Affordable Care Act : Texas And Medicaid

The existence of Affordable Care Act have been a promising act for millions of citizens, especially the effort to end homeless, to put low-income on a better care at a reasonable price, and the access to healthcare through a variety of healthcare insurance choices. Its’ purpose is to reform healthcare, creating new policies, and establishing a better accessibility to physician and hospital with a cost that fit within both side budgets. The Act guarantees subsidies to all patient with an offering to better practitioner and treatment options to create a strong incentives to improve the quality of cares and services (Meek, 2012, pg. 15). Nevertheless, The Affordable Care Act face many barriers such as

Critically analyze the implications of the state’s decision to opt out of Medicaid expansion on the citizens of the state.

The concept of providing basic healthcare services to individuals in need has undergone an agonizing transition, from a luxury once only afforded by the affluent to a basic human right granted to citizens of every economic station, and the recently enacted Affordable Care Act (ACA) was designed to finalize this ethical evolution. Reflecting perhaps the bitter political enmity currently consuming the nation's once cherished democratic process, Republican legislatures in states throughout the union have bristled at the ACA's primary provisions, threatening all manner of procedural protestation as they attempt to delay and derail the bill's eventual implementation. One of the most intriguing aspects of the sprawling, thousand page law, however, has been the stipulation that individual states will be given a choice to either accept federal funding to expand their statewide Medicaid roster, or to forfeit all federal funding for that program in perpetuity. The role of government in monitoring and regulating the healthcare industry has been long debated, and the bitterly contested passage of President Obama's ACA, a law aimed at revising the country's health insurance system through the creating of a federal health insurance exchange to facilitate increased competition among insurers, has rekindled the debate over who holds the ultimate responsibility for regulating the care provided by hospitals, community clinics, and private practices.

This is an area where public opinion and public policy match in that they both heavily favor regressive taxation (Brown et al., 2014). Tausanovitch and Warshaw (2013) have developed a means of understanding political preference in comparison with public opinion and public policy to determine whether a government is best serving the desires of its people. This type of tool would be very useful for the state of Texas to use to determine whether the government is serving the desires of its constituents. But, just because public opinion and public policy line up doesn’t mean that the interests of citizens are best served because some groups may still be left out and those groups may have more needs than others. Texas’ current operational stance of “pay-as-you-go” makes for a very tight budget where the government cannot always afford to spend money on things the citizens of Texas may need. For instance, Texas operates its roads with the same “pay-as-you-go” mentality by opting for toll roads (Brown et al., 2014). Toll roads receive some government funding through state issued bonds and the collection of tolls after completion. This system is hardly fair for the citizens who do not use the toll roads but still must subsidize them through taxpayer dollars when the toll revenue does not meet the projected earnings. There are also many more citizens in Texas who live below the poverty line, 18.4% for Texas in comparison to 15.1% for the entire United States (Brown et al., 2014). With a larger proportion of citizens in poverty the burden to the state becomes greater, especially when funding remains low (Insert citation). Texas is just hurting its citizens by not being able to provide as much support and assistance to them as possible. Texas was given the opportunity, along with every other state in the union, to expand its offering of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. A sample of public opinion was obtained

What started out as a much needed revision of the Health Care System has turned into a total overhaul which was not passed with bipartisan agreement. This division is reflected not only in the government, but among the people of the United States as well. Polls are taken daily and most of them show that the vast majority of Americans do not want the Health Care Bill. Due to the larger part of America not wanting this bill and finding the bill itself unconstitutional, many states have now filed a lawsuit against the federal government. More than a dozen states that have filed suit against the government believe that this bill violates the Constitution and many more states are considering joining the lawsuits. Some of these contend that the Health Care Bill infringes upon the Tenth Amendment. This amendment states that "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people"(Dethrick 1). This amendment declares that the states have the ability to implement their own decisions despite what the federal government says. This lawsuit will prove to be a long and costly battle. Regardless of the results of this litigation, undoubtedly, the country will remain divided on this issue for years to come.

Goal The Affordable Care Act had the goal of the potentially increasing access to coverage for millions of Americans by implementation of market reforms. As well as the establishing new health insurance exchanges; and expanding the Medicaid eligibility for low-income adults (Keith & Lucia, 2014)

Achieving the goal of providing health care benefits for all U.S. citizens is a goal that is not new in our health care system and still lingers to be resolved by government officials. The health reform act’s provisions are stated to achieve these goals. The Medicaid

Texas, which currently has a large uninsured population and limited Medicaid eligibility, forfeits billions of dollars from the federal government every year by not expanding its Medicaid program as implemented in the Affordable Care Act. In contrast, Medicaid expansion could benefit the state exponentially and give its citizens the fullest potential of what this country offers. A substantial amount of federal funding that could increase uninsured coverage, improve healthcare costs, and provide economic stimulus is left on the table. Additionally, the nation benefits when each state participates, contributing to the success of the healthcare reform.

On June 28, 2012, The Supreme Court ruled the Federal Government does not have the constitutional right to sanction an individual to buy health insurance, but declared that the states do have the right to place a tax on citizens that do not carry insurance. This ruling is in response to President Obama’s Patient Protection and Healthcare Act of 2010. Passed on March 23, 2010, President Obama’s Reform Act mandates Texas, as well as the nation, to provide Medicaid funding to all individuals that are uninsured by 2014. As well as expanding Medicaid, it will provide exchanges, which are pools of insurance companies a previously uninsured person can pick

The affordable care act was signed into law by president Obama in the year 2010. The aim of the act is to ensure Americans get access to quality health care and at the same time, reform the health care system in order to manage costs. The act has different sections that explicitly explain how this aim would be realized.

The state of Texas has pulled its Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood, leaving poor residents with few options for affordable healthcare. Medicaid, a program focused on helping low-income families and individuals receive healthcare, has always been jointly operated by the state and the federal government. But to who this program would be eligible for is entirely up to the state. More conservative states, like Texas for example, strictly reserve Medicaid for only the most severe cases of poverty-stricken families, leaving a large portion of low-income residents uninsured. The Affordable Care Act, a federally mandated reform of Medicaid introduced by President Obama, would provide healthcare for many American citizens in need. Despite being

Texas has the largest uninsured population with an estimated 6.2 million uninsured citizens within its stateliness, approximately a quarter of the statewide population (Rapoport, 2012). In 2012, then governor, Rick Perry decided that Texas would not expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This decision led to much debate over whether or not Perry made the right decision to leave upwards of a million Texans, who did not receive insurance subsidies and did not qualify for Medicaid, uninsured. These Texans fell under what many politicians refer to as the “coverage gap.” Texas decided not to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act because of the effects it would have on hospitals, financial reasons, and increased number of

Ironically, Texas has the highest number of uninsured citizens in the nation, 6.2 million to be exact. The majority of these citizens are children. According to Goodwyn (2013), “by Texas refusing to participate in the Medicaid expansion, which is part of the ACA, the state will leave on the table an estimated 100 billion dollars over the next decade. It is sad to know many citizens in this state will be denied health care by those who already have the best insurance and will never have to worry about being uninsured. In addition, the Texas politicians fail to recognize the need for health care for neither its most vulnerable citizens nor the burden on the Emergency room as well as the rise in healthcare premiums for citizens who maintain health insurance. Landers (2013) reports, “whether they have a good income or a lower one, Texas lag behind much of the nation in access to and quality health care.” States who fail to expand Medicaid will see their funds distributed to states on board with expanding Medicaid.

Also by rejecting the Medicaid expansion community-based providers, including hospitals are casualties. Hospitals will continue to provide care to the uninsured without sufficient compensation, increasing shift costs to the privately insured. This also has a chilling effect on enrollment in private insurance plans through the new federally facilitated marketplace. Opposing the Medicaid expansion also ignores the real needs of the uninsured and the massive financial burden shouldered not only by the hospitals but taxpayers and businesses. (Stultz, 27)

The implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), popularly known as “Obamacare”, has drastically altered healthcare in America. The goal of this act was to give Americans access to affordable, high quality insurance while simultaneously decreasing overall healthcare spending. The ACA had intended to maximize health care coverage throughout the United States, but this lofty ambition resulted in staggeringly huge financial and human costs.