AEI resident fellow JD Kleinke, an expert on health care business strategy and entrepreneurship offers a fresh perspective on the recent fracas over insurance mandates to cover contraception.

The dirty little secret of American healthcare is that the mandate wouldn’t save taxpayers a dime. Why? Because the tax subsidies for people with health insurance are bigger than the unpaid medical bills left behind by the uninsured.

Whether or not the individual mandate in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) proves to be constitutionally valid, it is based on mistaken premises, faulty economic analysis, short-sighted politics, and seriously flawed health policy.

We estimate that a family affordability rule could initially lead to as many as 1.3 million more workers accessing exchange subsidies for themselves and their families than under a single affordability rule. If employees pay 50 percent of the premiums in the future, this number increases to 6 million.

Repeal of the current health law is a necessary, but not a sufficient, part of fixing our health care system. A credible “replace” proposal needs to deal with a number of important issues.

AEI health policy scholar discusses the pressures of rising costs on employer-provided health care.

Among many matters being discussed in the debate over the debt limit are proposals to reform health insurance policies used to supplement Medicare, such as so-called Medigap plans. Such reforms reportedly could save $53 billion over ten years.

As part of the American Enterprise Institute project, Beyond "Repeal and Replace": Ideas for Real Health Reform, health policy analysts James C. Capretta and Thomas P. Miller observe that the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act does little, if anything, to break with these longstanding policy problems.