Politics of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
The United States is one of the most developed countries that paradoxically still does not have Universal Healthcare Coverage (UHC) for its citizens. The result of this is that healthcare in the US is extremely expensive and unaffordable to many who do not have health insurance. But even for those with health insurance, only a few could afford private insurance that is run in a capitalist fashion with profits and not patient concern in mind. This changed in 2010 when President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 2010. This healthcare legislative policy was the closest the US has come to UHC. It brought into the healthcare coverage bracket a total of 22 million Americans that were hitherto uncovered (Kominski et al., 2017). It also brought changes in coverage in that it gave monetary incentives to private insurers to cover even pre-existing conditions that were hitherto uncovered. These are conditions like hypertension, heart disease, and diabetes. In 2017, however; the GOP legislators sought to “repeal and replace” the ACA 2010 also known as Obamacare (ASA, n.d.). The purpose of this discussion is to briefly look at the politics of the ACA 2010. Politics of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Cost-Benefit Analysis in Terms of the Re-election of Legislators and Effect on Efforts to Repeal/ Replace the ACA 2010
In 2017, Republicans under Trump wanted to “repeal and replace” the ACA 2010 with the American Health Care Act or AHCA (ASA, n.d.; Milstead & Short, 2019). It however soon became clear that this would water down the gains brought about by the ACA 2010. A total of 24 million Americans of little and moderate means would be rendered coverless if this passed. By proposing a tax credit system based on age and not income, the healthcare costs were going to skyrocket with the AHCA. Amongst other things, the proposed replacement law would also reduce premiums by 20% making it expensive for patients with pre-existing conditions. Because of these drawbacks of the AHCA, many in the GOP party risked not getting re-elected due to the generally unpopular policy.
Effect of Voters’ Views on Decisions by Legislators in Taking Policy Positions
The leading interest of any politician is to be re-elected into office. This is true of lawmakers in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. This is why the positions each of them took on the repealing of the ACA 2010 and the passing of the unpopular AHCA were informed by the prospects of re-election for each.
Conclusion
Policy formation and formulation at the national level is greatly influenced by politics. The attempt by the rump administration and the GOP Party to replace and overhaul some sections of the ACA 2010 was a case in point.
- Review the Resources and reflect on efforts to repeal/replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
- Consider who benefits the most when policy is developed and in the context of policy implementation.
By Day 3 of Week 3
Post an explanation for how you think the cost-benefit analysis in terms of legislators being reelected affected efforts to repeal/replace the ACA. Then, explain how analyses of the voters views may affect decisions by legislative leaders in recommending or positioning national policies (e.g., Congress’ decisions impacting Medicare or Medicaid). Remember, the number one job of a legislator is to be re-elected. Please check your discussion grading rubric to ensure your responses meet the criteria
ORDER NOW A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
Politics of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
RUBRIC
| Excellent | ||
| Main Posting | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
Politics of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act