...ObamaCare vs. RomneyCare: Is There Really a Difference? Before the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, there were over 50 million people in the United States who did not have health insurance coverage. Governor Mitt Romney says that the health care plan he passed in Massachusetts, known as “RomneyCare” is fundamentally different than “ObamaCare” and will end up becoming a nationwide health care system forced upon the American people. Are the two plans really that different? The 2012 Presidential campaigns have demonstrated that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have different visions for the country, yet both men share common views in healthcare. The centerpiece of the Affordable Care Act was created on the idea of the individual mandate. The individual mandate states that all citizens are required to buy health insurance. Most people tend to purchase health insurance only when they need it, such as in an accident or a sudden illness. This presented a moral challenge as it was questionable whether people could be forced to purchase insurance they don’t need. However, people are required to purchase car insurance so this was used as justification to force the purchase of health insurance. Another key justification is the fact that all hospitals are required to treat people in their emergency rooms regardless of their ability to pay. This creates a burden on the hospital as it raises their costs, so they must recover their losses from the paying patients. Under this type...
Words: 977 - Pages: 4
...The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is one of the most substantial reforms in Medicare since 1965. This is now considered the law of the land according to Douglas Holtz-Eaton. The PPACA portrays a “coverage first” strategy. “Sadly, a review a of the state’s experience bodes poorly for the future of national reform.” (Point/Counterpoint 177) There are two major driving factors in which could propose a threat for this reform. The first factor is it costs too much. Many decades ago, healthcare spending was at a minimum and not the focal point of American citizens. The statics show during 1970, national health expenditures were $1,300 per person and consumed 7 cents out of every national dollar, 7% of the GDP. Since the 1970, the spending per person has grown 2% more each year than income per captia. Therefore, healthcare costs have been increasing at such a high rate and will continue to threaten many decades to come. The second factor is the skyrocket of health insurance. This obviously is not mindboggling due to the fact that it is a reaction to the rapid increase of healthcare. Insurance costs have tripled over the past decade, making it hard for the average citizen to afford such outrageous premiums. As a result, less and less people are opting out of health insurance, which is no longer an option due to the new federal law making health insurance mandatory. The PPACA reform is looked upon with a “cost first” approach. This approach allows...
Words: 1699 - Pages: 7
...details of the tax penalties the government will implement against those who do not have health insurance are not easy to decipher. The hospitals and health care providers feel very positive about this law because they are guaranteed patients who guarantees payment from the federal government, which should also mean premiums will go down as a result. I have no idea how people can claim that health insurers will suffer. In Massachusetts, they live under the predecessor of ObamaCare — the Massachusetts Healthcare Reform Act, signed into law by former governor Mitt Romney in 2006. (Rapoza) Under RomneyCare, 98 percent of Massachusetts’ residents have affordable health insurance. (Rapoza) Meanwhile, Massachusetts has not gone broke. Its unemployment level is currently 6 percent, better than the national average of 8.3 percent. (Rapoza) Companies are not going belly up because of RomneyCare. Private insurers operate in the state alongside the non-profit health insurers like Harvard Pilgrim and Blue Cross Blue Shield. (Rapoza) There have not been massive layoffs in the industry because of the law. According to the Annenberg Public Policy Center, the minimum tax assessment will be $695 per person and no more than $2,085 per family when the law goes into full effect in 2016. (Rapoza) The amount can be higher depending on income. But there are exemptions for low-income persons and...
Words: 741 - Pages: 3
...Access to Insurance Versus Access to Care October 23, 2011 Access to Insurance Versus Access to Care Access to insurance means that a person has a contract where a company will reimburse either the person or health care professional for treatment of a certain disease process or medical problem. However, one may have insurance for a condition but not be able to access care for that condition. This can arise for several reasons including physical proximity to the care being rendered, available care opportunities already being occupied by people requesting the care earlier than the next-comer, and businesses closing their doors due to costs not being reimbursed adequately for care being provided. Access to Insurance The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA) as explained by Davis (2010) gives more access to insurance for United States citizens. Improved access to insurance comes from multiple rules that range from prohibiting restriction of insurance coverage to covering children of already those already covered by insurance up through age 26. Since the PPACA is based on the Massachusetts’ 2006 health care reform plan (Gruber, 2011), it is reasonable to evaluate the effects that have been experienced in Massachusetts. One thing to note is that 124,000 fewer people in Massachusetts have employer-sponsored insurance, creating an even bigger public burden, since this is a way to reduce non-salary personnel expenses (Byron, 2011). The same scenario is being...
Words: 1009 - Pages: 5
