Under the leadership of Mehmet Oz, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, is seeking to heavily restrict traditional Medicare enrollees’ use of remote monitoring devices for their health conditions. A proposed rule would eliminate coverage for these services unless the service is provided at a physician’s office. This rule would particularly hurt enrollees who have difficulty traveling to in-person appointments, such as rural seniors. And it would undercut a key Republican effort to alleviate the harms of last year’s “big, beautiful bill.”

Remote monitoring programs allow patients to collect their health data themselves (such as taking their own blood pressure, oxygen levels or blood sugar) and transmit the data to healthcare providers, who can use the information to help manage the patient’s health. These programs aren’t just convenient; they make it easier to proactively manage chronic diseases before there is an emergency. Patients and providers don’t have to rely on a single data point at a scheduled appointment or waiting until the condition worsens.

Where the HHS inspector general suggested a scalpel, CMS would use a hammer.

Consequently, reliance on remote monitoring has expanded in recent years. Almost 1 million Medicare enrollees received it in 2024 alone. Remote monitoring has proved particularly valuable to those who have chronic medical conditions but face obstacles to in-person appointments. For instance, residents in rural communities and areas with shortages of health professionals don’t need to travel long distances for appointments as frequently. Transportation is a critical social determinant of health, and if one has poor vision or limited mobility, in-person appointments are especially challenging.

To justify the new restrictions, the CMS cites a 2025 report by the Department of Health and Human Services’ inspector general. Those findings raised concerns about suspicious billing practices and patients not receiving treatment. But the report called for a measured approach: closer monitoring of billing while preserving Medicare enrollees’ ability to benefit from this program. CMS would go much further: Because most medical practices lack the bandwidth to launch and oversee their own remote monitoring programs, requiring the service to be provided by someone at a physician’s office practically eliminates the benefit. In short, where the HHS inspector general suggested a scalpel, CMS would use a hammer.

Already, a bipartisan group of House members is calling on Oz to reconsider the rule, but it fits within a broader context of the Trump administration’s quiet campaign to curtail Medicare’s effectiveness.

Much of the attention on H.R. 1 — what Trump called the “big, beautiful bill” — focused on its draconian cuts to Medicaid, but the law also triggered an automatic $500 billion cut from Medicare between 2026 and 2034. The law also delayed until late 2034 the implementation of finalized rules that would help very low-income Medicare enrollees access programs to help cover premiums and cost-sharing of benefits.

The new CMS proposal, however, is particularly curious in light of how the “big, beautiful bill” came to be.

Since then, CMS has allowed a subsidy program for Medicare Part D prescription-drug costs to expire. And it introduced a pilot program in six states that uses artificial intelligence to review the medical necessity of prescribed care. The practice, also known as prior authorization, previously was rarely used in traditional Medicare. The pilot program has already resulted in significant delays in care.

The new CMS proposal, however, is particularly curious in light of how the “big, beautiful bill” came to be. To stanch the proverbial bleeding that rural communities are projected to face from the bill’s cuts, Republicans created a $50 billion fund for rural healthcare. Technological innovation was a central pillar of this effort, known as the Rural Health Transformation Program.

Restricting remote monitoring does anything but foster innovative technologies. And the effects will be felt increasingly in the years to come. The RHTP is a relative pittance compared to H.R. 1’s Medicaid cuts and will do little to prevent closures of rural hospitals or key hospital services. And when a rural hospital closes, the driving time to the next hospital increases by 20 to 40 miles on average, regardless of whether one is on Medicaid or Medicare — which makes the ability to monitor one’s health at home all the more important.

While remote monitoring programs are imperfect and deserve oversight, they help provide healthcare in typically underserved areas. What’s more, by facilitating earlier detection, these programs can result in better patient outcomes, which are less costly to treat. In other words, remote monitoring is good for patients and for the healthcare system itself.

Along with Social Security, Medicare is considered the “third rail” of American politics. Not only is the program popular, but seniors (roughly 90% of its enrollees) vote at high rates, and younger voters prefer to protect the program for when they age into it. The politics of Medicare retrenchment may ultimately prove to be less visible than the consequences of slashing health programs. Elected officials understand the political costs of reducing Medicare spending. Yet under Oz’s leadership, CMS is demonstrating how to weaken Medicare through a series of administrative decisions that preserve the appearance of coverage while weakening access to care. Medicare’s greatest vulnerability may not be outright cuts, but rather the quiet erosion of the benefits on which seniors have been counting.

The post Dr. Oz’s new Medicare proposal would be bad news for rural seniors appeared first on MS NOW.

Alaska’s Republican governor ordered an investigation into Democrat Mary Peltola’s Senate campaign Wednesday after The New York Times reported her campaign was involved with another person named Dan Sullivan ending up on the ballot alongside Sen. Dan S. Sullivan, the Republican incumbent. That report that Peltola’s campaign attempted to put a finger on the scale provoked a fresh round of outrage from President Donald Trump, and, at first glance, it may have seemed to support an unprecedented lawsuit by the Department of Justice lawsuit to pre-emptively discredit a Peltola victory. But not even Wednesday’s political bombshell justifies the DOJ’s involvement.

There’s a lot to find concerning about the Peltola campaign’s shenanigans, but the federal government has no power to force Alaska to alter its election procedures.

The Peltola campaign denies it did anything untoward, but there’s plenty to be concerned about in the Times’ reporting. According to Peltola’s former campaign manager, who spoke extensively with the Times but retracted her comments before publication, the campaign worked with Senate Democrats’ campaign arm to recruit the second Dan Sullivan to run. The DOJ’s lawsuit to intervene in Alaska’s election in case the incumbent Republican senator loses also leans heavily on the Peltola campaign’s supposedly nefarious moves to confound voters.

But even if there were attempts to confound voters, that doesn’t mean voters will be confounded. The ballot makes exceedingly clear which Dan Sullivan is which. The incumbent Dan S. Sullivan has the word “Incumbent” next to his name and the label “Registered Republican,” and Daniel J. Sullivan Jr.’s name is left unadorned.

And Edward Foley, a law professor and former Ohio solicitor general, explained in an MS NOW essay why concerns of voters accidentally denying the incumbent senator re-election are “significantly mitigated” by the state’s ranked choice voting system.

That doesn’t mean we should entirely disregard the reported shady tactics and condescension from people working to get Peltola elected. At one point, some Democratic strategists seemed to delight in the idea of confusing the public:

In one exchange of text messages obtained by The Times, Peltola advisers seemed to make fun of voters while watching a focus group, surmising the participants would be susceptible to being tricked into voting for a ballot spoiler.

“Do we have a scheme for you,” wrote a consultant for the Peltola campaign. A pollster on the chat wrote that one voter seemed like the perfect audience “for our ballot strategy plan :)”

Despite Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s call for an investigation, and the DOJ’s lawsuit, the Times report makes clear that “ballot-stacking tactics are common in politics and generally considered legal — and have been employed by both parties in Alaska.” But the department’s lawsuit says it has an “obligation to protect the integrity of its election” and, if Peltola wins, wants to block certification “pending an investigation to determine whether votes cast for Daniel J. Sullivan were meant to be cast for Senator Sullivan,” according to their lawsuit.

The DOJ’s suit quotes an initial claim from Carol Beecher, Alaska’s director of the division of elections, that Daniel J. Sullivan wanted to be on the ballot “for the purpose of confusing or misleading voters and compromising the fairness of the ballot.” But now Beecher is firmly against the DOJ’s suit. State lawyers in a motion to dismiss filed Monday argued that the federal government “lacks authority to intervene in state elections at all, much less in support of a favored candidate.”

If anything, in its own efforts to affect the race’s outcome, the DOJ may have jumped the gun.

Nothing in the Times’ report changes that. There may be consequences for Peltola and her campaign staff at the state level. As election law expert Rick Hasen noted, if anyone lied under oath about cooperation between Democrats and Dan J. Sullivan, then there could be cause for a perjury prosecution, but no allegations on that front had arisen as of Thursday afternoon.

Any such testimony would have come from Dan J. Sullivan’s lawsuit to remain on the ballot earlier this year. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled in his favor, allowing him to remain an option for voters. Again, there’s a lot to find concerning about the Peltola campaign’s shenanigans, but the federal government has no power to force Alaska to alter its election procedures.

If anything, in its own efforts to affect the race’s outcome, the DOJ may have jumped the gun. I imagine there would be a lot more willingness to criticize Peltola outright, and a potentially less mixed bag reaction from Alaskans, without the federal intervention. As it stands, the case will still fall flat, and Alaska’s voters will still have their say in who represents them in the U.S. Senate — even if they have to take a few seconds longer to read their ballot.

The post Alaska Senate race shenanigans still don’t justify the DOJ’s lawsuit appeared first on MS NOW.

Originally published by Pacific Forum, this article is republished with permission. A central problem in US nuclear thinking is that it is fragmented. Washington is laser-focused on the “three-body problem”: It considers the US-Russia-China triangle fundamental, and when it does not ignore the China-India-Pakistan triangle, it treats it as a mere “Southern Asia” issue. Washington, […]

The post The rise of the nuclear hexagon and the future of Asian stability appeared first on Asia Times.

No sé qué hará Sánchez, pero la mejor noticia para el PP sería la continuidad de Óscar Puente. No hay que ser ni un gran analista ni uno de esos fantoches de la izquierda que se erigen en gurús y se pasean dando opiniones como si fueran los nuevos oráculos de Delfos, aunque luego no importa si aciertan o se equivocan. La decisión más sensata para sus intereses sería destituirlo de forma fulminante. Es un incompetente y tiene la caradura de no dimitir tras dos catástrofes ferroviarias en un año. No voy a esperar dignidad entre los sanchistas, pero al menos egoísmo político por parte de su líder. A pesar del pesimismo de algún sector del centroderecha, la realidad es que no puede remontar la campaña. No me refiero tras el accidente ferroviario, sino desde hace mucho tiempo. Es cierto que hay personas que le votarán, algunos tapándose la nariz, y otros con mayor dignidad, preferirán abstenerse o votar en blanco. En cambio, hay una mayoría abrumadora que está harta de la corrupción, las colocas y la ineptitud del Gobierno socialista comunista. A la hora de elegir al mayor incompetente creo que podemos coincidir en la figura del bocazas de Puente, que siempre me ha parecido un fantoche, un cateto y un lenguaraz, que esconde sus carencias formativas y profesionales intentando ser más sanchista que Sánchez. Fue un error nombrarlo, pero me temo que lo sería en cualquier cargo. Su falta de cualificación no sería relevante si se hubiera rodeado de gente capaz o fuera trabajador. No ha sido así. En su día ya reconoció que era un mal jurista y ahora tenemos la constatación de que es incapaz de garantizar que el sistema ferroviario funcione bien. Las chorradas que dice en las redes no me importan, le gusta rebajarse e insultar, pero las consecuencias de su gestión son catastróficas. Al PP le viene muy bien que esté rodeado de ministros incompetentes. La culpa de los problemas que tienen las infraestructuras corresponde única y exclusivamente a Sánchez. Es algo evidente, ya que es el presidente de un Gobierno que no ha hecho nada en ocho años. Es lo mismo que sucede con la vivienda, el gran apagón o la crisis provocada por la invasión de Ceuta. Todo tiene un mismo denominador común que es Sánchez..

Francisco Marhuenda. Académico de número de la Real Academia de Jurisprudencia y Legislación de España y de la Real Academia de Doctores de España. Académico correspondiente de la Real Academia de la Historia. Catedrático de Derecho Público e Historia de las Instituciones (UNIE).

© EUROPAPRESS

Cartoon by Amjad Rasmi. (Courtesy of Asharq Al-Awsat)

Betting markets like Polymarket and Kalshi have transformed America’s democracy into a new kind of casino.

© Hilary Swift for The New York Times

Quito, 29 oct (Prensa Latina) Ecuador se ha convertido en un laboratorio de experimentación militar, tecnológica y psicológica con asistencia de Estados Unidos, advirtió hoy el profesor universitario Luis Córdova-Alarcón.

The post Académico alerta que Ecuador es un laboratorio de guerra first appeared on Noticias Prensa Latina.

When the 2026 Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group convened in Bangkok from Oct. 12 to 18, most headlines focused on wars, supply chains, and sovereign debt. But buried in one document, the chair’s statement of the 54th meeting of the International Monetary and Financial Committee, issued on Oct. 17, was what may prove to be a defining moment in the evolving relationship among technology, money, and power. Before reading that statement, it helps to remembe

We have come to expect sanctimony mixed with hypocrisy from Barack Obama. But his latest endeavor turns out to be a doozy.

Preaching his usual moral superiority, the former president recently took to social media to inveigh against the current president for targeting Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota with a criminal investigation. He called it "appalling."

Obama should have sat this one out at his luxurious spread on Martha’s Vineyard.

OBAMA BACKS ILHAN OMAR AMID PROBE, ACCUSES TRUMP ADMIN OF 'APPALLING' TARGETING IN LENGTHY STATEMENT

Lo and behold, he did the same thing when he was president. And Omar was the target. But, of course, the probe was kept under wraps. Until now.

Reporting by The New York Times reveals that Obama’s Department of Homeland Security and the FBI did a deep dive in the summer of 2016 into whether Omar entered into a sham marriage with her alleged brother, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, to enable him to secure a green card.

OBAMA'S LENGTHY REACTION TO OMAR INVESTIGATION TRIGGERS INSTANT BACKLASH: 'SPARE ME'

Brace yourself for the result. That investigation "found some evidence that it was fraudulent," according to the Times.

Accusations of marriage fraud have long dogged Omar, who has consistently dismissed them as politically driven and a right-wing conspiracy. So much for that argument.

GREGG JARRETT: IN A TORTURED DEFENSE OF ILHAN OMAR, THE NEW YORK TIMES REACHES FOR ITS DARKEST TRUMP ANALOGY

The latest investigation that culminated in a judicially ordered search of Omar’s home on October 12, 2026, reportedly encompasses not only the suspect marriage but troubling questions over whether she ran afoul of the law by using a fake name and false birth date to obtain citizenship. A separate investigation is examining her financial transactions.

The Obama-era inquiry did not end because of insufficient evidence. Instead, the Times divulges that it was shelved "because prosecutors concluded that the potential crime, a felony, fell outside a five-year statute of limitations." The newspaper’s story relied on statements by current and former officials with knowledge of the first case.

ILHAN OMAR ISSUES STUNNING ADMISSION WHEN CONFRONTED WITH BROTHER MARRIAGE RUMORS

That decision to mothball any legal action against Omar makes little sense, unless one factors in political favoritism by Obama and his prosecutorial cohorts.

It is true that marriage fraud is a federal felony governed by a five-year statute of limitations under 8 U.S.C. § 1325(c). However, the clock runs from the last overt act of fraud or submission of false documents, not the date of the wedding ceremony itself in 2009.

WHAT'S NEXT FOR ILHAN OMAR? FORMER IMMIGRATION JUDGE BREAKS DOWN LEGAL RISKS AMID FEDERAL PROBES

Taking steps to later obtain a green card would qualify as an overt act, as would document fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1546). So, too, would any act to cover up a sham marriage or efforts to conceal it. Indeed, it would constitute additional crimes such as conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 371) and obstruction of justice or obstruction of proceedings (18 U.S.C. §§ 1505 and 1512).

Elmi abandoned his quest for a green card and left the U.S. for London sometime in 2011 when disturbing questions reportedly arose over his application. His actions and any misrepresentations associated with Omar might have brought the case within the permissible statute of limitations.

HOMAN SAYS ILHAN OMAR COULD BE STRIPPED OF NATURALIZATION, DEPORTED IF IMMIGRATION FRAUD IS PROVEN

But never mind all of that.

Obama’s DHS and DOJ could have pursued a simpler approach under civil (not criminal) immigration fraud. Orchestrating a scheme to illegally obtain U.S. immigration status or benefits carries severe legal consequences. There is no statute of limitations.

GREGG JARRETT: ILHAN OMAR COULD FACE INDICTMENT, DENATURALIZATION AND DEPORTATION

If the Obama administration had chosen this logical course, it could have led to Omar’s denaturalization and subsequent deportation. The standard of proof is "clear and convincing evidence," much lower than in criminal prosecutions.

It is unclear, but curious, why this legal road was never taken. We only know that authorities under Obama shuttered the case and buried the investigation. Preferential treatment? Political cronyism? It has the unmistakable stench.

REP ILHAN OMAR'S IMMIGRATION HISTORY FACES NEW SCRUTINY AS FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS SUBPOENA RELATIVES

This makes Obama’s social media screed against President Trump even more outlandish. Trump is doing what Obama did, except that Trump’s administration has expanded the Omar inquiry into areas where the former president’s prosecutors refused to go.

They should have gone there.

Obama’s harangue on X accused Trump of selectively targeting Omar without ever disclosing that his own administration investigated her first. That was dishonesty by omission. A mere oversight? Doubtful.

Obama also pronounced as true certain facts about Omar’s age that may not be true at all. He declared with absolute confidence that she was 17 years old when she applied as a minor for derivative citizenship based on her father’s citizenship.

But her age and birth date are still very much in dispute. Her autobiography and other documents undermine Obama’s claim, indicating that Omar may have been an adult of 18 years and legally ineligible for the type of citizenship that she procured. If she or her father made false statements or committed fraud, it would nullify her citizenship and could lead to removal from the U.S.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

This is not an "unsubstantiated theory," as Obama asserts in his social media post.

The former president accuses Trump of "intimidation" and laments that he is deploying "the full weight of the federal government" to bring down "a law-abiding elected official because she has dared to criticize the president." Spare us the duplicitous pearl-clutching.

Obama expressed no moral outrage when his successor, Joe Biden, targeted his political opponent with criminal indictments. Going back further to his own presidency, Obama’s dirty fingerprints were all over the initial stages of the government’s damaging investigation of Trump in the phony collusion scandal.

Obama seems to think that Americans are simpletons with anterograde amnesia. It resembles contempt.

The New York Times report exposes Obama’s glaring double standard for what it is — a transparently insincere attack based on shallow evidence. This comes as no surprise.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Obama always seems confident in his righteousness in an irritatingly pious way. Ever the charlatan, he pretends to be holier-than-thou. Sometimes the truth catches up with him.

But don’t expect Obama to change now that his hypocrisy has been revealed. That would require earnest introspection.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM GREGG JARRETT

“Associate membership” is out and “ever closer association” back in.

The offer of the first phrase was made to Canada a month ago by EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen. 

The phraseology, made during von der Leyen’s State of the Union speech, surprised many EU diplomats who claimed that they had not been consulted.

It was also never clear precisely what this would mean.

The idea of Canada having representatives or observer status in the EU institutions always sounded fanciful. Besides, there is no mention of ‘associate membership’ in the EU treaties, and this uncertainty appears to have persuaded Germany to demand that it be dropped ahead of Thursday and Friday’s (29-30 October) EU-Canada summit.  

The draft communique circulated ahead of the summit talks of “work to define by the 2027 EU-Canada summit the concept of an ever closer association of Canada to the EU, short of full membership itself.” 

Von der Leyen appeared not to have read the memo. 

Officials would “start discussing how to make Canada the first associate member of the EU,” she said on arrival in Montreal, adding that “our ambition is to build the closest partnership we have ever had with a non-European country”. 

Yet this is a dispute over language rather than substance. The EU and Mark Carney’s Canada see each other as their closest ally. Both have been repeatedly threatened with hefty trade tariffs by Donald Trump’s White House and the consequences of Trump’s foreign policy adventures in the Middle East and the Arctic. Carney’s remarks at the World Economic Forum in January that ‘middle’ powers should club together to avoid being squeezed between China and the US were aimed at the EU.  

Commission officials may blench at the comparison, but the EU is a collection of middle ranking and small states. And it is yet to act like a world power on the political stage. 

This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership

Talk about under-handed politics!

Talk about under-handed politics!

Congress is being urged to pass the Biosimilar Red Tape Elimination Act to reduce medication costs by removing the costly interchangeability standard for biologics.

Congress is being urged to pass the Biosimilar Red Tape Elimination Act to reduce medication costs by removing the costly interchangeability standard for biologics.

The upcoming Texas gubernatorial election between incumbent Greg Abbott and challenger Gina Hinojosa will determine if a new congressional map favoring Republicans or one protecting Latino representation becomes law.

The upcoming Texas gubernatorial election between incumbent Greg Abbott and challenger Gina Hinojosa will determine if a new congressional map favoring Republicans or one protecting Latino representation becomes law.

Health experts are calling for standardized reporting of breast arterial calcification on mammograms to improve cardiovascular disease prevention for women.

Health experts are calling for standardized reporting of breast arterial calcification on mammograms to improve cardiovascular disease prevention for women.

<![CDATA[

Más de sesenta personas salieron de casa este miércoles para coger un tren y no llegaron a su destino. Más de un centenar resultaron heridas. Los que presenciaron la tragedia y salieron ilesos cargarán con secuelas menos visibles como el estrés postraumático. Nadie implicado en esta catástrofe quedará indemne. Tampoco los usuarios que, cuando vuelvan a subirse a un vagón, deberán hacerlo venciendo el miedo, en mayor o menor medida, a sufrir una desgracia.

Seguir leyendo...

Congress changed the law 10 years ago precisely to give the families a pathway to test their claims, which may or may not prevail in court.