Cost-Sharing In Healthcare

Our Healthcare system is clearly business based according to the article “Cost Conundrum” and on the movie “Escape Fire”. In the movie it had an impacting story of an older lady who had heart problems where she went to a doctor and they were going to charge her thousands of dollars were later she went to a different doctor and they charged her a couple hundred dollars for t he same procedure. I couldn’t believe that in a different office she would get the same procedure done for a lot cheaper than in the other doctor’s office. Also, it surprised me how the medical staff are giving all these medications to our soldiers were they are clearly

The current paper examines the Disproportionate Share Hospital Payment Reduction CMS 2367F rule which was effective on November 18, 2013. The Disproportionate Share Hospital Payment Reduction CMS 2367F is Federal Legislation that was implemented due to the Affordable Care Act. The rule was initially proposed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS on May 13, 2013. The proposed rule was to implement the provision of the Affordable Care Act that reduces Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) allotments.

The ACA also introduced certain incentives for applying for insurance such as subsidies as well as mandates that penalized those who refused health insurance with a tax. However, for those individuals who would see at least 8% of their income go towards insurance, are exempt from the penalty. The law requires insurance providers to accept any applicants and prohibits discrimination from preexisting conditions or sex. It also requires that insurers provide all patients with ten essential health benefits. Provisions also prevent insurers from subjecting preventive care and vaccinations and to co-payments. Annual and lifetime coverage caps on the aforementioned essential benefits were also banned by the ACA. The Centre for Disease Control reported a steep drop from 16% to 8.9% in individuals lacking health insurance from 2010 to 2016. States that chose to expand Medicaid had roughly a 7% uninsured rate compared to those that did not expand. Despite the positive effect of the ACA, it is not without its demerits, Conservatives in particular took offense at the increase in both taxes and insurance premiums needed to expand coverage to those with prior conditions as well as benefits. Several new taxes help provide funding for Obamacare such as those on pharmaceutical sales, as well as the higher income bracket. Thus there is opposition with the fact that the wealthy are in part subsidizing insurance for the poor.

The United States health-care system grapples with myriad challenges ranging from stress of an aging population, tremendous inefficiencies and rising costs. These challenges have significantly impacted access to health care services by the citizens.

The signing of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 was a big step forward in fixing the broken healthcare system in the United States. Unfortunately the law did not do enough to help a large segment of the population achieve its named goal. Due to high deductibles and other cost sharing in lower tier plans, healthcare continues to be unaffordable to many.

For eight years, former President Barack Obama strived to get a health care for those who could not afford it, and that is when Obamacare was created. Now, our new President Donald Trump is looking to reform health care. In an article written by Lee and Luhby on CNN, they stated, “Within hours of taking the oath of office, President Donald Trump on Friday night signed an executive order aimed at trying to fulfill one of his most impassioned campaign promises: Rolling back Obamacare” (1). President Trump wanted to prevent civilians to use Obamacare which is also known as the Affordable Care Act. President Trump’s intention is to help the people of America to have the right not to pay for an expensive health care insurance. Donald Trump has seven

These “cost-sharing reductions” are not the same subsidies that were at issue in King v. Burwell, which decided that certain tax credits would remain available for eligible Americans regardless of which Marketplace (state or Federally-facilitated) was used to purchase health insurance. “Cost-sharing reductions” help individuals pay for out-of-pocket costs by reducing cost-sharing (deductibles, copayments, etc) on health insurance plans. These reductions are available to individuals whose income is between 100% and 250% of the federal poverty line and who sign up for insurance through a Marketplace. House v. Burwell is still pending at the lowest level of the federal court system. The Judge assigned to the case has not yet ruled on whether the plaintiffs should be allowed to bring the case at all (called

Single payer reimbursement is a health care financing system that “includes both the collection of money for health care and reimbursement of providers for health care costs.” In such a system, the government or a quasi public agency is the entity that bears full responsibility of collecting funds and reimbursing appropriate parties, but the provision of care remains in private hands. Through taxpayer funds, the government collects money from individuals and businesses, and then reimburses providers who delivered health care services to those individuals enrolled in the public health insurance program. (http://www.pnhp.org/facts/what-is-single-payer).

Affordable health care has always been a problem in the United States of American yet we have the largest economy in the world. The Affordable Care Act was signed on March 23, 2010 yet so many Americans are still unable to pay for health insurance. By examining the situation, we can look for problems such as possibly reducing military spending and relocating the extra towards health care which is just one of the examples. A country as large as the United States should not have a problem implementing affordable health care for its citizens. The current cost of health care in the United States should be Affordable for everyone regardless of income.

Medicare is another section that will feel some relieve from practices brought from the Act. As mentioned before, the cost of health care is expensive, therefore making it difficult for those under the Medicare plan to seek preventive services. Before moving forward on the effects of the Act on Medicare, one must first explain some of the benefits of Medicare. Medicare is the nation’s largest health insurance program, it serves more than forty-two million enrollees, and it was originally established to provide access to health services for the elderly (Carroll, 2009). One can grasp the idea that the nation, along with its government, has made constant efforts to support the health of all Americans. This especially true for the ever growing

Through the presidency of Barack Obama, the United States was introduced with the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This act gives the opportunity to individuals and families a greater access to affordable health insurance options that include medical, dental, vision, and other types of health insurance that they may not have been applicable for previously. The cost of health care can be extremely expensive for those who face ongoing medical issues. Through the ACA, it allows individuals to enroll that have lost previous coverage, had a child, or got married and the list goes on. “In 2014, Medicaid coverage had been expanded, through the ACA, to almost all adults with incomes at or below 138% poverty in states that have accepted the expansion, and tax credits are available for those with incomes up to 400% of poverty who purchase coverage through a health insurance marketplace” (Garfield). After the ACA was established the uninsured rates dropped to a historic low.

For many Americans the cost of health care is something they cannot easily afford, however these individuals make too much to obtain Medicaid. Usually these Americans are young and generally healthy individuals that do not need access to medical services regularly. Until the ACA passed in 2010, many of these healthy individuals were not covered by an insurance policy. Under our new laws regarding mandatory coverage, these hard working, healthy taxpayers are forced to maintain insurance

Shared health services are one of the greatest thinking by provincial government. If government implement shared health services, it can solve the money problems associated with healthcare. The province Ontario, British Columbia in collaboration with Alberta and New Brunswick have introduced health shared service models. In my opinion, it will be one of the greatest step for allocating funds to different province and there will be a huge change in the health care services provided to people of Canada. It will surely help to improve the efficiency of care and manage cost. Public and private sectors use this type of service, so it will help in providing quality care to residents of Canada.

All across the country sick and elderly Americans, including 56 percent of Donald Trump’s voting base, rely on the Affordable Care Act for stable and affordable health care and treatment for illnesses. Taking away healthcare from millions of Americans is both a heartless and idiotic move by the Republicans. If this bill is passed, the Republicans could lose a large portion their voting base, who rely on medicaid, and lose their majority in the House of Representatives and Senate in the midterm election next year. It is clear that Paul Ryan and the rest of the Republican leadership are willing to take away healthcare from the people who voted them into office in order to get a massive tax break for their rich friends.

Cost, the number one thing on people’s mind nowadays. People’s worry about the cost of healthcare usually leads to them being uninsured. For my healthcare system, I want it to publicly funded by public taxes (private donations are always welcome), similar to how healthcare in Europe is modeled. For check ups and routine things, the cost of those visits will be covered, if one visits a preferred doctor provided by the healthcare company. But if the medical expenses go over a certain amount, the patient will have to pay a percent of the cost. Such as if you go to the doctor a yearly check up, that visit will be covered. If the doctor happens to find a brain tumor and surgery is required and the costs exceed the amount able to be covered, a percentage of the remaining amount will be billed to the patient and the rest paid for by the healthcare system. I believe this is the fairest way of rationalizing and dividing up the cost and the money of a healthcare system. Routine things should not cost an arm and a leg, I believe they should be free to promote good health and wellness. But at the same time, the system should not be completely free, because then taxes would be ridiculously high. Also, to make sure patients are not getting ripped off, I would impose price control. This would only affect doctors that are under our healthcare system. Private practices can continue to run independently since they are not funded by the public. Although the public doctors will get paid less,