Health Care Reform Essay

Health care has been an area of discussion for some time now. In the United States, the current health care system is a private system that allows individuals to choose their own method of care. Despite the freedom that comes with the independent nature of this type of health care system, the true disposition creates more problems than it solves. The privacy of the health care institutions has caused affordability and access to become serious issues with this system. Additionally, those with lower socioeconomic status fall short of the ability to access the same pool of resources as everyone else. Due to the issues with affordability, access, and the poor infrastructure of the health care system, a universal health

Although division is seen between the political parties of the Republicans and Democrats, points exist to where lawmakers agree on the reform of healthcare. Lawmakers do, however, have three major points they agree. These points are the banning of underwriting by private insurance companies, providing federal funding to assistance low income families with securing insurance, and by accessing Medicare’s funding to its full advantage to reduce patients billing (Times Topics, 2009). While lawmakers have managed to agree on some points, by drafting a complete healthcare reform that is ethical. This will call for Congress to agree on a bill that fits President Obama’s views, requiring substantial research and planning.

The New York Times printed an article by Robert Pear, which reported that on December 24, 2009, the US senate passed the first bill, which would call for major reform regarding health care in the United States (Pear). The article titled “Senate Passes Health Care Overhaul on Party-Line Vote,” discusses the fact that while this step was a major milestone in the process of providing Americans with affordable heath care, it was not the end of the road. Over the coming months and years there would be a lot of give and take between democrats and republicans to revise the bill to the point where both sides could support it. One of the major points in this reform is that the US government was now going to offer affordable plans including subsidy options which would allow more Americans affordable options which were

LEADER’S EFFECTIVENESS USING UTILITARIANISM AS THE ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING APPROACH IN REGARD TO THE HEALTHCARE CHALLENGES SET FORTH BY THE PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT OF 2010

The latest health care reform has done what few policies manage to do – sicken both republicans and progressive democrats. While we can all agree that a reform of the health care system is sorely needed, we must also acknowledge that “Obamacare” is not the cure-all we so desperately require. Rather, President Obama, like a medieval barber, prescribed a health care reform that treated the symptoms of our flawed system rather than the actual disease. The subsidization of health insurance providers has proven ineffective at providing affordable coverage for all. Certainly one is likely to hear the various incendiary talking points of both the proponents and opponents. Whether it’s the republican candidates blaspheming Obamacare as socialism, or the administration praising the success of health care for all, it is difficult to actually find constructive dialogue. We are purview to many sound bites, but few actual solutions. We have witnessed heated debates, but rarely do we witness intelligent discourse. If beneficial reform is to be crafted and implemented, we must first acknowledge the issues and inconsistencies of the current system and begin to explore alternate methods of providing health care to the American people.

Long before the 1990s when Ms. Clinton fought for a Universal Healthcare system in America, the issue of America’s healthcare had been a political quandary. The enactment of the Republican administration’s Health Management Organization Act of 1973 was a weapon meant to address that crisis, yet, it did little to fix the problem. While the liberal Democrats are fighting for Universal Healthcare coverage for all Americans, the conservative Republicans are fighting to maintain the current private health insurance, however, with some revamping of the system, which preserves the capitalistic element of the status quo. The reason for the two opposing views stems from their differences in political ideologies, which theoretically is like pitting socialism against capitalism. While the liberal Democrats’ endorsement of Universal Healthcare system is socialistic in practice, the conservative Republicans’ fight to retain the private or market based plan is unarguably in support of their pro-capitalism stance. The truth, however, is that, though almost every American believes in capitalism, yet, almost none would vote to disband the Medicare and the Medicaid programs, both of which are socialistic. In that light, the argument of a pro-capitalist nation is negated, as we do already have a socialized healthcare program for the seniors and the poor. Extending that concept to include

In today’s day and age, American households can all agree that health insurance is not a luxury, but a necessity. Without it, costs of emergency room visits and prescription medicines can be financially devastating. However, in the past many families and individuals have taken the risk of not being insured due to the high cost of the insurance itself. To attempt to reform this unfair system, the Obama administration signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010. The law, coined “Obamacare,” has received much opposition due to its expansion government programs and increase in spending. It brings to question how much the government should be involved in an area that for the majority of America’s history, has been

In March 2010, one of the most controversial bills in modern history was signed into law by President Barack Obama. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act expanded the 1965 bill passed under President Johnson that created Medicare and Medicaid (“LBJ Presidential Library,” 2015). While the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare” as it has been dubbed by the media, has many components, the focus here is the expansion of Medicaid. Obamacare sought to expand Medicaid to cover those who earn too much to qualify for traditional Medicaid, but not enough to afford employer-provided health care. These people are said to be in the “coverage gap” (“Obamacare Medicaid expansion,” 2015). While only 32 states have adopted Obamacare, we should advance a policy encouraging the remaining states to expand existing coverage by extending the period of federal government cost-sharing an additional five years. Doing so would give states previously refusing the cost sharing a second chance to opt-in. This expansion would save money for the states from some of the rising cost of healthcare, and fulfill our moral duty to care for uninsured Americans.

Creating a health care reform plan for the U.S. health care system is no easy task. Multiple things must be taken into consideration. These include making insurance affordable, making sure the plan is economically feasible, and creating a plan that will still work in the future. What hindered the reshaping of health care into a sustainable system in the past, are the health sectors interests that prefer the status quo. By continuing to cling on to yesterday’s model, the health care industry is creating its own peril (Schaeffer, 2007).

In 2008, during President Obama’s campaign, President Obama announced that he would fight for a national health care system that helped millions of uninsured Americans obtain health insurance. The Affordable Care Act, also termed Obamacare, passed on Christmas Eve of 2009. While some people believe the Affordable Care Act is great, others are not too fond of the of it. From passing the bill, the government hoped to expand Medicaid eligibility to help more people whose income was meager or near poverty level. Although the idea was good, studies show that people of color, families in rural areas, and those with cultural and language barriers struggle to receive health care and pay for it. Furthermore, since Obamacare passed into law, the

The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) from being introduced in 2010 has not been well received by the public. Two main consequences are economic issues, and many states rejecting the act. Economic issues are relevant because it is assumed that insurance premiums are increased, rising cost increases during a recession, mandated benefits and other costs will be passed on to consumers and billions of dollars will be taken from seniors Medicare benefits. In addition, a requirement of the act is that insurance companies spend at least 50-80 percent of premium dollars on medical care, which will lead to less consumer choice and higher prices. Many states are choosing to reject the act

The American Healthcare industry is in dire need of repair. Not only is it in need or repair, the American public needs to know why and what exactly it is that needs to be repaired. Most Americans who have healthcare coverage don’t know or understand what their coverage entails. On November 8, 2009, the house passed H.R. 3962, which establishes standards for healthcare and health insurance, as well as a government-provided public option for those who can’t afford coverage. Politicians are so divided on the issue that conservatives have promised to block passage of the bill through the senate with a filibuster.

One of the major platforms for Barack Obama when he first ran for president in 2008 was healthcare reform. Obama’s approach for fixing the healthcare system was to provide universal coverage by expanding the system that had been in place of using both private and public group insurance, while adding consumer protections and income-based subsidies (Collins, S., Nicholson, J., Rustgi, S., & Davis, K., 2008). Obama believed that expanding coverage at an affordable cost, which included increasing eligibility to government programs such as Medicaid, would make things better for everyone.

“We will pass reform that lowers cost, promotes choice, and provides coverage that every American can count on. And we will do it this year.” The preceding is a powerful statement from the newly elected President Barak Obama. One of the main aspects of both political campaigns was health care reform. The above quote shows passion and encouragement, but the quotes about health care do not end there. Georgian republican gubernatorial candidate and health care policy maker John Oxendine expressed: “Their proposal would virtually devastate the private healthcare sector in this country along with competition and patient choice, by replacing it with bureaucratic planning and government control. The result of this plan and its one trillion

The multi-payer insurance system in the U.S. derives its revenue from both private and public sources, while a single-payer system is predominately financed through tax revenues managed by the government (Gusamano & Rodwin, n.d., p. 55). Therefore, single-payer systems are more subject to governmental environment changes, especially when tax cuts or health care policy change become the focus of a particular political agenda, and thus, may fall victim to the prevailing political ideology (Reinhardt, 2007). Democrats often favor the prospect of a single-payer system while republicans oppose it and work to deconstruct efforts in developing this entity (Sparer & Thompson, n.d., p.32-33). This may predispose a single-payer system to be undone through the partiality of this country’s governing majority (Reinhardt, 2007). This eventuality would leave the country with a health care conundrum. Thus, a multi-payer system that incorporates a provision for universal coverage makes the most