Healthcare In Turmoil Essay

America is facing a healthcare crisis! In town hall meetings across America, brawls have broken out during speeches given in an attempt to promote government run healthcare. When looking at the big picture, healthcare is only a small portion of the current problems, but a very big one, in the eyes of Americans, considering how it affects every citizen. The healthcare system in the United States is experiencing hard times, but does that mean, we, as Americans, should just step aside and let government take over? Absolutely not! Government will claim that the numbers of uninsured Americans are high because of the prices insurance companies charge, but are these numbers correct and who makes up these numbers? What will a government run

Q2-Evaluate Vegemite’s brand image based on the social media research undertaken by Talbot and his team .In light of these historic factors, Why did Talbot want to revitalize the brand?

President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act on March 23, 2010. This law puts in place widespread health insurance reforms that expanded out over the last 4 years and continues to change the lives of many Americans today. Health care reform has been an extensively debated topic for multiple years, and the ACA is the first effective attempt at passing a law aiming to make health care not only affordable, but accessible for all individuals. The law impacts many Americans including, children, employers, government programs which includes federal and state, health plans and private insurers, health care coverage, health care cost, and the quality of care received. The main goal of the law is to expand health care coverage, broaden Medicaid eligibility, minimize and regulate health care cost, and improve the health care delivery system. In order to improve the health care delivery there have been new consumer protections established and an increase access to affordable care.

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.

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.

On March 23, 2010, the Affordable care act also known as “obamacare” was signed into law by president Barrack Obama. Only gay marriage legislations and gun laws have elicited more public response than the affordable care act. Both opponents and proponents have presented constructive arguments of the perceived failures and strengths of the act. Owing to the intense debate surrounding the act, very few people understand that the act only came into full implementation in 2014. The raving reviews and critiques of the debate have bordered on myths and perception influenced by political alignments. Pertinent questions have been asked about the affordable care act. There have been conflicting accounts on the role of the affordable care act in regulating the health insurance industry. Concerns have been raised on why patients are paying higher out of pocket expenses yet the affordable care act was meant to introduce checks and balance in healthcare provisions. This paper therefore seeks to deeply explore the affordable care act by researching on these questions. The paper will also demonstrate perspectives on the good and the bad that comes from the affordable care act. Lastly, the paper will analyze healthcare situation in New York City with statistics showing that healthcare services are becoming more expensive in the city even after the full implementation of the affordable care act.

LEADER’S EFFECTIVENESS USING UTILITARIANISM AS THE ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING APPROACH IN REGARD TO THE HEALTHCARE CHALLENGES SET FORTH BY THE PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT OF 2010

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

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.

In 2012 the Supreme Court resolved a case where Florida sued the Federal Government over the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. Florida believed the Federal Government had overstepped its allocated powers granted to it by the constitution. Specifically article 1, section 8, known as the Spending Clause, which gave the government the power to grant money to the states and tell the states what to do with said money (Jefferson, 1787, p. 25). Florida’s issue arose in the fact that the Affordable Care Act provided no additional funding and the government has no right to tell the states how to spend their own wealth.

The Affordable Care Act is one of America’s many insurance plans to attempt to lower costs and provide a wider coverage for citizens all over the country. It is a widely controversial topic in America; especially within the past year. Although there are some people out there who support it, there are also those who base their campaigns on getting it repealed; Donald Trump is a prime example of this. When instituting this policy, Obama had very good intentions, but he was far from fulfilling his intended purpose. Today, the ACA has many flaws that affect Americans both as a whole and individually. Obamacare has raised costs for individuals, contributed even more money to America’s debt, is the complete opposite of what President Obama said it would be, it takes away civil liberties, and puts new standards on patients.

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.

An issue that is widely discussed and debated concerning the United States’ economy is our health care system. The health care system in the United States is not public, meaning that the states does not offer free or affordable health care service. In Canada, France and Great Britain, for example, the government funds health care through taxes. The United States, on the other hand, opted for another direction and passed the burden of health care spending on individual consumers as well as employers and insurers. In July 2006, the issue was transparency: should the American people know the price of the health care service they use and the results doctors and hospitals achieve? The Wall Street Journal article revealed that “U.S. hospitals,

ObamaCare and the Healthcare System Medical and health insurance is a very helpful and needed aid in America. Although not

Quality healthcare in the more rural areas of the United States is not only getting more difficult to obtain, but difficult to afford. American citizens living in rural areas have the highest rates of chronic disease, higher poverty populations, less health insurance, and there is less access to primary care physicians. When the economy is at its lowest point it causes an increase in a number of access and health issues that have already had prior problems in communities and in rural areas, therefore the main goal of the national health care tax of 2010 was to allow coverage to all residents of the United States, and also by transferring necessary health care to places that were farther away, such as the