Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - Essay Example

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is a United States federal statute that aims to regulate the healthcare system of the United States. It was signed by President Barrack Obama on 23 March 2010, also known as ‘Obamacare’ (Jacobs & Skocpol, 2012).
This was for the first time in the history of the United States that the public was forced to buy health insurance and pay a penalty if they were not able to afford it.

After the implementation of this law, several challenges and consequences are faced by federal, courts, and state governments. People of the United States argue that this was an indirect approach of the government to persuade the general public to buy a commercial product. The individual mandate tax is considered to be an unprecedented implementation of the court which was a burden on people with low incomes (Murdock, 2012). The general public claims that ‘Obamacare’ has rather imposed an individual tax burden.
The health insurance policies were introduced as a relief for the general public. But these policies have rather imposed another tax burden on people who cannot afford it. Furthermore, it has also been claimed that this regulation of the court is an approach to generate government revenue and increase the imposition of direct tax.
On the contrary, the government clarified that the implementation of the penalty is a government strategy to ensure health insurance for people who cannot afford it. Also, it was claimed that the Act’s implementation is a way to sustain the health and prosperity of the nation (Coln & Russell, 2012). It can be determined that the Act has ensured the possibility of health insurance measures for all citizens of the United States. Perhaps, the mandatory individual tax and penalty have burdened the general public. Compelling the general public to buy health insurance has just proven another way to burden the general public.

The expansion of Medicare:
The Supreme Court of the United States directs Patient Protection and Affordable Act to reject the further expansion of Medicare facilities (Jacobs & Skocpol, 2012). The Act has burdened the government and has increased healthcare costs and eliminated job opportunities. The government has clarified from its end that further expansion in the plan will highly influence government revenues. According to the Federal Report (2012), it has been observed that Patient Protection Affordable Care Act has reduced economic output to $750 billion in the last five years (Jacobs & Skocpol, 2012). It has also affected employment mandate which has further affected the employment rate and the individual mandate for Medicare insurance. The minimum employer mandate has also been affected as people have become jobless. In addition, the expansion of Medicare facilities will crowd private health insurance which will further leave Americans with less secure health care institutions. According to recent research by Coln and Russell, it has been noted that physicians have denied accepting the new Medicaid Patient Act (Coln & Russell, 2012). The refusal of the health insurance expansion has diverted people from the public to private insurance sectors (Coln & Russell, 2012). According to the study by Jacobs and Skocpol (2012), it has been revealed that private insurance is considered to be more opted for by the general public (Jacobs & Skocpol, 2012).

Moreover, the Act will reduce access to health insurance for the general public due to reducing income and the unemployment rate. Low incomes and high unemployment rates will reduce the affordability of the general public to buy health insurance. Therefore, the refusal of the patient protection affordability care Act will sustain economic output and government revenues (Coln & Russell, 2012). This shall allow the government to control the unemployment rate which shall further increase the health insurance affordability for the general public. Read More