Essay On Healthcare Exchange

Closing out the meeting was John Connolly who serves as Associate Director of Insure the Uninsured. Connolly detailed the Covered California healthcare exchange as a commercial insurance provider. Connolly spent the majority of his time speaking addressing the improvements to coverage, and eligibility changes to applicable California residents. Making a repeated and substantial effort to state how the commercial insurance exchange would work, Connolly showed the various healthcare providers that would be available to certain individuals, and an estimation of the average cost per provider. The most significant aspect of Connolly’s presentation was his outline of the new health insurance plan tier levels, ranging from “Bronze” to “Platinum”. Bronze tier coverage represented the tier with the smallest amount of payment made by the plan and highest amount of payment made by the consumer, and Platinum tier coverage representing the highest amount of payment made by the plan and lowest amount paid by consumer.

In the second reading by Richard Saltman, for the author, the health care insurance exchange only benefit those who lacked insurance before. The ones who had a good insurance before will have some important annual deductible and have seen their premium increase to 30-60%. For Richard, the fact that the opposition has never turned into a political action is due to the failure of the opposition Republican Party and their incapacity to propose alternative strategy. Richard concludes by saying that The Supreme Court ruling in favor of the federal

At the moment, President Obama, Republican and Democratic members of Congress, the American Medical Association and America’s Health Insurance plans all agree that a change is needed to the current system. There is little debate that the health care is necessary but a lot of debate on how the change should be done.

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.

This May, the United States House of Representatives successfully passed the American Health Care Act. This passed by a slim margin of 217–213. The bill was then sent to the Senate for deliberation where it was highly criticized, especially by the Congressional Budget Office, for the number of citizens which it would negatively impact. Therefore, instead of amending the bill, the Senate decided to write its own version. The Senate GOP healthcare plan is titled as the Better Care Reconciliation Act. It is titled this way because reconciliation is the process which the Senate will be using in order to pass the legislation. This maneuver allows the Senate to bypass the filibuster process. This will lower the 60-vote majority requirement to pass

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

The main difference between the House and the Senate is that the house puts all responsibility on the national government while the Senate positions the responsibility onto the states when it comes to creating their health insurance exchanges. It seems as though that if a state fails to do it they are then under the hand of the House and not the Senate. While both bills are aiming towards a similar result they go about it in different ways. Exclusivity of the health insurance exchange is one way they differ. , The Senate wants non-group health insurance to be sold outside of the exchange where it will be less regulated. The House calls for all non-group health insurance coverage to be sold through the health insurance exchange.

I believe healthcare reform is a waste of time and money but I also see that it can be beneficial to many uninsured Americans. First of all, health care costs keep rising and in 2011 the average cost for a family of four increased by 7.3% or $19,393. This is double the cost estimated in 2003, and by 2030 payroll taxes will cover only 38% of Medicare Costs and the rest will be added to our already enormous budget deficit.

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.

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.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been a topic of dispute since its introduction and continues to be discussed by politicians in the U.S. and throughout the world even after its passage. The Act has many opponents and is the cause of much controversy nationwide, primarily because it introduces higher healthcare costs for the richest citizens. Nevertheless, the ACA is an important stage in the American healthcare development process as it not only allows more people to receive healthcare services, but will also reduce the deficit. However, not everyone agrees. The policy is controversial in terms of cost vs. benefits, but the benefits ultimately outweigh the costs.

U.S. health care reform is currently one of the most heavily discussed topics in health discourse and politics. After former President Clinton’s failed attempt at health care reform in the mid-1990s, the Bush administration showed no serious efforts at achieving universal health coverage for the millions of uninsured Americans. With Barack Obama as the current U.S. President, health care reform is once again a top priority. President Obama has made a promise to “provide affordable, comprehensive, and portable health coverage for all Americans…” by the end of his first term (Barackobama.com). The heated debate between the two major political parties over health care reform revolves around how to pay for it and more importantly, whether it

In the past what has hindered health care reform plans from being enacted were the issues surrounding how they were to be funded. When comparing the attempts of the Clinton administration, the current legislation developed by both the House and the Senate, and Britain’s National Health Service, it is in my opinion that my optimal health care reform plan be funded through taxes, cost-sharing, and fees. In order for this plan to be successful it must be economically feasible and be able to reduce overall health care costs.

Simultaneously, health and healthcare policy plays a tremendous role in the quality of life of every American. Likewise, by the government constantly interceding, health and healthcare is significantly influenced by the political climate and undertakings of administration; therefore creating a conflictual split between republicans and democrats. Health care is regarded as a product rather than a human right shaped by policymaking. Policies establish healthcare service stipulations, which are rooted in local, state, and federal statutes combined with landmark court decisions. Not only does policy focus on healthcare services; but, it also places a substantial emphasis on cost-efficiency and equality.

Since the initiation of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, Americans have been put back in charge of their individual health care. Under this new law, a health insurance marketplace provides a haven for individuals without insurance to gain coverage. Just this year, citizens found out early whether they qualified for Medicare or the CHIP formally known as the Children’s Health Insurance Program. So much is to be learned about the Affordable Care act and this paper provides the roles of the different governmental branches, along with other important factors associated with this law.