SEE ATTACHMENT
Interest Group Presentation
Requirements
You have been given the opportunity to present your case to an influential interest group in your community. You will use information gathered in each of the previous assignments to create a compelling presentation with the goal of persuading the interest group that your position on the policy is worthy of being implemented.
Create a 6–8-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you:
· Provide a historical perspective of the policy from the Week 3 assignment, Historical Perspective.
· Describe the official and unofficial actors of the policy from the Week 6 assignment, Analyzing Policy.
· Present both of the positions of the policy from the Week 8 assignment, Position Paper.
· Persuade the audience that the position you have chosen is worthy of the policy being implemented.
· Include at least four peer-reviewed references (no more than five years old) from material outside the textbook. Note: Appropriate peer-reviewed references include scholarly articles and governmental websites. Wikipedia, other wikis, and any other websites ending in anything other than “.gov” do not qualify as peer-reviewed. Use
Basic Search: Strayer University Online Library
to identify references.
Your assignment must include:
· Title slide with the name of the policy, your name, and date.
· Reference slide with at least four peer-reviewed references formatted according to the Strayer Writing Standards.
· 6–8 slides (the title slide and reference slide are not included in this number).
· A typed narration of each of your slides in the Notes section of the PowerPoint presentation.
This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards. For assistance and information, please refer to the Strayer Writing Standards link in the left-hand menu of your course. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
The specific course learning outcome associated with this assignment is:
· Defend positions (for and against) on policy issues using various argument types.
Interest Group Presentation
Requirements
You have been given the opportunity to present your case to an influential interest group in your community. You will use information gathered in each of the previous assignments to create a compelling presentation with the goal of persuading the interest group that your position on the policy is worthy of being implemented.
Create a 6–8-slide PowerPoint presentation in which you:
· Provide a historical perspective of the policy from the Week 3 assignment, Historical Perspective.
· Describe the official and unofficial actors of the policy from the Week 6 assignment, Analyzing Policy.
· Present both of the positions of the policy from the Week 8 assignment, Position Paper.
· Persuade the audience that the position you have chosen is worthy of the policy being implemented.
· Include at least four peer-reviewed references (no more than five years old) from material outside the textbook. Note: Appropriate peer-reviewed references include scholarly articles and governmental websites. Wikipedia, other wikis, and any other websites ending in anything other than “.gov” do not qualify as peer-reviewed. Use
Basic Search: Strayer University Online Library
to identify references.
Your assignment must include:
· Title slide with the name of the policy, your name, and date.
· Reference slide with at least four peer-reviewed references formatted according to the Strayer Writing Standards.
· 6–8 slides (the title slide and reference slide are not included in this number).
· A typed narration of each of your slides in the Notes section of the PowerPoint presentation.
This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards. For assistance and information, please refer to the Strayer Writing Standards link in the left-hand menu of your course. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
2
Historical Perspectives
Historical Perspective
WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT
Historical Perspective
Discuss The Historical Perspective of The Time When the Policy Was Discussed or Implemented. Indicate The Context or The Problem of The Day and The Urgency for The Policy.
I choose to compare President Clinton’s and President Obama’s healthcare policies for my homework. Clinton was the first president to prioritize expenses throughout his term, and his successors did the same. Because healthcare has been a source of conflict for a long time, it was necessary to address the problem of inflation. The main goal was to obtain universal coverage, which he accomplished by requiring that everyone buy insurance via the government. Furthermore, corporations were obligated to make the dame available to their workers (Zhang, 2021). Even though the program would assist many people, certain individuals would be required to pay more than others, generating disagreement about the policy’s effectiveness. “You may be eligible for a subsidy if your company employs less than 50 individuals. You may be required to pay an extra cost if a business offers minimal coverage. If you are a young single person in your twenties already covered, your insurance rates may rise somewhat. This is because you will be joining a significant gathering of middle-aged and older people.” The president made this remark.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, signed into law by President Barack Obama, accelerated the implementation of these regulations. There are significant parallels between the policies of the two presidents in the United States. However, there are some distinctions between the two. Hillarycare forced companies to enroll their workers in the exchanges from the outset, even though large firms may opt-out of the agreements (Mechkova & Carlitz, 2019). During the program’s first year of operation, Obamacare allowed for the cohabitation of the individual insurance market and state-based exchanges. The goal was to guarantee that as many people as possible were covered. Individual market health plans were expected to be swiftly transferred to exchanges, which is exactly what is happening today, at least in part. Both Hillarycare and Obamacare gave their boards of directors to supervise clinical procedures.
Analyze The Social, Economic, And Political Environments for The Times the Policy Was Discussed or Implemented
President Obama may have opted to make a significant sacrifice for the nation’s sake on purpose. Despite his “imperfect” healthcare reform, he included subsidized universal national health insurance for all legal residents of the United States earning less than 138 percent of the poverty threshold. His plan to reduce income inequality by raising the Medicare payroll tax by 0.9 percent on individuals earning more than $200,000 and couples earning more than $250,000, as well as imposing a new 3.8 percent tax on unearned income to help pay for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), only resulted in a marginal improvement. Consequently, he raised the marginal tax rate on the top 1% to what it was during Ronald Reagan’s administration.
Furthermore, keep in mind that its social and economic characteristics were not at their peak. Because of the crisis, many individuals had lost their employment, and the project was intended to provide some assistance to the general public. The strategy was designed for those with limited financial resources. Small firms would gain from this arrangement (Fervers, 2018). Since the key coverage provisions of the Affordable Care Act went into effect in January 2014, our country’s uninsured rate has dropped to its lowest level in history. This is unique in the decade since Medicare and Medicaid were established, and our country’s uninsured rate has dropped to its lowest level in history. According to the most recent study from the Department of Health and Human Services, an estimated 16.4 million people got coverage in the first few months of 2015. This figure includes both persons who obtained coverage after the end of 2013 and young adults who obtained coverage before 2014 due to the law’s provision allowing them to remain on their parent’s health insurance plan until 26.
Critique The Policy for Its Effectiveness of The Time
According to facts, the Affordable Care Act’s introduction in 2010 changed the nature of the federal government’s relationship with the citizens of the United States. Using a broad interpretation of the Commerce Clause, the government was able to pass legislation that radically transformed how Americans get healthcare and the federal government’s role in that relationship. That link has been re-established in three major locations. First, by giving the federal government greater influence over the states, the Affordable Care Act shifted the balance of federalism considerably. While states have the freedom to choose how to execute the Affordable Care Act, they must do so. Following that, civil rights were violated when the Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandated some demographics to pay higher healthcare premiums, even though such rates were not actuarially justifiable. Finally, by mandating all insurers to cover birth contraception as a mandatory benefit, the Affordable Care Act infringed on American civil freedoms, particularly those linked to religion and the First Amendment (Rule, 2019).
There is no doubt that the healthcare system in the United States is in disarray. Compared to other industrialized nations, Americans pay some of the highest healthcare costs while receiving about the same quality of treatment. On the other hand, the Affordable Care Act is not the solution. To begin with, it does not affect lowering prices; all it does is mandate more healthcare coverage for the uninsured, which does not affect lowering costs. Second, it has the intellectual ability to profoundly change the relationship between the people and the federal government in ways that would be very destructive to society. The Commerce Clause and the federal government’s power, in general, are no longer bound by the Constitution if the federal government has the authority to tax a person for failing to obtain a commodity that it thinks it needs. Because legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) continue, it might be years before the legislation’s real status is confirmed.
References
Fervers, L. (2018). Economic miracle, political disaster? Political consequences of Hartz IV. Journal of European Social Policy, 29(3), 411–427.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928718774259
Mechkova, V., & Carlitz, R. (2019). Gendered Accountability: When and Why Do Women’s Policy Priorities Get Implemented? SSRN Electronic Journal.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3384559
Rule, J. B. (2019). Contextual Integrity and its Discontents: A Critique of Helen Nissenbaum’s Normative Arguments. Policy & Internet, 11(3), 260–279.
https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.215
Zhang, Z. (2021). Space Science in China: A Historical Perspective on Chinese Policy 1957–2020 and Policy Implication. Space Policy, 58, 101449.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2021.101449
1
Analyzing the Policy
7
Analyzing the Policy
Analyzing the Policy- Health Care Policy
Strayer University
Dr. Smith
PAD 510
February 12,2022
Summary of the Policy
When the Patient Protection and ACA were passed into law on March 23, 2010, the Supreme Court decided to review it and generally uphold it (ObamaCare.Net, 2016). Because of this legislative change, the way health care is structured, financed, and offered in the United States has altered dramatically (Brief Summary of the Affordable Care Act, 2016). The Affordable Care Act’s principal objectives were:
-improving long-term cost containment in the health care sector
-Ensuring that medical bills don’t force families into bankruptcy
-Prevention is the best defense against crime.
-Enhancing the quality of patient safety and care
– Assuring that everyone in the United States has access to inexpensive health insurance
-Maintaining insurance coverage after losing a job
-Ending hurdles to pre-existing condition insurance
(Auerbach, 2017).
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) covers preventative services such as blood pressure screening, vaccines; contraception; STI tests; mental health; and drug and alcohol abuse or addiction treatment. Additionally, the Affordable Care Act’s strategy aimed to boost the use of precautionary and proactive health care to lessen the potential for high health care expenses in the future (Gardner, 2016). These goals were met by putting an employer mandate that necessitates US citizens to get some qualified healthcare or pay tax fines, requiring businesses to provide healthcare coverage for full-time workers within specific provisions, broadening the Healthcare system, and establishing health insurance exchanges. It is also possible for patients to receive precautionary and proactive services from their healthcare professionals at ACA regulation (Gardner, 2016).
Policy Stakeholders
Patients, doctors, employers, insurance firms, the pharmaceutical industry, and the government are primary players in the healthcare system. There are two ways health insurance firms market their policies to consumers: either directly to the individual or through an employer or government agency.
Governmental officials are those whose roles are established by law or the legislation and who, as such, have the authority to make and implement public policy (Birkland, 2016). Most public policies are created or implemented by all three government departments (legislative, judicial, and executive) (Birkland, 2016). For example, President Obama was the first official to implement the Affordable Care Act. According to the Supreme Court’s 2012 ruling, Congress should be regarded as an official stakeholder in this policy. Health Minister Kathleen Sebelius can also be considered an official participant in the Affordable Care Act’s preparations and implementation.
Stakeholders that have no legal power or obligation to participate in the policymaking process are known as “unofficial actors” (Birkland, 2016). Individuals who serve as “unofficial actors” frequently represent interest individuals and organizations that may be directly or indirectly impacted by a shift in policy (Birkland, 2016). For example, the following are unofficial spokespersons for the Affordable Care Act:
Special Interests Groups
· American Nurses Association (support) and the American Medical Association (support)
· The AARP (support)
· Pharmaceutical manufacturers’ trade groups are the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America (against). Pharmaceutical companies create and sell the drugs that doctors prescribe to their patients.
Insurance Industry Leaders
· Leaders in the Health Insurance Industry in the United States (against).
· Academic researchers
· William Dow, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley (support) (Ellis, 2017).
The healthcare system’s stakeholders have a complicated relationship. Pharmacies and insurance companies, two key stakeholders, are publicly traded organizations. Stockholders’ wealth is their principal objective. Although employers are focused on making money, providing health insurance for workers is a perk, not a source of revenue. The primary fiduciary responsibility of physicians is to their patients, as opposed to that of other stakeholders. The doctor-patient partnership is a sacred trust, even though they are paid for their services. Patients are entitled to certain rights, duties, and obligations. Last but not least, democratic governments have obligations and responsibilities to their citizens, but how those obligations and responsibilities are defined regarding the provision of care is a developing American story.
Now that the Affordable Care Act has been repealed, we can see many stakeholders involved. For example, while Blue Cross Blue Shield has declared their support for the repeal, the American Diabetes Association has undertaken considerable efforts to demonstrate why this repeal would do more damage than good to the American people (Cox, 2017).
The roles, function of each of the stakeholders identified, and Political Influence
Pharmaceutical companies create and sell the drugs that doctors prescribe to their patients. Patients are the beneficiaries of medical treatment, while physicians are the ones who deliver it. Insurance or government medication benefit schemes are the most common ways to compensate. Many firms provide their employees with various health insurance plans with variable deductibles and co-pays. Health care is also provided to the aged, disabled, and impoverished at a discounted rate by the federal government. Every stakeholder has tasks and duties to fulfill.
Officials have a vital role in policy development and implementation. For example, the campaign for health care reform by President Barack Obama sparked the formation of congressional caucuses that eventually led to the creation of the Affordable Care Act. This informal group, which included three Republicans and three Democrats, was formed after the Affordable Care Act was passed by the House of Representatives. This group was eventually referred to as the “Gang of Six” based on the Clinton administration’s failed attempt at healthcare reform; the “Gang of Six” began conversations about reform. After Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell warned that their futures would be in jeopardy if they opted to negotiate with the Democrats, the backing of members from the “Gang of Six” dissipated. All 60 Democratic senators voted in favor of the Affordable Care Act, but none Republican senators did the same.
Neither the House nor the Senate may vote on a policy written by non-official actors. The discussions over healthcare legislation and the Affordable Care Act were not without pharmaceutical firms, doctors, and other members of the medical profession. These groups included AARP, Affordable Healthcare for America Now, SEIU, Households USA, Clinicians for America, NRHA, Center for Economic and Policy Research, and other organizations representing people with disabilities. These groups played a critical role in promoting public support for the ACA and promoting public endorsement of the law.
References
Auerbach, M. P. (2017). The Health Care Reform Act of 2010. Health Care Reform Act Of 2010 – Research Starters Business, 1-6.
Birkland, T.A. (2016). An Introduction to the Policy Process, 4th Edition. [Strayer University Bookshelf]. Retrieved from
https://strayer.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781317509790/
Brief Summary of the Affordable Care Act. (2016). Congressional Digest, 95(3), 3.
Cox, K. (2017). Key Players Give Their Opinions- For And Against- On GOP’s Obamacare Replacement. Consumerist. Retrieved from https://consumerist.com/2017/03/07/keyplayers-give-their-opinions-for-and-against-on-gops-obamacare-replacement/
Gardner, D. B. (2016). Health Policy and Politics. Election 2016: Where Are We with the Affordable Care Act?. Nursing Economic$, 34(5), 251-254
2
Position Paper
Position Paper
PAD 510
Strayer University
Dr. Smith
02/21/2022
Policy: Affordable Care Act
Healthcare is a critical component in our society since its availability and affordability determines all other spheres of human life. One of the main healthcare policies in American history is the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Affordable Care Act is a comprehensive care reform policy enacted into law in 2010 by president Obama. Purposely, the ACA was put in place to increase the affordability of health insurance among the American people, expand the Medicaid Program and promote innovative health care programs meant to lower the costs of healthcare generally (Sewell, 1). This policy is among the best things to happen in the country’s healthcare system since it has made healthcare more accessible and reduced healthcare costs among low income earners.
Evidence Argument for Affordable Healthcare
According to the department of Human Health Services (HHS), ACA has led to an increase in the number of insured residents who could not previously afford health insurance. The department of Human Health Services reports that the number of uninsured nonelderly citizens declined from 48.2 million in 2010 to 28.2 million in 2016 (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2). Such a figure represents a 41 percent decline in the number of citizens without health insurance. Currently, 31 million citizens have a health insurance cover under ACA. Such figures underscore the importance of ACA in promoting healthcare access and affordability across the country.
The affordable Healthcare Act has also had a significant impact among small businesses and their ability to cover their employees. According to Sewell (1), the affordable care act made it possible for small businesses to cover their employees by providing them with tax credits. Under ACA, small businesses with up to 25 employees receive tax credits up to 35 percent of the cost of coverage. Since 2014, tax credits covered up to 50 percent of the cost of coverage. Additionally, in 2011 alone, 360,000 small employers utilized the Small Business Healthcare Tax Credit to offer healthcare coverage to 2 million employees (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2). From these figures, it is evident that ACA is a very critical policy in America’s healthcare system and therefore, its importance cannot be overstated. Additionally, ACA was a major relief to women and other disadvantaged groups. For instance, it prohibited insurance companies from dropping or penalizing women when they became sick or pregnant. Since 2014, women were no longer treated as a special group with an existing condition. Previously, women used to pay higher insurance premiums due to pre-existing conditions such as pregnancy, breast cancer, C-section delivery or having been a victim of domestic violence. The ACA is so useful in healthcare provision since it eliminated all barriers that made healthcare inaccessible (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2).
Normative Argument for Affordable Healthcare Act
From an ethical point of view, enacting the ACA was the right thing to do for Congress and president Obama’s administration. Before the act, proper medical care was a preserve of the rich, who could afford to pay for private health insurance coverage. Such a situation violates general principles of equality and just society. Morally, it is wrong to make healthcare, a basic human need, so expensive that only a few can afford. In my view, the affordable healthcare act saved so many citizens from exorbitant medical bills that threatened their general wellbeing. Individually, I believe in a fair and just society, where all citizens have equal opportunities in all spheres of life, including healthcare. Besides, ACA helped increase healthcare access and insurance coverage among minorities such as Black Americans hence reducing the disparities that exist between them and their white counterparts.
Argument Against Affordable Care Act
Evidence-Based Arguments
The Affordable Care Act has not lived to its expectations. Initially, ACA sought to increase in the number of people under health coverage, expand Medicaid program to include all adults whose income was 138 percent less than Federal Poverty Level, and support innovative medical care delivery techniques that would lower the cost of healthcare. On the contrary, ACA made healthcare more expensive and hard to acquire among citizens. For instance, the passage of ACA meant that insurance firms could cover a wider range of benefits and even people with pre-existing conditions. Such a policy led a rise in insurance premiums, making it harder for low-income earners to acquire healthcare insurance coverage.
The ACA turned out as a punitive tool designed to punish citizens not willing to acquire healthcare insurance. Before 2019, any person not under ACA coverage had to pay a fine, which deprived citizens their right to choice (Reisman, 3). The policy would have been beneficial if it was made voluntary. Additionally, the ACA policy increased inequality across the American society instead of solving it. For instance, additional taxes on pharmaceutical sales and medical equipment were imposed to help finance ACA. Such taxes were an extra burden to the American population. Besides the economic burden on citizens, ACA entrenched unfairness in the American society. The wealthy were subjected to greater taxes to subsidize healthcare coverage for low income earners. Such a move sought to punish the rich for their effort while rewarding the poor.
Affordable Care Act became an incentive for small businesses to lay-off some of its workers. According to the policy, only businesses with 50 or more fulltime employees were under obligation to make insurance contributions on behalf of their employees (Manchikanti,4). Such a policy encouraged small firms to reduce their workforce to less than 50 employees with an aim to evade paying for their insurance subscriptions. The same employers also sought to reduce working hours of their staff to less than 30 hours per week so that their staff do not qualify as full-time employees. Generally, under this situation, ACA reduced the rates of healthcare insurance among the population instead of increasing.
Normative Argument Against ACA
Under the values of equity and fairness, ACA was a poor policy that brought more harm to the health sector than good. For instance, under the policy, being female would no longer be treated as a pre-existing condition yet women need some special services such as C-section deliveries, breast cancer and care arising from domestic-related violence. In a fair and just society, women would be made to pay for the extra services they receive under ACA. Also, low income earners were granted exceptions and discounts based on their incomes relative to the Federal Poverty Level. Favoring low-income earners at the expense of the rich amounts to punishing the rich due to their hard work. In the principles of fairness and justice, I believe all people should be treated equally regardless of the situations.
In 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act removed penalties levied on employees who did not subscribe to ACA. Such a move made it voluntary for people to choose whether to acquire health insurance or not (Reisman,3). Making health insurance voluntary is burdensome to those with insurance since they have to bear some costs on behalf of those without insurance. Therefore, ACA did not promote fairness or equity in the health industry, hence it was a poor policy.
Sources
1. Sewell, Terri. 2022. Benefits of the affordable care act. Congresswoman, Alabama’s 7th District.
https://sewell.house.gov/aca-you/benefits-affordable-care-act
2. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. 2017. Nearly 12 million people with Medicare have saved over $26 billion on prescription drugs since 2010.
https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/press-releases/nearly-12-million-people-medicare-have-saved-over-26-billion-prescription-drugs-2010
3. Riesman, Miriam. 2015. The affordable care act, five years later: Policies, progress, and politics, 40(9); 575-578.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4571845/
4. Manchikanti, Laxmaiah, et al. 2017. A critical analysis of Obamacare: Affordable care or insurance for many and coverage for few? National Library of Medicine.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28339427/