logo
UFC heavyweight champ enters the ring for healthcare reform with new price transparency partnership

UFC heavyweight champ enters the ring for healthcare reform with new price transparency partnership

Yahoo06-02-2025

FIRST ON FOX: Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) heavyweight Jon Jones announced Thursday that he is about to deliver a big blow to hidden prices in healthcare.
UFC heavyweight champ Jon Jones said that he would be launching a new initiative partnering with the nonprofit group Power to the Patients to take on hospitals, pharmacy benefit managers and insurance companies, which he says have "refuse[d]" to be transparent with their prices in order to rake in more profits.
"This next fight for me is a personal one, but it's not just for me. It's for every American who has ever been bullied, robbed or deceived. It's arguably the most important fight of my career," Jones said in a mock press conference akin to those he participates in when announcing his next UFC opponent. "My next opponent will be: the American healthcare system."
Va Secretary Doug Collins Prioritizes Efficiency, Healthcare Flexibility For Veterans
During his first term, President Donald Trump passed healthcare price transparency rules that forced hospitals and insurers to publish all their prices, so patients could make more informed decisions about where they want to get their treatment and, as a result, increase competition and lower prices.
On the 2024 campaign trail, President Trump suggested during an interview with podcaster Theo Von that the lack of transparency around healthcare pricing amounted to "extortion" by these wealthy companies, and he charged former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris with refusing to enforce his first-term rule. However, according to Trump, he'll be "pressing" to ensure that this sort of transparency in the healthcare system comes to fruition.
Read On The Fox News App
Jones said during the mock press conference that people should know whether an MRI costs $600 or $6,000, noting that "in America, we shouldn't have to advocate for honesty and accountability in healthcare."
Lgbtq+ Advocates, Families Sue Trump Admin For Ending Funding Of Transgender Healthcare Under 19
Medical bills are a leading cause of bankruptcy in the U.S., according to some studies. The National Institutes of Health posited in 2019 that a survey of debtors showed that the majority of respondents, 58.5%, agreed that medical expenses contributed to their financial woes.
Trump has said that if his first-term rules on healthcare pricing transparency had been enforced the way he envisioned, it could have brought down the price of care by as much as 50% to 60%. Trump also blamed the healthcare industry's "powerful" lobby for a reason why the rules have not been adequately enforced.
Trump Handed 'Opportunity To Save Medicare' After Biden Admin's Final Blow To Seniors: Expert While Jones and Trump are allies – the fighter presented the president with his champion belt during one of his recent fights and also surprised fans with Trump's signature dance move following his win – the issue is a bipartisan one. During the last Congress, a cohort of Republicans and Democrats sought to pass legislation clamping down on improving hospital and insurer price transparency.
Power to the Patients is no stranger to star power. The group has partnered in the past with country superstars Lainey Wilson and Jelly Roll, as well as rappers Fat Joe, Method Man and others.
"I am proud to be joining Power to the Patients to take on hospitals and insurance companies that refuse to show their prices," Jones told Fox News Digital.
"For years, hospitals and insurers have been disregarding rules requiring them to disclose prices to patients in advance of care. In a healthcare system that lacks transparency and accountability, Jones said, "Without real prices, hospitals and health insurers are making healthcare in America unaffordable, inaccessible, and totally dishonest. When we can't see or compare real prices upfront, we are blindsided by overcharges, price-gouging and surprise bills that we can't verify are correct."
"In his first term, President Trump took aggressive and historic action to make healthcare prices available to patients before they get care instead of sticking Americans with surprise bills," said White House spokesperson Kush Desai. "After the Biden administration neglected implementation of these commonsense ideas and allowed the healthcare industry to keep patients in the dark, the second Trump administration is committed to lowering costs and Making America Healthy Again by giving Americans the choices they want and the transparency they need to make informed decisions."Original article source: UFC heavyweight champ enters the ring for healthcare reform with new price transparency partnership

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Oscar Health, Inc. (OSCR) Soared On Thursday
Why Oscar Health, Inc. (OSCR) Soared On Thursday

Yahoo

time37 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Why Oscar Health, Inc. (OSCR) Soared On Thursday

We recently published a list of . In this article, we are going to take a look at where Oscar Health, Inc. (NYSE:OSCR) stands against other best-performing stocks on Thursday. Oscar Health snapped a five-day losing streak on Thursday, jumping 10.6 percent to close at $15.65 apiece as investors resorted to bargain-hunting while waiting for more concrete developments on the Trump administration's Medicare Advantage review. Earlier this year, lawmakers passed a $5-trillion tax-and-spending package that shaves as much as $900 billion in Medicaid, which servers over 70 million low-income households. A close up of a patient and a healthcare professional engaging in conversation, showing the company's commitment to patient care. Now, Senate Republicans to broaden savings by looking for supposed inefficiencies in the Medicare program for senior citizens. In the first quarter of the year, Oscar Health, Inc. (NYSE:OSCR) registered a 55-percent increase in attributable net income of $275 million versus the $177 million registered in the same period last year. Revenues rose by 42 percent to $3.046 billion from $2.142 billion year-on-year. Overall, OSCR ranks 5th on our list of best-performing stocks on Thursday. While we acknowledge the potential of OSCR as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 20 Best AI Stocks To Buy Now and 30 Best Stocks to Buy Now According to Billionaires. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

In Lansing, Democrats warn Medicaid and SNAP cuts would be a 'perfect storm' for the poor
In Lansing, Democrats warn Medicaid and SNAP cuts would be a 'perfect storm' for the poor

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

In Lansing, Democrats warn Medicaid and SNAP cuts would be a 'perfect storm' for the poor

U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Holly) and U.S. Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet (D-Bay City) at a June 6, 2025 town hall in Lansing. | Kyle Davidson Members of the Michigan Democratic Party laid out the impacts of congressional Republicans' 'big beautiful bill' at a town hall on Friday, calling on residents of Michigan's 7th Congressional District to help educate their friends and family as well. A few hundred supporters packed into the gym of Everett High School in Lansing as U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Holly), U.S. Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet (D-Bay City) and Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel detailed how the Trump administration's policies would impact everyone, particularly individuals with limited income. The Michigan Democratic Party has hosted several similar events in Republican districts throughout the state, Hertel said, noting House Republicans had been instructed to avoid town halls with their constituents. 'The most basic thing for a public servant is to be able to sit and answer questions. … The least someone can do is sit down with people and explain their votes' Hertel said. And the 7th Congressional District's current representative, Tom Barrett (R-Charlotte) has a lot of explaining to do, Hertel said, slamming Barrett for supporting Republican's spending plan, and arguing the representative failed to stand up to the President and make himself available to his constituents A Barrett spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. Prior to taking questions, McDonald Rivet slammed the Republican spending effort, telling audience members that it would take away healthcare and raise the cost of medicine, education and energy in order to deliver a tax break to the wealthy. 'Oh, and by the way, it's going to increase the deficit by several trillion dollars,' She said. Slotkin looked back on the president's first term, when Trump was looking to overturn the Affordable Care Act, which expanded access to Medicaid and barred insurance providers from denying people coverage or charging them due to preexisting health conditions. 'It was the first thing he talked about when he got sworn in, he even had the House of Representatives vote to repeal Obamacare. And now we not only still have it, we expanded it, and how? Because we educated people,' Slotkin said. However, rather than cutting people's healthcare outright, Slotkin argued Trump is aiming to hide those cuts by requiring individuals to reregister for Medicaid every six months, making it harder to qualify and more difficult to sign up. While the current proposal would implement work requirements for Medicaid recipients, Slotkin noted it also raises the age limit for those requirements to 64. According to KFF, an independent health policy organization, 92% of medicaid recipients under 65 are already working full or part time. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that Republican's budget plan would result in 10.9 million additional people being uninsured in 2034, with 7.8 million fewer individuals on Medicaid due to the policy's proposed work requirements. Even individuals who are not on Medicaid will feel the impacts of cuts to the program, Slotkin said, noting that nursing homes, hospitals and mental health facilities all rely on Medicaid funding. 'I would just say this bill is designed to really be a perfect storm for poor people. If you are living at or below the poverty line, you're getting hit in every direction. Medicaid, your health care; SNAP your food; a bunch of programs, right, that you depend on. … They are paying for those tax benefits for the most wealthy by really the perfect storm of cuts for the poorest among us,' Slotkin said. On top of cutting SNAP benefits by $300 billion, the Department of Government Efficiency had canceled $1 billion in funding to programs supporting school meals and food banks, McDonald Rivet said. 'So you're that hungry kid and you have lost access to a food bank. You have lost access to food at school, and now you don't have SNAP benefits. This is the America that this bill creates,' McDonald Rivet said. Alongside questions on cuts to SNAP and Medicaid, audience members asked the lawmakers about the legal challenges levied against the Trump administration, and Democrats' plans to counter Republicans heading into the 2026 mid-term election. On Friday, the Trump Administration backed down in its resistance of a Supreme Court order demanding that the administration facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was wrongly deported to El Salvador three months ago. However, the fight goes beyond Abrego Gracia, into whether the executive branch needs to obey orders from the Supreme Court, Slotkin said. 'Now, we haven't had to deal with this issue in the years past because Democrats and Republicans have largely said, 'Huh, if the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court issues a court order, we're going to follow it.' Trump is pushing the boundaries on all the democratic values and principles most of us grew up with,' Slotkin said. Should an individual defy a federal court order, U.S. marshals would eventually be sent to enforce that order, Slotkin said. However, the U.S. marshals are controlled by the United States attorney general. Should the U.S. marshals receive a request to enforce a Supreme Court order against the president, Slotkin raised the question on whether Attorney General Pam Bondi, a Trump loyalist, would approve it. 'We've needed to have this fight. We need to have it out. We need a court order that he needs to obey, and we need to precipitate this conversation on the U.S. marshals. But today was an important sign that they don't want to get to that point. They don't want to wait until the U.S. marshals are potentially getting an order to activate,' Slotkin said. In preparing to take on the Trump Administration, Slotkin said she'd gone back to her roots in national security and crafted a war plan in the form of a 17-page powerpoint, with plans to lay out her vision of the nation's future under Democratic leadership. 'It's about facing our problems head on and saying the only way we do well as a country, the only way that we have a strong middle class going forward, the American Dream going forward, is if we face these issues and have a vision. And it's economic, it's about national security, and it's about our democracy,' Slotkin said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

How thousands of unreviewed ingredients got into our food — and what FDA can do about it
How thousands of unreviewed ingredients got into our food — and what FDA can do about it

The Hill

time2 hours ago

  • The Hill

How thousands of unreviewed ingredients got into our food — and what FDA can do about it

At least 1,000 ingredients in food products on our grocery store shelves have never been checked for safety by the Food and Drug Administration. Dozens have raised serious safety concerns among experts. How did the FDA allow this? The answer can be found in the agency's lax interpretation of a little-known legal designation that lets companies decide for themselves if ingredients in their products are safe. Fortunately, there are steps the agency can take right now to stem the flow of potentially unsafe ingredients into our food supply. Environmental Defense Fund outlined these steps in a letter we recently sent to the agency, but first let's take a closer look at how we got here. 'Generally Recognized as Safe' is a designation Congress created in 1958 to allow commonly used food ingredients to bypass the FDA's pre-market safety review process. It was meant for food substances — such as oils, vinegar, baking soda and common spices — that were widely considered safe due to their long history of everyday use. Since 1958, this status has been coopted to cover a universe of foods that extends far beyond its original intent. According to FDA regulations, a chemical can receive the designation if experts widely agree that scientific evidence shows its use to be safe. But because 'Generally Recognized as Safe' wasn't meant for newer ingredients, Congress allowed ingredients so designated to skip the FDA's premarket approval process — despite requiring similar evidence for other additives. Under the agency's current interpretation, companies can designate the use of a substance as safe and take products with that substance to market without informing the FDA or the public of its decision. While companies may voluntarily submit a notice to FDA offering safety evidence, they are not required to — and often don't. Our organization estimated that manufacturers have notified FDA of fewer than half of the ingredients they market as safe under the 'Generally Recognized' standard. Companies that do bother to submit a notice to the FDA are free to withdraw it at any point and take their product to market, provided they can cite evidence of its safe use. But this 'evidence' is often far from independent. Companies can, and often do, enlist their own employees or handpicked consultants to conduct their safety assessments. The result is a process riddled with conflicts of interest that lets unsafe foods into Americans' homes. We analyzed 'Generally Recognized as Safe' notices received by the FDA, obtained via a Freedom of Information request, and found that of the 1,163 submitted by companies between 1997 and April 2024, 192 were later withdrawn, with safety concerns cited in at least a dozen cases. We also identified 31 ingredients that companies have advertised to be recognized as safe, such as in press releases, trade publications and on their own websites (see the Appendix of our letter). However, we were unable to find the scientific evidence required under this standard to demonstrate these ingredients are commonly regarded as safe among experts. This raises red flags that FDA should be taking seriously. Although a comprehensive fix to the 'Generally Recognized' standard will require legislation from Congress, there are significant steps the FDA can take right away to ensure a more rigorous determination process that better protects Americans' health. Starting today, the FDA can use existing authority to remove safe designations from ingredients it deems unsafe and take them off the market. It can also notify manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers that the substance is no longer recognized as safe. In addition, the FDA can enforce the requirement that companies base safety designations on publicly available data. Although this won't curtail companies' ability to self-declare substances as safe, it will require those who do to be transparent in citing their evidence. Third, the FDA can enforce the requirement that safety assessments consider vital health information such as a substance's dietary sources, potential cancer risks and the cumulative health effects of similar substances. Finally, the FDA can make companies revise and resubmit their data for review when they submit 'Generally Recognized as Safe' notices that fail to comply with the criteria. The 'Generally Recognized as Safe' designation is far from a perfect system, but it can work better if it is interpreted and enforced more comprehensively. If the FDA is serious about protecting public health, it should start by fully exercising the tools already at its disposal. Maria Doa is senior director at the Chemicals Policy at Environmental Defense Fund. Maricel Maffini is an independent consultant focused on human and environmental health and chemical safety.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store