Big Medicine is about to make pregnancy more expensive



The American Medical Association is overhauling the way doctors bill for pregnancy care. Anyone who cares about families should be alarmed.

The AMA says the new model promotes accuracy and modern care. Nice slogan. For millions of American families already struggling with rising costs, it looks more like an unelected lobbying organization has found a way to make having children even more expensive.

Policymakers cannot allow the AMA to blow up the current system at the expense of families.

Starting January 1, 2027, the long-standing global maternity payment will be replaced with a more complicated system that bills pregnancy, labor, delivery, and postpartum care in pieces. Instead of treating pregnancy as a single episode of care, the new structure lets providers bill separately for visits and services.

But pregnancy is not a menu where mothers pick one item from column A and one from column B. It is a coordinated journey that should be managed as a whole. A bundled payment system rewards providers for delivering care efficiently and effectively. An unbundled framework rewards the accumulation of billable moments.

For many couples, the question is no longer whether they want children. It is whether they can afford them. Now one of the most expensive moments in family life could become even more expensive.

The AMA controls the billing codes — those five-digit numbers patients see on medical receipts. The codes tell insurance companies what providers did so they can get paid. Moving pregnancy from one bundled code to many separate codes pushes maternity care toward a fee-for-service model. That model incentivizes more services and more fees.

Federal watchdogs have warned for years that fragmented billing creates openings for abuse. The Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General investigates billing practices and often identifies coding and billing integrity problems.

In one audit, the inspector general found that Medicare made up to $17.8 million in potentially improper payments tied to complicated coding and other billing problems in opioid treatment programs. Different specialty. Same lesson. When payment systems get sliced up or loosely controlled, waste, fraud, and abuse follow.

RELATED: The right to life cannot depend on a baby’s zip code

Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

Pregnant women and their families get stuck with the bill. Patient advocates already warn that the new system could mean higher out-of-pocket costs.

Policymakers moved toward bundled payments for maternity care because the model had the potential to lower costs and improve quality. Bundling can discourage unnecessary cesarean sections, which cost significantly more than vaginal births, carry greater risks for mothers and babies, and require longer recovery times.

When payment incentives reward more services rather than better outcomes, families can face higher medical bills, extra recovery time, more follow-up visits, and increased child-care costs.

The policy question is not whether every provider will abuse the system. It is whether Washington should allow a system that makes abuse easier and family life more expensive.

This billing-code change is landing at exactly the wrong moment. The United States recorded its lowest fertility rate ever in 2024. If conservative policymakers are serious about family formation, they should not tolerate the AMA worsening one of the most expensive and stressful experiences in American life.

As the father of a large family, I know firsthand that having children in America is not for the faint of heart. Every new baby is a blessing. Every parent also knows the bills come fast.

Policymakers cannot allow the AMA to blow up the current system at the expense of families. American families will notice when the bills multiply and the care journey is less coordinated. We cannot allow another elite institution to call this progress while ordinary Americans pay more for the privilege of bringing a child into the world and pursuing the American dream.

The Bill For Medicare Insolvency Is Coming Due, And It’s Not Pretty

The Social Security and Medicare trust funds incurred a net of over $132 billion in losses in 2025 — losses that will only grow in future years.

JD Vance is ending the Medicaid gravy train



The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may have just signaled the beginning of the end for one of California’s most aggressive Medicaid financing schemes.

In late May, CMS proposed a rule that would limit many Medicaid payment arrangements to Medicare-equivalent reimbursement levels while targeting the financing mechanisms that shift excessive costs onto federal taxpayers.

The more states spend, the more federal money they receive.

The proposal specifically highlights intergovernmental transfers and similar arrangements that have allowed states to inflate federal reimbursement claims.

This rule comes as California health officials are asking CMS to approve a set of pending state plan amendments that would further expand reimbursement arrangements built around intergovernmental transfers — the very type of financing mechanism now facing increased scrutiny from federal regulators.

For years, states have exploited these loopholes in Medicaid’s financing rules to draw down more money from Washington. CMS now appears ready to put some limits on that practice.

Vice President JD Vance and CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz deserve credit for cracking down on these kinds of abuses. Vance said the administration is withholding $1.3 billion in Medicaid reimbursements from California because the state does “not take Medicaid fraud very seriously.”

Oz warned that states have exploited “the cracks and crevices” between state and federal systems — describing California as a member of the “varsity team” of fraud alongside Massachusetts and New York.

The proposed rule makes the fate of California’s pending SPAs clear: They cannot survive. Approving them would directly contradict a rule CMS has already put forward, expanding the exact reimbursement scheme the agency has identified as a threat to Medicaid program integrity.

The only question now is whether CMS will formalize what its own rulemaking has already decided.

At the center of the IGT problem is Medicaid’s open-ended reimbursement structure. States spend money, and the federal government reimburses a percentage of those expenditures. Public entities recycle funds through multiple agencies to trigger larger federal Medicaid matching payments.

The more states spend, the more federal money they receive.

These arrangements may technically comply with federal rules, but they function as financial engineering schemes rather than legitimate health care financing. Medicaid was designed to fund health care for vulnerable Americans, not maximize revenue for governments and health care bureaucracies.

California’s ambulance reimbursement system provides a textbook example of the kind of payment arrangement CMS now appears determined to rein in.

RELATED: Trump’s next bill needs tax relief with teeth

Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Under current rules, a public fire district can hold an emergency medical services franchise while subcontracting the actual ambulance operations to a private company.

Even though the private contractor performs the transport itself, the public entity can still bill Medi-Cal at the elevated IGT reimbursement rate — around $1,168 per transport in 2024, with a proposed increase to nearly $1,600.

If that same private ambulance provider billed Medi-Cal directly, that $1,600 would become roughly $339 under the standard fee schedule.

Federal taxpayers are therefore paying nearly five times the normal reimbursement rate for operationally identical services, simply because the billing structure has been routed through a government intermediary eligible for enhanced federal matching funds. For ACA expansion enrollees, a large share of Medi-Cal, Washington covers 90% of that already inflated cost.

The fire district keeps the difference between the inflated Medi-Cal reimbursement and the private contractor’s actual operating payment. Taxpayers finance the excess.

Unlike these existing payment arrangements that may eventually be required to conform to the new federal standards, California’s pending ambulance SPAs have not yet been approved. Federal regulators should not authorize an expansion of a reimbursement model they have already identified as inconsistent with Medicaid’s future direction.

CMS has now made clear that payment arrangements built around inflated reimbursement rates, intergovernmental transfers, and excessive federal matching dollars are no longer business as usual. States have been put on notice.

California’s pending ambulance SPAs should be among the first tests of whether the agency intends to enforce the principles it has now announced. If CMS truly believes Medicaid exists to fund patient care rather than reimbursement gamesmanship, these proposals should not survive review.

Democrats Object To New Medicaid Rule Requiring Able Adults To Work A Bare Minimum

The law should encourage able adults receiving taxpayer-funded benefits to contribute to the community while advancing their own self-sufficiency, and the new Medicaid rule does just that.

Ending Fraud Is Great But It’s Not Enough To Fix Medicare Insolvency

Washington policymakers can no longer ignore the mounting challenge of federal entitlements, especially Medicare.

Washington’s fraud machine needs handcuffs, not more hearings



Every government form I sign contains some variation of the same warning: “I certify that the information provided is true and correct.” “False statements may result in civil penalties.” “Federal charges may apply.”

I have been signing forms like that since Ronald Reagan was president.

Americans do not need another report telling them what everyone already knows. They need accountability.

For 40 years, I have managed a medical catastrophe. My wife has endured nearly 100 surgeries, multiple amputations, years of hospitalization, and enough insurance claims and medical bills to wallpaper a house. Over those four decades, I learned something millions of family caregivers understand all too well: You don’t respect what you don’t inspect.

Long before smartphones, electronic records, and artificial intelligence, I sat at kitchen tables with a pencil, a calculator, and a telephone, combing through Explanation of Benefits forms, hospital bills, physician statements, pharmacy charges, and insurance claims. I have argued with surgeons, hospital administrators, insurance executives, case managers, billing departments, and just about everyone in between. I have won all but two of those arguments because if I did not, my wife paid the price. The consequences of their mistakes landed in my living room.

When your loved one’s health and financial survival hang in the balance, you learn to confront, challenge, and stay in the room long after everyone else wishes you would leave. That is what advocates do. That is what skin in the game looks like.

Imagine if our elected advocates approached their responsibilities with even a fraction of that urgency.

As America approaches its 250th birthday, we are preparing celebrations, restoring monuments, and planning fireworks displays. That’s fine. I enjoy fireworks as much as anyone. But the colonists did not risk everything over fireworks. The Stamp Act was never merely about stamps. It was about accountability. It was about whether government could impose burdens on citizens while remaining insulated from the consequences of those burdens.

RELATED: Mercedes, Bentley, and McLaren cars seized in BUST of $30 million Medicaid fraud scheme, feds say

CHUYN/iStock/Getty Images

Two hundred and 50 years later, that question remains painfully relevant.

More than 65 million Americans serve as family caregivers. Together, they provide an estimated $1.2 trillion in unpaid care each year. They keep loved ones out of institutions, reduce burdens on taxpayers, and shoulder responsibilities that would overwhelm many public systems. We do not have lobbyists. We do not have communications directors. We have kitchen tables covered with bills. We have loved ones whose lives depend on us showing up again tomorrow.

Then, we turn on the news. We see stories of fraud. We see agencies unable to account for money. We see programs consuming billions with little to show for it but waste. We see officials preside over failure and retire comfortably while ordinary Americans are left holding the bill.

In “The Dark Knight,” the Joker tells Batman, “It’s all part of the plan.” After enough years of watching obvious failures produce little accountability, cynicism begins to sound less like paranoia and more like experience.

Finding fraud matters. But merely finding it is not enough.

If I discovered an error in a medical bill and nobody corrected it, the problem remained. If I identified the source of a problem and nobody addressed it, all I had really done was document my frustration. At some point, discovery without consequence becomes theater.

Americans have watched report after report, audit after audit, investigation after investigation. Fraud was found. Good. Now what?

Finding fraud is important. Arresting fraudsters is important. But accountability also requires asking who ignored it, who enabled it, who benefited from it, and who failed to stop it.

And if those people occupied positions of authority, what consequences do they face? Loss of office? Loss of contracts? Public accountability? Criminal prosecution where warranted? Or do they simply move on while the public absorbs the cost?

Otherwise, we’re not fixing a system. We’re simply rotating villains.

The average American lives under penalty of perjury. Every form I sign reminds me of it. If I knowingly misrepresent information, consequences follow. Why should the people entrusted with billions of taxpayer dollars operate under a lower standard than the citizens paying the bills?

If fraud occurred, prosecute the people responsible and name names. If someone knowingly violated the public trust, identify him and hold him accountable. Not for revenge. For stewardship.

I write this while undergoing cancer treatment. At the same time, I am still caring for a woman who has spent four decades battling catastrophic disability. If I sound impatient with waste, fraud, and excuses, it is because I have spent too much of my life paying for other people’s mistakes.

RELATED: Minnesota fraudsters fined millions of dollars — but report finds many don't pay and get released anyway

DNY59/iStock/Getty Images

Millions of caregivers know exactly what I mean. We are tired in a way that is difficult to explain to people who have never lived this life. Staying outraged takes more energy than most caregivers can afford. But we are paying attention.

Scripture says, “When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan” (Proverbs 29:2).

There is a lot of groaning in this country. I hear it in hospital waiting rooms. I hear it in caregiver support groups. I hear it from people staring at medical bills long after midnight.

Americans do not need another report telling them what everyone already knows. They need accountability. They need leaders willing to impose upon government the same standards government imposes upon them.

For too long, the consequences of government failure have been borne by the wrong people. It is time for accountability to land somewhere else.

House Committee Hearing Exposes Ohio As Yet Another State Where Foreigner Fraud Runs Rampant

One Bhutanese family may have made around 10% of Bhutan's GDP by defrauding United States taxpayers, according to testimony in a House Oversight Committee task force.

Newsom would rather pick fights than fix California’s fraud problem



California is being ripped off. The state is losing billions of dollars to fraudsters every year, and the state’s leaders have done too little to stop them.

While California’s population has dropped since 2020, Medi-Cal spending has doubled over the same time frame. How is this even possible? One reason is that per initial federal estimates, one out of every four Medi-Cal dollars is lost to fraud, for a whopping $50 billion in losses per year. This is an amount larger than the entire economy of some states.

If federal estimates are correct, the state has lost some $200 billion to Medi-Cal fraud under Governor Newsom, not to mention other kinds of fraud using taxpayer dollars.

The federal government must ensure that federal funding will be spent wisely by the states, not lost to fraudsters.

In California alone, federal auditors have found 1.2 million ineligible individuals on Medicaid, with another 3.2 million enrollees found to be potentially ineligible.

Auditors have flagged hundreds of thousands of individuals who were enrolled in Medicaid in multiple states at the same time — many of whom were flagged for fake or stolen Social Security numbers. Even worse, hundreds of millions of Medicaid dollars have funded benefits for the deceased.

Fortunately, the Trump administration is taking on fraudsters like no administration in American history and holding California’s leaders accountable. Earlier this year, the White House announced it would withhold roughly $10 billion in federal funding from five states, including California, until they make reasonable plans for reducing fraud.

This step is absolutely necessary: The federal government must ensure that federal funding will be spent wisely by the states, not lost to fraudsters.

Remarkably, Governor Newsom’s response has been to attack the Trump administration for its anti-fraud efforts and even blame President Trump for California’s carelessness and laxity toward criminals, all while casting himself as an anti-fraud champion.

This tactic might play well on Bluesky, but it is completely divorced from the facts and does nothing to solve the very real problem of taxpayer dollars being stolen.

Unless the governor gets serious, California taxpayers could end up paying an even higher price as soon as President Trump’s new welfare reform law goes into effect. The president’s new law requires states to clean up their rolls and reduce improper payments or risk losing the share of the federal dollars that support Medicaid.

RELATED: The Trump administration is cracking down on fraud

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

With these shocking rates of waste, fraud, and abuse, California could lose a large amount of federal funding while it continues to bleed billions of dollars to fraudsters. California has wisely had a balanced budget amendment to the state constitution for more than a century, but this means that every dollar lost to fraud is a dollar taken away from other priorities.

California can’t just print money. Fraudsters are stealing directly out of taxpayers’ pockets, and right now they are doing so on a massive scale.

The good news is that there is a common-sense solution on the table right now in the State Assembly. Republican Assemblywoman Alexandra Macedo has introduced the Protect the Promise Act to help California reduce Medicaid fraud and lower the state’s improper payment rate.

The bill would simply require more eligibility checks using more data. For example, it would require officials to cross-check Medi-Cal enrollment data with federal Medicaid enrollment data to ensure that people aren’t enrolling in multiple states, which is illegal. It would require the state to take immediate action when discrepancies are found.

The bill wouldn’t affect Medi-Cal benefits in the slightest. But by dramatically slashing payments to ineligible people, it could save Californians billions of dollars by reducing fraud and preventing a loss of federal funds. In a balanced-budget state like California, this would free up more resources for other priorities.

Medi-Cal was started to help Californians in need — not to enrich fraudsters with Californians’ hard-earned tax dollars. It is time for the state’s leaders to end the fraud crisis and finally protect the promise for the truly needy. Otherwise, Californians will pay a high price — one that is only getting higher.

America’s fiscal fire will not put itself out



There is an old admonition, courtesy of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, that no one has the right to falsely shout “fire” in a crowded theater and cause a panic. The abused part of that line is obvious. The neglected part is just as important: When the danger is real, responsible people do not stay silent. They sound the alarm before the smoke fills the room and the flames become impossible to ignore.

That is where the United States is today.

The fire may not yet be visible to everyone, but it is already burning. Recognizing it is the first step. Acting on it is the next.

Our nation’s fiscal condition poses a real and growing threat, and pretending otherwise will only make the consequences more severe.

And I am shouting fire.

Washington’s overspending has produced a federal debt that is plainly unsustainable. Interest-bearing debt alone now exceeds $39 trillion and climbs higher each year by trillions of dollars. Add unfunded commitments for Social Security and Medicare, and the total burden rises to more than $136 trillion, a number so large that it barely registers. Spread across the population, the liability amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars for every American.

According to projections from the Congressional Budget Office, the debt will exceed $63 trillion within 10 years. In less than a decade, the trust funds supporting major entitlement programs are expected to be depleted, requiring by law major cuts in benefits. The federal government can continue on this path only by borrowing more, which compounds the problem, or by printing money, which courts hyperinflation. That cycle cannot continue indefinitely.

The government itself acknowledges this reality in plain language. Its own financial reports describe the current fiscal path as “unsustainable.” That word means the system, as currently constructed, will not endure. At some point, the burden becomes too great and the consequences grow severe. It will make the Great Depression seem mild. That is the future awaiting a nation that continues to spend far beyond its means.

This situation did not arise overnight, nor can it be blamed on one party or one generation. It is the product of years of decisions in which immediate political gain took precedence over long-term stability.

Voters were promised benefits, often framed as cost-free, while the real price was pushed into the future. Little by little, we have been mortgaging tomorrow until soon there may be nothing left to mortgage.

The good news is that the method of putting out this fire is no mystery. The principles required to restore stability are well understood and have repeatedly proven themselves in practice. Limited government, restrained spending, and less federal intrusion into our lives remain the foundation of long-term prosperity.

RELATED: Jerome Powell is out — for good reason. Here are 4 of his top blunders.

Samuel Corum/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Reform must begin with the biggest drivers of future debt. Entitlement programs must be strengthened for the long term, not ignored for short-term political convenience. That does not require cutting benefits for current recipients, but it does require thoughtful reforms to keep those programs viable for future generations.

At the same time, the scope of the federal government should be reconsidered with renewed respect for constitutional limits.

America’s founders envisioned a system of limited federal powers and reinforced that design in the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not specifically granted to the national government to the states or the people. A more disciplined understanding of federal responsibility would not only reduce costs, but also strengthen accountability and preserve liberty.

Examples around the world show that nations can confront fiscal crisis and begin to recover through disciplined economic policy. Each country’s circumstances differ, but the lesson is consistent: When governments commit to sound principles and follow through, better outcomes follow.

The United States still possesses enormous strengths, including a dynamic economy, innovative capacity, and a resilient people. Those advantages give us a window to address this problem before it reaches the breaking point. But that window will not remain open forever.

Ultimately, the responsibility does not rest only with elected officials. It rests with the public that sends them to Washington. An informed electorate that understands the stakes and demands accountability can still change the country’s course. The challenge is serious, but it is not beyond our ability to meet.

The fire may not yet be visible to everyone, but it is already burning. Recognizing it is the first step. Acting on it is the next. The future will be shaped by whether we confront this danger now or keep looking away until the consequences can no longer be avoided.

Here’s Why Your Hospital Bills Are So Big — And Why Congress Doesn’t Care

If the right and left agree on reining in hospitals’ abusive tactics, then why hasn’t Congress acted?