Don't Miss a Chance to Chat With Experts. It's Free!

Health Care in the United States and Affordable Care Act

C4C Haylie Stanat POL SCI 211 – T5 14 February 2013 Healthcare in the United States Michael Tennant, a software developer and writer, questions why we should have the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.“From page 1 to page 906, ObamaCare is chock full of expensive, intrusive, and downright scary programs such as these.The law gives the federal and state governments virtually unlimited power to interfere in Americans’ lives, even within the confines of our own homes” (Tennant).

Stop Using Plagiarized Content. Get a 100% Unique Essay on Health Care in the United States and Affordable Care Act

for $13,9/Page.

Get Essay

This act is often referred to as “Obamacare. The idea of this act first came up during the Clinton administration. They tried to develop a healthcare system just like “Obamacare” but it never went through. The system is similar and based off of what is happening in Europe, where the government controls the medical care system. Why did they want to start this? The Clinton administration believed too many people were not receiving adequate medical care and coverage. They wanted everyone to have healthcare regardless of their financial means.

The socialized healthcare system has been said to intrude on the population’s right to make decisions for what their life requires and also be very costly to the people and the United States as a whole, and Tennant wants to do away with everything regarding “Obamacare”. Tennant points out that this act allows “the US government to expand its reach into the lives of its citizens. ” Some of the provisions of the act allow the government home visitations by government agents, possibly including forced immunizations, and “Community Transformation Grants”.

These grants are “designed to alter Americans’ lifestyles to conform to the whims of bureaucrats in Washington” (Tennant). This act seems like to Tennant, and many other advocates against Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, another way for the government to intrude on the freedom of its population. Others, like Matt Welch, the editor in chief of Reason magazine, argue there are many benefits that come from this act. He points out that France has a socialized health care system and it makes treatment less expensive and more accessible.

The point being made is that the system only helps in areas of service and quality. There is no intrusion on the lives of its citizens, only trying to benefit their lives. Edmund F. Haislmaier also points out that when coverage that is basic, people with special needs have to work harder to make a plan that specifically fits them. Haislmaier states, “The effects will be one-size-fitsall coverage—so that patients are not “confused” by having choices—and elimination of employers’ freedom to design their own self-insured plans. When “confused” is used, it makes one believe that the government thinks we are incapable of helping ourselves and making the right decisions for our own lives. Like Tennant says, “It destroys individual self-reliance and, through a variety of provisions such as school-based health clinics and home visitation programs, the family unit. These are the foundations of the American Republic; without them the United States will become a society of helpless, dependent sheep with neither the desire nor the will to resist the state’s relentless encroachments on our liberties. Also, if Congress expands what benefits are essential and required to be given, the more Congress will make insurers, employers, and patients pay more for these essential services provided. This brings us to our next topic: the cost Obamacare will have on the Nation’s citizens. Those for “Obamacare” say that socialized healthcare has many benefits, and these benefits are better than the standards we have in the United States today. For example, Welch says, “ObamaCare opponents often warn that a new system will lead to long waiting times, mountains of paperwork, and less choice among doctors.

Yet on all three of those counts the French system is significantly better, not worse, than what the U. S. has now. ” The side that opposes also raises awareness to another flaw in the single-payer health care program. Some drugs that are life-saving are withheld from patients in countries with this health care system because these drugs are deemed “too costly. ” When these people try to acquire these drugs outside the system, the government will go as far as to take their coverage away. Governments with this system are willing to do many things that affect the lives of their citizens to keep costs down.

The system is also affecting businesses, small and large. Businesses with more than 50 full-time workers will be required to give their employees coverage. Most small businesses are supposed to benefit from this act. Sy Mukherjee states, “Studies have shown that Obamacare’s employer mandates will actually lower health spending for small businesses and only modestly increase large companies’ health care costs, all while substantially helping low-wage and working Americans receive the affordable health coverage they need. With this act, many more people will be covered, with little increase of cost to larger to businesses, and many more small businesses will have to spend less on healthcare. Throughout his article, Tennant, being biased against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, does not think that the problems can be fixed with provisions. Michael Tennant believes the act should be completely repealed by Congress and he believes they violate one of government’s key values, freedom. He suggests the act needs to also be nulled by each state; this is the only way to help the United States’ healthcare system. These problems cannot be fixed merely by modifying a clause here and a proviso there. ObamaCare needs to be repealed in full before it can metastasize into a full-blown single-payer system. State-by-state nullification should also be undertaken. Then we can work on dismantling the rest of the federal healthcare behemoth. These are the only cures for what ails the American healthcare system”(Tennant). In other words, Tennant does not believe anything beneficial has come from this act. It should be completely abolished, not just fixed, because according to him, these problems in the act cannot be fixed by minor adjustments.

Republicans have already tried to repeal this act, 33 times as of July 11, 2012. They keeping trying to pass bills of repeal through the House of Representatives but the Democratic-dominant Senate would not do the same. If the Republicans can get a bill to be approved by the Senate, they have a chance to make a difference. Of course the bill will go to the President, who will most likely veto since it was his main idea last election, but then it will go back through Congress. If the bill can be approved once again, they can over-ride the President’s veto and repeal the act.

The question is: Should the United States reap the benefits of a socialized healthcare system the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act provides, or should she keep the values of the Founding Fathers and not let the government control every aspect of our lives? The Constitution gives the power to the government to promote general welfare. Then again, right after that the Constitution also secures “the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity. ” As Janda says, “in other words, the government exists to promote order and freedom”(55).

Is the government not trying to promote order to the healthcare system we previously had, but at the same time controlling our lives and limiting the decisions we can make? The Founding Fathers relied on four principles to create the Constitution, one of these was Republicanism. According to The Challenge of Democracy, “Republicanism is a form of government in which power resides on the people… ” (Janda 56). The federal form of government should strong enough to maintain order but not strong enough to completely control the states or the Nation’s citizen’s freedoms. Works Cited Haislmaier, Edmund F. The Case Against Obamacare A Health Care Policy Series for the 112th Congress. ” WebMemo. The Heritage Foundation, 20 Jan. 2011. Web. 12 Feb. 2013. Janda, Kenneth, Jeffrey M. Berry, Jerry Goldman, and Kevin W. Hula. The Challenge of Democracy. Third ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2004. Print. Mukherjee, Sy. “Five Ways Obamacare Will Help Americans Now That The Election Is Over. ” Think Progress. Center for American Progress Action Fund, 7 Nov. 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2013. Tennant, Michael. “Health Care Reform Law Expands Government Control. ” Health Care. Ed. David M. Haugen. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012.

Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from “The New World of ObamaCare. ” New American 26. 16 (16 Aug. 2010). Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 13 Feb. 2013. Welch, Matt. “Socialized Medicine Offers Many Advantages. ” Is Socialism Harmful? Ed. Ronald D. Lankford, Jr. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2011. At Issue. Rpt. from “Why I Prefer French Health Care. ” Reason (Jan. 2010). Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 13 Feb. 2013. Documentation I took my paper down to the writing center and received feedback such as not to start or end a paragraph with a quote, and to fix one sentence to be unbiased.

How to cite Health Care in the United States and Affordable Care Act, Essays

Choose cite format:
Health Care in the United States and Affordable Care Act. (2017, Mar 13). Retrieved February 24, 2020, from