The Affordable Care Act, Helping or Hurting?
Merriam-Webster’s definition of socialism is “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods”. The Affordable Care act permits the U.S. Government to strictly regulate the health care system, almost to the point of eventual monopolization. The act is also known as “Obamacare”, even though it is a program Democrats have sought to pass since the presidency of Bill Clinton (“Making the Case”). It plans to extend affordable coverage to 32 million Americans, cut back on money citizens pay for medicine by establishing protective tariffs, offering deductibles and making it easier to qualify for Medicaid, which sounds good, but few think the program as a whole is beneficial(“Health Care Reform”, “Making the Case”, White House). Three out of Ten people do not understand what the government has posted on its sites; sites that are supposed to help inform the public about the act(Agiesta). The Affordable Care act suggests the distribution of wealth throughout the financial system, which is devastating to all social classes and fiscal stability if the act is not repealed. The US government suggests the taxing of upper classes, and their luxury items to pay for the Affordable Care act. Not all money comes from the taxation of the rich, but almost 85 percent of the 940 billion dollars comes from a tax on those making more than 250,000 dollars a year (“Health Care Reform”). Where does all of the money taxed and borrowed through bonds to pay for the act go? Money taxed from the rich is used to offer subsides, deductibles, give seniors free wellness checkups and remove co pays on certain health services (“Making the Case”, Agiesta). Also, families who make less than 22,000 dollars a year are eligible for Medicaid, discounts on their health insurance and larger tax credits (“Making the Case”). Health insurance companies can no longer charge deductibles or co pay for mammograms, colonoscopies and immunizations, which are some of the major ways insurance companies make their money (White House). This cripples health insurance companies profits, are some of the “provisions that implement a new Patient’s Bill of Rights that put an end to some of the worst insurance company practices”(White House) really terrible practices? The revised Patient’s Bill of Rights abolishes denying people with physiological or psychological impairments from purchasing insurance and, restrictions on annual limits. Insurance companies have the right to discriminate to make their practices cost effective, because it is not unconstitutional. In addition, payments made on legal medicines and other drugs may be reimbursed by the government (“Affordable Care Act Tax Provisions”). Only on certain medicines though, mostly medicines that are made in the US, which is a attempt to get the people to buy from certain medicinal companies. Insurance companies often do not cover people with disabilities because of the cost to cover them (White House). Citizens will also be able to purchase health insurance plan through affordable state plans. If state plans offer affordable rates, insurance companies would be forced to go lower than state plans, or they would starve out, creating a monopoly in the health care system. Should a person that is not able to pay for health insurance on their current salary be able to receive discounts for a program where the government forces them to buy health insurance? The constitutionality of the act is something commonly debated and the supreme court is currently working on deciding. The government would force citizens to buy a certain product or be heavily fined, which is arguably in violation of antitrust laws and the eighth amendment. The Sherman Antitrust Laws prohibit monopolies, and economic freedom, which means consumers are guaranteed the opportunity to purchase product from more...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document