Washington’s notorious revolving door was in full swing again last week as the health insurance industry snagged another top federal official to help it get what it wants out of lawmakers and regulators.

The Obamacare contraception mandate was a major issue in the 2012 presidential campaign, and the left may soon be pushing for taxpayer-funded abortafacient drugs for young girls as part of the 2016 campaign strategy.

The issue appeared earlier this week in the New York Times’ “Room for Debate” blog. At issue is a growing debate arising out of Colorado.

More than a dozen states that opted to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act have seen enrollments surge way beyond projections, raising concerns that the added costs will strain their budgets when federal aid is scaled back starting in two years.

Some lawmakers warn the price of expanding the health care program for poor and lower-income Americans could mean less money available for other state services, including education.

President Obama says he’s “feeling pretty good” about the Affordable Care Act in the wake of King v. Burwell, the June 25 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the flow of means-tested subsidies through the federally operated health insurance exchange, HealthCare.gov.

What’s behind the huge premium increases on the Obamacare exchanges?

Supporters and opponents offer wildly different explanations and theories. They all pore over the data and get into the details of who is signing up, what the risk pools look like, and other things actuaries find exciting.

The flurry of announced and rumored mergers in the health insurance sector has focused attention on how the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) might assess the combination of some (or all) of the big five players (in order of size by revenues: UnitedHealth, Anthem, Aetna, Humana, Cigna).