy a silver-level plan.

(Cost-sharing reductions are a different type of subsidy than the premium tax credits that are available to people with incomes up to 400% of the poverty level regardless of the type of plan they buy.)

In its analysis of exchange income data for those enrolled in the health insurance marketplaces in 2015, Avalere found that 8.1 million individuals with this coverage had income levels that should have qualified them for cost-sharing reductions. But only 5.9 million received the reductions, which are automatically applied if people enroll in silver-level plans.

Some of those who were eligible probably bought cheaper bronze-level plans, says Elizabeth Carpenter, a vice president at Avalere.

“Surveys show that people shop for plans based on premiums,” Carpenter says. “But if somebody forgoes cost-sharing reductions in order to pay a lower monthly premium and then has an unexpected accident or illness, their out-of-pocket exposure is likely to be higher.”

Silver plans pay 70% of medical costs, on average, while bronze plans pay 60%.

Consumers with a silver plan are thus responsible for paying 30% of their medical costs in deductibles and copayments or coinsurance, up to a maximum of $6,600 for an individual and $13,200 for a family in 2015. Cost-sharing reduction subsidies reduce those out-of-pocket costs. People with incomes that are 150% of the federal poverty level or less are on the hook for no more than 6% of their costs (instead of 30%); those with incomes up to 200% of poverty pay no more than 13%; and those with incomes up to 250% pay 27% at most. Consumers who are eligible for cost-sharing reductions also have lower maximum out-of-pocket spending limits.

In 2015, a standard silver plan has a $2,556 average annual deductible for medical and drug costs for single coverage on the federal exchange, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis. (KHN is an editorially independent program of the foundation.) Cost-sharing reductions would cut the average deductible to $2,077 for someone whose income was between 200 and 250% of poverty, and to $737 for someone whose income was between 150 to 200% of poverty. Someone whose income was 150% of poverty or lower would have a deductible of just $229 for a silver plan.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a nonprofit national health policy news service.

MONEY Health Care

What You’ll Have to Pay for ‘Female Viagra’

A tablet of flibanserin female viagra
Allen G. Breed—AP A tablet of flibanserin

The answer is, it depends

On Tuesday the Food and Drug Administration approved Addyi, the first sexual dysfunction drug for women. Questions remain about the drug’s side effects and risks. But if it works well, will it be affordable for most women?

Sprout CEO Cindy Whitehead said that while the cost of Addyi has not been finalized, it should be priced similarly to a month of Viagra pills. GoodRx, a drug cost comparison site, found that the average fair cash price for Viagra is around $400 a month. However, Whitehead expected that patients with insurance coverage would only need to pay about $30 to $75 a month in copays.

That’s the amount most Americans currently pay for non-generic prescription drugs. Virtually all job-based health plans have prescription drug benefits with a “formulary,” or a list of which drugs are covered and which are not. Most drug formularies have more than one tier, which means that some drugs require a higher co-pay or co-insurance rate than others, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. For formularies with just two tiers, the average co-pay for first-tier drugs like generics is just $11, while more specialized second-tier drugs go up to $30. On plans with four or more pricing levels, the most expensive average co-pay is $80.

That said, it’s not yet known whether all insurers will cover Addyi. For men seeking erectile-dysfunction medication, some insurers require evidence of a documented medical condition or refuse to cover certain drugs, according to the Cleveland Clinic. For instance, starting next year, CVS/Caremark will remove Viagra and Levitra from its formulary (though Cialis will still be available). Plus, those over 65 are often out of luck: By law, Medicare Part D is prohibited from paying for erectile dysfunction drugs.

MONEY Medicare

Medicare Wants Doctors to Get Paid to Discuss End-Of-Life Issues

The government is accepting public comments on the proposal and will make a decision in November.

Remember the so-called death panels?

When Congress debated the Affordable Care Act in 2009, the legislation originally included a provision that would have allowed Medicare to reimburse doctors when they meet with patients to talk about end-of-life care.

But then Sarah Palin argued that such payments would lead to care being withheld from the elderly and disabled. Her comment ignited a firestorm among conservatives and helped fuel the opposition to the legislation.

Her assertions greatly distressed Dr. Pamelyn Close, a palliative care specialist in Los Angeles.

“It did terrible damage to the concept of having this conversation,” she said.

Amid the ensuing political uproar, Congress deleted the provision. And the lack of payments and concerns about the controversy further discouraged doctors from initiating these talks, according to Close.

“We just are not having these conversations often enough and soon enough,” Close said. “Loved ones who are trying to do always the right thing, end up being weighed with tremendous guilt and tremendous uncertainty without having had that conversation.”

When done right, according to Close, these counseling sessions often delve into end-of-life treatment options and legal documents, such as advance directives and living wills. The issues to be covered are complex and typically require a series of discussions.

Right now, Medicare only pays doctors for this sort of advanced care planning if it happens during the first visit for new Medicare enrollees. But the government recently has again proposed that Medicare reimburse doctors for including these conversations in their practice, whenever they occur.

Already, some private insurance companies are starting to do just that.

Read next: How Medicare’s New Rules May Improve Eldercare Benefits

Meanwhile, the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian organization, has formally opposed Medicare’s proposal.

“By paying doctors for these conversations, what we’re doing is opening the door to directive counseling and coercion,” said Catherine Glenn Foster, an attorney with the group. Foster says her organization supports end-of-life counseling and planning, but not in a doctor’s office.

“A doctor is not really the person you’d want to be having it with – particularly not a general practitioner who would not be able to advise on the nuances of end-of-life care in the first place,” she says.

But patients seem to want these talks. A 2012 study by the California HealthCare Foundation found that 80 percent of Californians would like to have an end-of-life conversation with their physician, but fewer than one in 10 has done so.

Many doctors who initiate the discussions often do so on their own dime. More often, they don’t have them at all, said Dr. Daniel Stone, an internist with Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.

“When a doctor has patients scheduled every 15 minutes, it’s difficult to have a face-to-face conversation about values and goals related to the end of life, which is one of the most sensitive topics that you can possibly discuss with a patient,” Stone said.

Dr. Susan Tolle, an internist with the Center for Ethics in Health Care at the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, says the informality with which such conversations are held now means that family members may not be included. Having the discussion as part of a formal doctor’s appointment can change that, she said.

“What it does is, it gives this really important conversation dignity and standing,” she said.

In Oregon, doctors have been squeezing end-of-life discussions into regular medical appointments for decades, under less-than-ideal circumstances. Over the last five years a quarter of a million Oregonians filed their wishes with a state registry. They use what’s known as a POLST form, which stands for Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment. A version of it has been adopted by some other states, including New York and West Virginia.

Jo Ann Farwell, a retired Portland social worker who was recently diagnosed with a brain tumor, completed the form after talking to her doctor.

“I had surgery and had a prognosis of four to six months to live,” she said, after she was diagnosed with a brain tumor.

She did it, she said, to make sure her last hours are as comfortable as possible.

“I wouldn’t want to be on tube-feeding,” she said. “I wouldn’t want to be resuscitated, or have mechanical ventilation, because that would probably prolong my dying, rather than giving me quality of life.”

In the 1990s, health care workers all over Oregon recognized that the wishes of patients weren’t being consistently followed. So the health care establishment worked with the state and with ethicists to prioritize end-of-life talks; the result was the POLST form.

Rep. Earl Blumenauer, a Democrat from Portland, has introduced the Medicare reimbursement legislation every session since 2009. Until now, he says, the federal government hasn’t placed any value on helping people prepare for death, and he finds that ironic.

“The Medicare program will pay for literally thousands of medical procedures, many of them very expensive and complex, even if the person is at the latest stage of life and it may not do any good,” Blumenauer says.

From a purely financial point of view, the change could save money. But Blumenauer says that’s not what’s driving him.

“I don’t care what people decide,” he says. “If they want to die in an ICU with tubes up their nose, that’s their choice. What we want is that people know what their choices are.”

Farwell, the brain tumor patient, well remembers when her sister was dying from cancer.

“She never talked about death or dying,” Farwell said, “never talked about what she wanted at the end. It was very, very difficult for me to try to plan and give her care.”

Farwell wants her sons to be in a better position when it comes to carrying out her wishes.

The federal government is now accepting public comment on the Medicare reimbursement proposal. It’s expected to make a decision in November.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a nonprofit national health policy news service.

TIME Health Care

Arkansas to End Medicaid Payments to Planned Parenthood

Asa Hutchinson
Danny Johnston—AP Gov. Asa Hutchinson speaks at a news conference at the Arkansas state Capitol in Little Rock, Ark. onAug. 4, 2015.

"This organization does not represent the values of the people of our state," the governor said

(LITTLE ROCK, Ark.)—Arkansas is ending its Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson said Friday, despite warnings federal officials have given other states that such a move could violate the law.

Hutchinson ordered the Arkansas Department of Human Services to terminate its Medicaid provider contract with the organization in 30 days. The move came in response to secretly recorded videos released by an anti-abortion group showing Planned Parenthood officials describing how they provide fetal tissue from abortions for medical research.

“It is apparent that after the recent revelations on the actions of Planned Parenthood, that this organization does not represent the values of the people of our state and Arkansas is better served by terminating any and all existing contracts with them,” Hutchinson said in a statement.

Planned Parenthood received more than $51,000 in Medicaid payments in Arkansas over the past fiscal year for family planning and gynecological services. None of the money went toward abortions, Arkansas Department of Human Services spokeswoman Amy Webb said.

Independent state Rep. Nate Bell, who chairs the Arkansas House State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee, sent a letter to Hutchinson Thursday asking the governor to terminate the contract. Hutchinson said he’s received a similar request from other state lawmakers, including Republican Sen. Eddie Joe Williams, who chairs the Senate committee, and Republican Rep. David Meeks of Conway.

Hutchinson announced the move just a couple of hours after telling reporters he was reviewing the lawmakers’ requests. He told reporters he was “very troubled” by the videos.

Alabama and Louisiana earlier this month announced they were ending Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood, a move that prompted a warning from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that it could violate federal law.

“Longstanding Medicaid laws prohibit states from restricting individuals who have coverage through Medicaid from receiving care from a qualified provider,” Lori Lodes, spokeswoman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said in an email before Hutchinson’s announcement. “By restricting which provider a woman could choose to receive care from, women could lose access to critical preventive care, such as cancer screenings.”

Louisiana officials have argued the move doesn’t violate federal law because other Medicaid providers offer the same services as Planned Parenthood.

Hutchinson’s office said the governor was confident in the legal basis for the decision, saying the contract allows the state to terminate it with 30 days’ notice.

“Even though we anticipate a federal review and scrutiny, standing up for Arkansas values is most important to the governor,” spokesman J.R. Davis said.

Hutchinson earlier this year signed into law a measure prohibiting public funding to abortion providers and entities that refer women to abortion providers, a move aimed at blocking any money to Planned Parenthood. The new law, however, did not apply to Medicaid funding. The organization had previously received money for sex education funding.

Republicans around the country have targeted Planned Parenthood after several videos were released by the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress.

The center said the videos showed Planned Parenthood illegally sells fetal tissue for profit. Planned Parenthood said the organization receives legal payment only for the cost of the procedure and requires a mother’s consent before the tissue is given to researchers.

Planned Parenthood said it believed the move by Hutchinson and the other states is “clearly a violation of the Medicaid statute that requires that a woman have her choice among qualified providers.”

“This political grandstanding could have real and devastating consequences for women who rely on Planned Parenthood for birth control, cancer screenings, STD tests and other lifesaving care,” Angie Remington, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of the Heartland, said in a statement.

MONEY Health Care

Online Doctor Visits Are Set to Surge

97970472
Martin Barraud—Getty Images

3 out of 4 large employers surveyed said they will offer telehealth options in 2016.

When the great summer cold hit my family, we hunkered down with soup, tissues and TV. But then my cough started to sound more worrisome.

Too weary to spend a chunk of my day trooping off to the nearest urgent care center or my primary care physician, I fired up my computer and saw a physician online.

Signing up with Doctor on Demand took only a few clicks. Less than half an hour later, prescriptions were waiting for me at my pharmacy.

According to a study released on Wednesday by the National Business Group on Health (NBGH), online doctor visits are going to skyrocket in the coming year. Last year, 48% of 140 large employers surveyed by NBGH made telehealth options available. In 2016, that number will jump to 74%.

It is part of a booming industry that is attracting venture capital and is expected to save U.S. companies more than $6 billion a year in healthcare costs, according to consultant Towers Watson.

You do not have to wait for your employer or insurance company to provide virtual doctor visits – major telehealth providers such as American Well, Doctor on Demand, MD Live and Teladoc offer on-demand services for about $40 to $50 for a 15-minute session.

“Telehealth can become an extension of primary care to free up physicians to focus on more complicated issues,” said Brian Marcotte, president and chief executive of NBGH, whose website describes it as a “non-profit organization devoted exclusively to representing large employers’ perspective on national health policy issues.”

Taking Hold

Companies that offer telehealth services to employees report 12% adoption rates, according to the NBGH survey. About half of companies offer services through their health plan, while 22% contract directly with a vendor.

With annual healthcare spending increases holding steady at around 6%, telehealth is one of the measures used by companies to cut costs without having to increase employee premiums or cost-sharing, Marcotte added.

Telehealth providers are reporting tremendous growth. American Well, for instance, pegs its growth at 1,100% in 2014 over 2013 and is going strong in 2015 so far, according to Chief Executive Roy Schoenberg. Patient visits at Teladoc grew to 299,000 in 2014, from 127,000 in 2013, according to company documents. The company’s current reach is 100 million people.

“This is becoming mainstream is every way,” said Schoenberg.

For consumers, the experience is akin to going to urgent care facility for minor conditions such as sinus infections and rashes.

Karen Corrigan, a consultant from Norfolk, Virginia, first used a telehealth service about a year ago, after coming home late on a Friday night from a business trip feeling as if she had bronchitis. “We had seen a commercial or something. I just went online and searched,” she said.

Since then, the 61-year-old has only used telehealth services when she already knows what she has. “Obviously, if something more serious was coming on, I’d go to urgent care, or get a new physician,” Corrigan said.

Diagnostics tools for physical exams at home are, however, limited. For my own online visit, the doctor had me say “ah” to the webcam; it was rudimentary at best. And while the online doc prescribed heavy-duty medicines, at a comparative visit to urgent care, the in-person doc told me it was just a virus and to go home and rest.

“About half of our visits will result in an RX. In an offline setting, it’s usually in the 70% range,” said Doctor on Demand Chief Executive Adam Jackson. “The doctors in the urgent care are the same ones we’re staffing.”

Advances are coming for home diagnostic tools but are not readily available yet. Some offices and retail clinics have telehealth kiosks, which have devices such as web-connected blood pressure cuffs and stethoscopes, along with video screens. Doctor on Demand has a partnership with Wegman’s pharmacies, for instance.

TIME Health Care

Nearly 90% of Americans Now Have Health Insurance

TIME.com stock photos Health First Aid Kit
Elizabeth Renstrom for TIME

Rates of uninsured Americans has dropped in the first three months of 2015

The number of uninsured Americans has continued to decrease in 2015, according to new federal data released Wednesday.

According to a new report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics, in the first three months of 2015, 29 million Americans were uninsured, which is down 7 million from 2014. For adults between the ages of 18 to 64, the uninsured rate dropped from 16.3% in 2014 to 13% from January to March 2015.

Among people under the age 65, the researchers found that the percentage of people with private insurance coverage through the Health Insurance Marketplace or state-based exchanges increased from 6.7 million in the last 3 months of 2014 to 9.7 million in the first 3 months of 2015.

Overall, from January through March, the percentage of people in the U.S. who were uninsured was 9.2%. During that time period, adults ages 25 to 34 were twice as likely as adults between ages 45 to 64 to not have health insurance coverage.

The researchers note that since 2013, the greatest declines in the number of uninsured Americans were among adults who were poor (family income below poverty threshold) or near-poor.

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com