Preview 50% of the Answer Below
Answer Preview
THE PATIENT’S PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, 2010
AND THE “INDIVIDUAL MANDATE” CLAUSE:
A Non –Biased Look From a Bystander’s Viewpoint.
Author (Name of Student)
Instructor’s Name
Name of Course
Date.
The PPACA and the ‘Individual Mandate’
Introduction
Whatever Conservative politicians my think or comment on the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA) of 2010, no one can deny that health care reform is an area of the development of the nation, which is crucial. The right to good health can be said to be a fundamental right of a citizen. As per Fuchs and Ezekiel[1], the United States spends a much higher amount on healthcare in comparison to other developed countries. In 2005, the US spent $ 6,401 per person. The countries next on the line, Norway and Switzerland spent $4,364 and $4,177 respectively. The United States spends 2.3 times the average healthcare budget of other developed economies but if the results are looked at, there is nothing to attribute the increased expenditure to (say faster recovery, increased immunity, less mortality etc.) as the results are unimpressive. This can be seen in the chart labelled Healthcare Expenditure compiled in Appendix I towards the end.
Healthcare Reforms were therefore on the cards for a number of years till President Obama sat down to business and on signed the PPACA Bill into law on 23rd March 2010. However, as is seen with all major bills, bitter opponents of the bill sprang into action, issued statements and filed cases against the bills implementation. In this paper, a sincere attempt will be made to analyze the main arguments in this regard and to establish the importance of the various arguments and issues relating to the same.
The Individual Mandate provision of the PPACA
The Patient Protection Affordable Care Act is a very complex piece of health care legislation. Its primary function is to regulate the accessibility, quality and affordability of healthcare insurance against a minimum ceiling payment which is known as the ‘Individual Mandate”. Though the ACA was signed into law by President Barack Obama in March 2010, the implementation of the act was only from 2014, i.e. the initial stages. The unveiling of the Act will continue in 2015 and go on till 2022. As the actual act is very wordy and long, for the purpose of this essay the ACA ( as the PPACA will be referred to hereinafter) can best be explained in a précis as follows:
&XXXXX;XXX Affordable Care Act XXXXXXXXX the quality, XXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX insurance. In XXXXXXXX, most people who XXX XXXXXX to XXXX XXXXXX Health XXXXXXXX XX XXXX or XXX a XXX-month fee. XXX law eliminates pre-XXXXXXXX conditions, XXXXX insurance companies XXXX XXXXXXXX you when you are XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXX discrimination, expands XXXX preventative XXXXXXXX and health benefits, XXXXXXX Medicaid and CHIP, XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX, requires XXXXXX employers XX XXXXXX their XXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXX a XXXXXXXXXXX for XXXXXXXXXX insurance providing XXXX of XXXXXXXX individuals, families, and XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX with XXXX or XXX-XXXX XXXXXX insurance, XXX decreases XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXXXXXX.”[X]
XXX XXXXXXXXXX Mandate XXX XXX XXX
XX per XXX XXX, all American XXXXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXXX (save certain exempted XXXXXX) XXX XXXXXXXX to XXXX a XXXXXXX health XXXXXXXXX cover, starting from XXXX onwards. XXX Mandate XXX XX XXXX as your contribution to XXXXXX XXXX XXXXXX insurance stays XXXXXXXXXX XXX all. XXX exemptions XXX be classified XXXX (a) The assesse falls in the classes XXXXX XXX exempt from the ACA and (b) XXX XXXXXXXX&XXXXX; XXXXXXXXXXX for the XXXXXXX mandate is XXXXXXXXX XXX XXX XXXX and XXXXX XX XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XX penalty for XXXXXXX XX XXXX minimum XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX.[X] XX XXXX is XXX XXXXX XXXX under XXXXX XXX mandate XXX( XXXXXXX) XXXXXXX will be XXXXXXXXX XX XXX IRS, we can assume XXXX the XXXXXXX law XXXX XX subjected XX XXXX legal attack XX the Fourth XXXXXXX of XXXX.
XXXXXXXX Citizens, XXX XXXX XXXXX the XXXXXXXXX sections, XXX XXX XXXXXXXX to XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX [i.e. XXXXX (a) above]. These XXX
I. XXXXXXX of a XXXXXXXXX faith XXXXX opposes XXXXXXX of benefits from a XXXXXX insurance XXXXXXXXX company.
XX. XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.
XXX. People who are incarcerated.
IV. XXXXXXX XX Native XXXXXXXX/ Indian XXXXXX.
V. Citizens XXXXX earnings are so low that tax XXXXXXX need not XX filed. (Threshold $10,XXX for an XXXXXXXXXX XXX $20,XXX for a XXXXXX in 2013).
VI. Citizen XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX exceed 8% XX their income, XXXXX XXXXXX into XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX or XXX XXXXXXX.
We then have XXXXX (b) XX which those meeting XXX group&XXXXX;s criteria XXXX not XXX any health XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XX they are XXXXXXX XXXXXX to have XXXXXXXXX their obligations in XXXX regard. XXX XXXXXXX will fall under XXXX XXXXX if he or she was insured under XXX XXXXX XXXX under XXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX or a XXXXXXXXXXX of them.[X]
X. Medicare
X. XXXXXXXX or XXXX ( Children’s Health Insurance Program).
X. XXXXXXX (XXX XXXXXXX members, retirees and their XXXXXXXX)
4. Veteran’s XXXXXX Insurance Program
5. Plan offered by an XXXXXXXX.
X. Insurance brought by self (at XXXXX at XXX XXXXXX XXXXX)
7. Member XX a XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX XXXXX was in XXXXXXXXX prior to March 26, 2010.
XXXXXX a XXXXXXX XX exempted XX given above, he is liable XXX health insurance XX XXX minimum XXXXXX XX
2013: $XX XXX adult and $47.50 XXX child (upto XX $XXX for a XXXXXX XXXXXX) or 1.0% of XXXXXX income XXXXXXXXX XX XXXX.
XXXX: XXXXXXX $XXX XXX XXXXX and $162.50 for child ( XXXXXX at $975 for family) or 2.0% XX family income, whichever XX XXXX.
2016 XXX XXXXXX: XXXXXXX $XXX XXX XXXXX and $XXX.50 for child ( XXXXXX at $X,085 XXX family) or X.5% of XXXXXX XXXXXX, XXXXXXXXX XX more.
XXXXXX 2016, XXX 2016 figures will XXXXX XXX post XXXX XX living XXXXXXXX (XXXXXXXXX adjustments)[X]
It can XX seen that XXX best XXXX XX the XXX is XXXXXXXXXX the insurance companies XXXXX have to XXXXX insurance regardless of XXX-existing XXXXXXXXXX. XXX XXXXXXXXXX pays subsidies for XXXX XXX are XXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX. XXX XXX makes XXXXXX insurance XXXXXXXXXX for XXXXXXXX for no one, in a XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX, XXX XX XXXXXXX XX die XX the XXXXXXX. When seriously XXX or XXXX when XXXXX, human dignity XXXXXX be XXXXXX to XXXXXX XX what XXX ACA champions.
XXXXXXX, it XXXXX XXXXXXXX out that the XXX defaulter XX the penalty/XXX XXXXXX be XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX criminal grounds. XXX XXXXXXX XXXX XXXX is XXXX the XXX XXXX deduct the defaulting XXXXXX with XXXX fine, from the Tax return checks XX XXX defaulter.
XXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX a XXX of opposition on its way XX become the law XXX the ‘worst XXXXXXXX XXXX’ (XX they say post XXXXXXXX) was XX the individual XXXXXXX XXXX connecting it to XXX XXXX XXXXXXX.
XXX main complaint XXXXXXX to be XXXX related XX the XXXXXXXXXXXX. Someone refuses XX do something on XXX XXXXXXX XXXX it is XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXX his XXXXXXXX XXXXX him XX XX XXX XXXX thing XXXXXXX he XXXX that &XXXXX;not XXXXX it&XXXXX; is unconstitutional. However, should XXX question XXXX XXX XXXXXXXXX as to the XXXXXXX XXX which XXXXX (or XXX XXXXX ) is unconstitutional, then one XXX safely wager XXXX XXX XXX will XX able XX offer XXX reasons. XXXX XXXX be XXXXXX not because of XXXX of eloquence XXX XXXXXXXXX of XXX subject XXXXXX. XXXX XXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX thoroughly through one end XX the XXXXX of the XXXXX, XXXXXXX it XX unreadable. Of every page of legalese jargon, one or two XXXXX XX XXXXXXX emerge. We XX not XXXXXXX throw the jargon away XX it XX a XXXXXXXX present XX XX from the XXXXXXX.
XX XXth June 2015, SCOTUS held on a 6-3 verdict that XXX XXXXXXXX XXX XXX right as XXX the constitution XX impose a penalty for XXXXX who do XXX XXXXX XX XXXXXXXXX for health XXX XXXX not insured XXXXXXXXX XXXXXX. This XXXXXXX XXX XXXX XXXXXXX the XXXX XXXXX XX 26 XXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX XXX XXXXXXX government XXX XX constitutional authority to lay down XXX XXXXXXXXXX XXX the mandate as XXXX XXX. SCOTUS XXXXXXX disagreed XXX declared the XXXXXXX XX XX &XXXXX;constitutional’ but XXX XX a XXXXXXX. XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXX impose a XXX XX those who XX not XXXXXX their health, XXX that the ACA will XXXXXXX with XXX mandate XXX XXXXX XXXXXX XX a XXX XXXXX fully XXXXXXXXXXXXXX.[7]
XXXXXXXX, the decision of XXXXXX was XXX XXXX surprising XX by then the SC XXX already XXXXX for XXX defendant XXXXXXX in XXXX XX. XXXXXXX XXXXX XXXX along with a number XX XXXXXXXXXX supporters filed a case against the ACA offering subsidies XX XXXXXX XXXX XXX mandate given by him, XXXXXXXXX that it was illegal and that the XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX had XX XXXXX to XXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXX in Healthcare subsidy XX it is a state matter. XXXX vs XXXXXXX [X]
Now, let the XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXX contradiction XXXXXXX (a) XXX XXXX XX XXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX in framing out XXX XXXXX (b) the actions XX the Federal Government in XXXXX endeavor XX XXX the XXX passed and then XX implement it after it becoming law. As perhaps in your case too, XXXX XXXXXX, this XXXXXX XXX XXXX see one XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX which XXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXX Everest at XXX beginning but XXXX became XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX a persistent XXXXXXXXX. If a research XXXXX XX a whodunit ( XXX XXXX XXXXX a homicide XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX) which the XXXX XXX XX XXXXX, XXXX XXXX is XXX homicide XXX XX are XXXXXXXX XX XXXX out if the contradiction is really so or XX it the same XXXXX XXXX in a XXXXXXXXX perspective. We XXXX try XX find out.
We XXXXX XX XXX XXXXXXXX of XXX Highest Court XX XXX XXXX and our reasons for doing so XXX described and XXXXXXXXXX in this and XXXXX paragraphs XXXXX follow it.
XXX XX today sits on the summit of a XXXX mountain XXXXXXX at XXX XXXXX XXXXXXX downhill, XXX XXXXXXXX that XXX XXXXXX has XXXX XXXX down and XXX XXXXXXXX –the tallest XXXX it XXX XXXXXXX XXXX now. XX will soon be facing XXXXXXX medical situations which XXXX occur XXXXXXXX XX coincidence, testing the XXXX XXXXX of our health care XXXXXX. These XXX (a) XXX XXXXXXXXX age of XXX XXXX XXXXXXX and (b) the overall XXXXXXX XX the country&XXXXX;s XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XX the old XXX XXXXXX XXXX XX in XXX XXXXXXXX. Today, USA is the XXXXXX highest XXXXXXX (after XXXXXX) comprising XX a XXXXXXXX XX XXXX-poppers, XXX XXXXXXX XX multinational XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX. Therefore XXXX XX XXXX XXX XXXXX, our pill-popping minds make XX hypochondriacs and XX XXXXXX to XX unable XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXX physicians XXX XXXXXX in our XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX. Now, XX can XXX a health care system in XXX XXXX near future which is strained and unable to XXXX up XXXX XXX delivery XX XXXXXXX medical care XX the citizens. XX XXXX to prepare for XXXX crisis from XXXXX in XXXXXXX or maybe XXXXX XXXXXX ventures.
In the recent war XXXXXXX XXX states XXX XXX Federal XXXXXXXXXX, the XXXXX XXXX been almost certainly XXXXXXXXXX to heath care when XXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXX should have XXXX ‘XXXXXXXXX XXXXX for XXXXXXX XX the values XX XXX constitution&XXXXX;. The constitution XXX XXXXXXX hundreds XX years XXXX XXXX people and XXXXXXXXX were different. Do we seriously XXXXX that XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX fashioned our XXXXXXXXXXXX in XXXX a way that XXXX XXX XXXXXXXX irrespective of time? XX we do, XXXX that XX ridiculous. Our constitution XXX to XXXXXX XX XXX XXX XXXXX. If XXX XXXXXX XX XXX sure XXXXX the relevance XX XXXX diatribe, XXXX he XX requested XX XXXXX about the 2nd amendment XXX the XXXXXXXXXXXXX that arise XXXXXXXX a XXXXXX XXXXXXXX takes XXXXX.
XXXXXX R.Fuchs XX the Stanford University XXXXXX out XXXX our XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX are XXX XXXXXXX in XXX world but XXX XXXXXXX are not XXXX impressive. XXX XXXXXXXXXX of the machine which converts greenbacks XXXX XXXXXXXXXX XX going down continuously. XXX is this XXXXXXXXX. Over XXXXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXX says Victor Fuchs. The table XXXXX in XXXXXXXX I XXXXXX for XXXXXX. XX XXXX too many XXXXX for mild ailments we don&XXXXX;t need XXXXXX out. We are highly XXXX XXXXXXX. XXX physicians are over-XXXX. XXXX of XXXX have built XX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX and XX not go to hospitals in the evenings/mornings. XXXXXXXX roll from XXXXXX XX XXXXXX. Their medical XXXXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXX XX every XXXXX. MRI&XXXXX;s, CAT scans XXX. XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXX XXX \XXXX faith in ‘ XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX&XXXXX;.XXX the last 3o XXXXX, XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXX X.8% XXXXX year over the one XXXXXX it. In another 30 XXXXX, our healthcare XXXXX XXXX XXXXX 30% of XXX GDP[X].
Conclusion:
The XXXXX XX not XXXXXXX but it is XXX most XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXX we XXXX today. XX XX a XXXX XXX action XXXXX in XX XXXXXXX, XX XXXXXX XXXXXX upon XXXXXXXXXXX. XX need to XXXX being ostriches and pull XXX XXXXX above the XXXXXX. We XXXXXX see XXX distance we could XXXX gone XXX start XXXXXXX to XXXX up. Maybe, XX will XXXX to XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX but so XX it. At XXXXX, the XXXXXXX XX XXXX be XXXX for the more physical XXXX to follow.
APPENDIX-I
Comparison XX Health XXXX Costs, XXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX
XXX source, XXXXXX refer XX (b) above (in XXX table)
XXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXX V.R. XXX Ezekiel, X.X. XXX XXXXXXX XXXXX of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXX, XXXXXXX XX the XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX, June XX XXXX
Obamacare Facts,. ‘Supreme Court Obama Care | XXXXXX on XXXXX XXXX&XXXXX; 2015, XXX XXXX://obamacarefacts.XXX/XXXXXXX-court-obamacare/. XXXXXXXX on 10th August XXXX
XXXXXXXXX Facts,. XXXX. Obamacare XXXXXXXXX | XX XXXXXXXXXXX Of Obamacare. URL http://XXXXXXXXXXXXXX.XXX/XXXXXXXXX-XXXXXXXXX/. XXXXXXXX on 10th August XXXX.
Mach, X L. &XXXXX; Individual XXXXXXX under XXX ACA”, ( XXXXXXXXXX D.C., Congressional XXXXXXXX Service XXXXXXXXXXX, 2015).
Moffit, R.X. ‘XXXXXXXXX XXX the Individual XXXXXXX: XXXXXXXXX Personal XXXXXXX XXX XXXXXXXXXX’. The XXXXXXXX Foundation’ portal . 2011, XXXXXXX XX . Accessed XX 10th XXXXXX, XXXX. XXX XXXX://www.XXXXXXXX.org/XXXXXXXX/XXXXXXX/2011/01/Obamacare-XXX-the-XXXXXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-Violating-XXXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-and-Federalism
XXXXXX X. Fuchs, &XXXXX;XXXXX inconvenient XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX&XXXXX;, (Journal XX the XXXXXXXX XXXXXXX Association, XXXX, October XX).(page)1
Zamosky, L., &XXXXX; XXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXX, and You: XXX XXXXX Consumers XXXXX” , ( New York, NY, XXXXXX Media LLC. 2013, XXXX August).
***********
[1] XXXXXX XXXX XXXXXX by V.R.XXXXX (A XXXXXXXXXXX of articles). XXXX: XX-XX. XXX XXXXXX XXXX Johnson
Foundation, XXXXXXXX University
[X] (XXXXXXXXX Facts 2015) XXXXXXXXX XXXXX,. 2015. Obamacare Explained | An Explanation Of XXXXXXXXX.
[X] Lisa Zamosky, XXXXXXXXXX, Insurance, XXX XXX: The Savvy Consumers Guide, ( XXX York, XX, XXXXXX XXXXX LLC. XXXX, 29th XXXXXX). 33-34.
[4] Ibid
[X]XXXXX.X.Mach, XXXXXXXXXX Mandate XXXXX the ACA, ( Washington D.X., Congressional Research XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX, 2015). 1-7
[X] Robert E.XXXXXX, ‘XXXXXXXXX XXX XXX Individual XXXXXXX: Violating Personal XXXXXXX XXX Federalism’. XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX’ XXXXXX . 2011, XXXXXXX XX . Accessed on 10
[7] (Obamacare XXXXX, XXXX) XXXXXXXXX XXXXX,. ‘Supreme Court Obama Care | Ruling on Obama XXXX&XXXXX; XXXX, XXX XXXX://obamacarefacts.com/XXXXXXX-XXXXX-obamacare/. Accessed XX XX
[X] Ibid
[9] Victor R. Fuchs, ‘Three inconvenient XXXXXX XXXXX Healthcare&XXXXX;, (Journal XX XXX American XXXXXXX Association,
2008, October 23).X