Federalism, Separation Of Powers And Rule Of Law

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.

Separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism are ways the government doesn't have too much power. Separation of powers makes sure no one gets too much power. Checks and Balances makes sure the three branches can monitor each other. Federalism is a system of government where the states government shares power with the national government. The founders of the constitution included the principles of separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism in order to prevent the government from being too powerful.

When it comes to federalism, it is not the easiest to pinpoint the exact meaning. Federalism can be defined as the distribution of power in an organization between a central authority and a voting member of a community (Merriam, Webster). It can be described as one of two fundamental organizational principles of the U.S Constitution. The other basic organizational principle, such as separation of powers, involves the distribution of powers within the National Government. It is said that federalism is the single most important protection for our freedom ( Nagel, 181). There are many different types of federalism, including Dual, Cooperative, Regulated, and New federalism.

Federalism is a form of government in which the power to make laws and other specific responsibilities are divided across the national, state, and local governments. How that power is divided has been a constant source of conflict as each level has some degree of autonomy. That is, each level has the capacity to carry out some policies without interference from the others. The national government is responsible for things of national common interest such as, national defense and foreign policy, as well as, responsibilities through implied powers that are inferred in the Constitution. The national government also has the power to declare war, coin money, control interstate commerce, borrow money, manage the postal service, and anything else

Federalism- A way of organizing a nation that two or more levels of government have formal authority over the same land and people; it is a system of shared power between units of power.

In every day life one must make decisions, and with decisions there comes options from which to choose from. One decision from Texas that has caused concerned has ties to one of the provisions in the Affordable Care Act. This provision wants to expand Medicaid coverage to low income Americans. However, the Supreme Court ruled a decision to make the Medicaid expansion optional for states. Therefore, Texas opted out on this idea but is still indecisive on weather or not this expansion is beneficial to the state. As we all know factors like politics enter into the mix, as does the costs of the expansion, availability, and quality of care for these new “enrollees”. The idea of medical care for all seems like a simple effective idea, but the effects overall is detrimental to Texas citizens like myself and my family, who doesn’t necessarily fit into this “mold” of the uninsured citizen the act is trying to attract. The decision Texas made to not expand, in my opinion is a reflection of all citizens who feel that they will not benefit from this implicated Medicaid program.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA), also referred to as ObamaCare, is a complex U.S healthcare reform that attempts to expand and improve access to healthcare and decrease spending through taxes and regulations. The main goal of the ACA is to provide more Americans with affordable health insurance. States vary in when and how they implemented the ACA in order to meet the needs of their state in hope to decrease the uninsured population. Every state had the option decide whether to offer healthcare through a state-based or a federal marketplace. Some states sued the federal government questioning whether they even had to right to impose this act. New Mexico and Pennsylvania are just two of the states that have had to figure out a way implement the Affordable Care Act. Each one had to take into consideration several factors including their state population, the demographics of that population, how many uninsured people there were, and the economy of their state. They both had the public plans such as Medicaid, Medicare and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) options as well as new federal subsidies that would now be offered depending upon income. Since there is no “one size fits all” health plan each state was challenged to make the best decisions using the tools available to them. This information was then used to formulate a plan that would give the most people access to affordable healthcare in each of these

Federalism is a political concept describing the practice whereby a group of members are bound together by a covenant. An advantage of federalism is that one person will not have too much power. So none of the branches can run with all the power, and what they say goes. Also it helps divide power between local, state, and federal governments. Everyone has to go through someone, also known as checks and balances, to get laws or other things passed. It also allow citizen to be involves in what is going in the country. All the power is not in one person’s hands, it is distributed to local representatives, and they give it to their citizens to vote. So citizens are aware of what is going on in government on the federal, state, and local levels.

In a traditionalist state, such as Texas, the financial toll that Medicaid would have on its taxpayers was on the frontlines. The Texas legislature was worried about whether or not its taxpayers would face a tax increase to cover the increased cost of those covered by Medicaid. These taxpayers would inadvertently pay for the hospital bills of those who are uninsured in Texas through an average $1,800 rise in the cost of their premiums (Rapoport, 2012). In support of expanding Medicaid, Texas would receive federal funds in order to ease the cost that accompany the expansion. Since Texas decided not to expand Medicaid, Texas “would be leaving billions and billions of federal dollars on the table” according to Anne Dunkelberg (Rapoport, 2012). Not only does this monetary incentive give Texas an extra push to participate towards expanding Medicaid but it would also help the residents of the state to get insured. Texas legislators understood that this monetary incentive would not fully cover the cost of the newly enrolled Medicaid recipients. In the end, they would have to rework the annual budget and increase taxes in order to cover these extra recipients.

The Medicaid revisions and expansion under the ACA, exhibited the federal government overstepping their power as they tried to penalize any state governments in opposition of the expansion, consequently, taking away states’ power. The Medicaid Expansion Mandate would’ve compelled states to join due to the loss of federal funding towards Medicaid if they did not adhere to (Phi Le, par.40). The Supreme Court hearing allowed states to have a choice whether or not to participate in the expansion without a total loss of their Medicaid funding. In return, states who didn't participate wouldn’t receive additional funding that coupled with this mandate that required inclusion, extending coverage of those who were at “Income below or ar 133% federal

By the state representatives not expanding Medicaid, not only will health insurance cost skyrocket, but only a small amount of money will be saved by the state. The state representatives should protect the interests of their residents rather than those of their own and give the residents in these states the opportunity to have access to the benefits of the Affordable Care

Federalism is a concept of a system of self-sustained units of governments and was considered to be the main idea of the U.S. Constitution. Vincent Ostrom’s The meaning of American federalism gives the definition of federalism as “a system of government where authority is exercised concurrently by a national government and state or provincial governments”.

Federalism is a system of government that divides power between a national government and a regional government with the use of a constitution. Throughout the United States history, federalism has played a significant role in the constitution and the system of government adopted by the United States of America. Federalism has also changed throughout the course of America's history to fit the constitution and the government.

Federalism is one of the six basic principles of the constitution. Federalism is defined as a division of power between national and state government. The constitution provides for a distribution of powers conferring on the states certain powers to the national government and certain powers. The Framers were dedicated to the concept of limited government. They were convinced that government power posed a threat to individual freedom, that the exercise of government power should be limited to prevent abuse. The national government is a government of delegated powers, powers conferred upon it by the Constitution, such as the extorted powers contained in the constitution, the implied powers are not directly placed in the constitution, but are

These powers provide the federal and the state governments with their role in the function of federalism. Further, Article VI gives the dominant rule of law to the federal government over the states rights in case there is ever a misunderstanding.