James C. Capretta

As more taxpayers and beneficiaries come to understand the full implications of “indexing” provisions in the Affordable Care Act, pressure will build to make significant adjustments to them. The result could be much higher spending and lower revenue than originally forecast by the Congressional Budget Office.

Jeb Bush has offered a health care plan that the electorate will find preferable to the government-centric focus of Obamacare.

President Reagan would never have proposed something so transparently infeasible as the tax plan of Donald Trump.

Hillary Clinton paved the way for Obamacare with the plan she pushed as first lady in 1993 and 1994. If elected, she will “build upon” Obamacare with more government control.

Polls right now aren’t screening out the candidates who would have no chance of ever winning the 2016 presidential election. But that time will come.

There’s a lot not to like about the “Cadillac tax” in Obamacare. But the GOP shouldn’t repeal it without replacing it with something more sensible.

States should move forward with Medicaid and other reforms that demonstrate what would be possible without excessive federal interference and control.

A report arguing that Nebraska should chart a new and better course for the Medicaid program by proceeding with reforms on two tracks.

Ezekiel Emanuel is wrong that the health-care reform plans offered by Scott Walker and Marco Rubio would result in much higher premiums for the middle class.

Both the Walker and Rubio plans for health care are based on the view that health care in the United States will be better, of higher quality, and less costly if important decisions are left with consumers, employers, and the states.

It will not be enough for the Republican candidates to issue general denunciations of the ACA. They must explain clearly why it is misguided and what they would do instead.

Critics are pouncing on Jeb Bush for saying Medicare needs reform. But his position is in the political mainstream, and correct.