Dr. Timothy Smith
Position Paper
The argument in Favor of the Policy
Anecdote Argument
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) was developed with the aim of improving the affordability as well as access to healthcare in the United States, regardless of the economic class of the citizen. One of the arguments in support of the policy is that it has increased the access to healthcare, with many of the Americans confirming that they can now acquire medical insurance even with pre-existing conditions and use it to cater for their healthcare needs (Graves & Swartz, 2017). An anecdote to explain the improved access is one by Bettina Cox who previously had not sort medical aid while her health continued to decline. The woman claimed that she developed a tumor but did not have insurance to cater for the healthcare costs, but after the Affordable Care Act was extended coverage she utilized Medicaid to get the treatment she needed.
Positive Argument
Another of the reasons why the Affordable Care Act is a good policy for America is that it shifts the burden of health care costs from the government to the care providers. The institution of the Affordable Care Act is expected to have lowered government spending on healthcare by $143 billion in the next three years. One of the ways through which it reduces the healthcare costs incurred by the government is by cutting the reimbursement costs on some healthcare services. For instance for every person that is released from the hospital after a short stay and gets readmitted within a month, then the hospital is not be refunded of the money. Such measures will ensure that the budget deficit is significantly reduced, while at the same time providing that quality services are offered to the patents. Moreover, the family’s burden of attaining care is reduced, more so with the Act authorizing free preventative care.
Response
The claim that the Affordable Care Act has helped the Americans and improved the health of many people is very true. Previously, there were numerous cases of people failing to go to hospitals because they had no insurance to cater for the rising costs of healthcare. Although there are a few cases where people feel that the Act did not bring changes in the healthcare sector, one should not disregard the fact that even the low-income household can currently afford to pay the insurance premiums (Sommers et al., 2017). Furthermore, the anecdote explained helps in explaining how bad things were before ACA, the changes that have occurred and the change that may be expected in the future.
In the argument in favor of the policy, is a case of oversimplification of the benefits that come with instituting the Affordable Care Act in the United States. One of the other advantages that have been disregarded is that the policy ensures that children continue to remain under their parent’s insurance cover until age 26, which guarantees that they get the medical attention they seek without having to worry about the costs (Sommers et al., 2017). While the ACA is beneficial by reducing the burden of healthcare costs from the government, it has a drawback in that this cost load is shifted to pharmaceutical companies, in which they had to pay $84.8 billion over the standard fees in 2013. The adverse effect of this shift is that it could be passed on o the consumers, whereby the drug firms raise the cost of medicine to help cover extra expenses incurred in fees.
Position against the Policy
Positive Argument
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) reform developed during President Obama’s reign was not effective since it led to four million individual choosing to pay tax and avoid paying for the cover. The policy resulted in an increase in tax, which forced some of the people in the nation to avoid taking the health insurance since their income was already reduced by the high taxes paid. The new policy also led to 5,000,000 people losing their employment-centered health covers since it was expensive for business to pay the health covers for the employees. Businesses opted out of the insurance covers they provided to the employees leaving five million workers without cover. Additionally, the new policy increased the tax rate by 0.9% among certain groups of income earners. The increase in tax affected 1,000,000 individuals earning $200,000 and above and 4,000,000 individuals earning $250,000 and above in joint returns. The rise in tax lowered the financial ability of individuals to seek healthcare services and made the healthcare plan less affordable.
Argument by Anecdote
In 2011, Nicole Dardeau failed to access healthcare despite having the Medicaid that was supposed to increase access to healthcare services. Dardeau could not find a surgeon willing to accept a Medicaid patient and offer treatment. In the end, the Medicaid was useless to Dardeau since it limited her access to healthcare. Based on the story it is rational to argue that the new health policy is ineffective and is reducing the access to healthcare. The complexity of the new systems has led to some health providers avoiding Medicaid patients since it underpays them for their services. Medicaid is the lowest payer to doctors, which makes them avoid treating patients using the system.
Response to Argument
Overall, the new health policy has been ineffective in improving healthcare in the US. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has increased the cost of healthcare, reduced the effectiveness of the healthcare system, and reduced the accessibility of health services. The facts raised against ACA prove that it has done more harm to healthcare than good. The policy has made it difficult for people in the society to access and afford healthcare services.
The ACA led to increased taxes as workers were made to pay more in taxes to fund the public health insurance. The claim is supported by Aron-Dine & Park (2017) claim that the ACA act had caused an increase in income taxes among some people, which were revised by the new Trump administration. Based on the authors’ arguments and the fact that four million people opted to pay taxes rather than the insurance cover, it is rational to claim that the new health system was unsuccessful in making healthcare more accessible and affordable. What is more, the statistics provided pointing out the millions of people affected by healthcare illustrate that the ACA failed to change the health system.
Oostrom, Einav & Finkelstein (2017) claims support the idea that ACA has reduced the access to healthcare by people. The authors’ arguments, which assert that Medicaid patients receive lower quality health services, prove that ACA has failed in improving healthcare in the US. The new system pays the healthcare providers poorly, which has prompted them to avoid the patients covered by Medicaid. Therefore, the argument against the policy based on its complexity and costs to doctors is logical.
References
Aron-Dine, A., & Park, E. (2017). Trump administration’s new health rule would reduce tax credits, raise costs, for millions of moderate-income families. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (February 15, 2017). At: http://www. cbpp. org/research/health/trumpadministrations-new-health-rule-would-reduce-tax-credits-raise-costs-for.
Graves, J. A., & Swartz, K. (2017). Effects of affordable care act marketplaces and Medicaid eligibility expansion on access to cancer care. Cancer journal (Sudbury, Mass.), 23(3), 168.
Oostrom, T., Einav, L., & Finkelstein, A. (2017). Outpatient office wait times and quality of care for Medicaid patients. Health Affairs, 36(5), 826-832.
Sommers, B. D., Maylone, B., Blendon, R. J., Orav, E. J., & Epstein, A. M. (2017). Three-year impacts of the Affordable Care Act: improved medical care and health among low-income adults. Health Affairs, 36(6), 1119-1128.