This sample essay written before the 2012 presidential election, touches on the sociopolitical background of Obamacare, outlining the differences between Republican and Democratic ideologies on the matter. If you are interested in learning more about this topic, or would like to buy an essay from our awesome site, give us a call or simply check out our pricing today!
Universal Health Care and the 2012 Elections: What is Washington Saying?
The new health care policy provides more coverage to a larger percentage of Americans, is more cost-effective for the United States’ budget especially during these dire economic conditions, and is a moral cause and sign of community that all Americans should strive for. Furthermore, it is important to note that while democratic presidential candidates such as potential incumbent Obama support a policy for Universal Healthcare, more conservative and Republican candidates such as Mitt Romney opt for the privatization of healthcare, and letting the capitalistic market naturally dictate the healthcare industry.
This essay will comprise of several parts. I will initially discuss what opponents of universal healthcare are concerned about. Subsequently, I will then analyze the reasons we should support a universal healthcare policy, explaining that universal healthcare provides multiple benefits ranging from protecting the poverty-stricken and insured to being a more efficient financial plan for the government. I will finally address the two most important presidential candidates and determine how their ideologies support or challenge this viewpoint. Ultimately, I will conclude that with although there are several controversies regarding universal healthcare, overall it is a sound policy that will improve the United States government in multiple ways.
The Republican Argument and the Problems of Obamacare
Conservatives argue that universal healthcare will place a larger financial burden upon the federal government. Tennessee, which although has a whopping ninety-three percent of its citizens insured, is going practically bankrupt in doing so, as most needy citizens receive care under the nation’s Medicaid programs (Clemmit 7). As a result, many politicians employ Tennessee’s predicament to illustrate how universal health care is potentially a fiscal disaster. Furthermore, employers also make sacrifices when purchasing care for their employees, resulting in the perpetuating state of high cost, low quality care. The fairly common Health Maintenance Organization package, or “HMO,” demonstrates this very principle, for this form of insurance was designed specifically to provide coverage yet keep costs low for companies (Reinhard 5). Additionally, Congress claims that this form of health care will expand the role of the government to an unnecessary degree, becoming too involved in the lives of its constituents. Thus, due to these reasons, many politicians in the United States feel apprehensive or oppose a nation-wide health care system, and employ these rationales as motives for maintaining current insurance policies.
The problem with universal health care, however, lies in the fact that above all concerns, the main goal of insurance companies within the United States is to make a profit. Insurance companies seek to provide satisfactory care without major financing and costs of their clients. On the other hand, clients seek plans that provide...