Pro Trumpcare or Obamacare?

When President Barack Obama officially retired from office, he left his healthcare legacy behind for our new president, Donald Trump, to pick up and work with. Now that Trump is in office, he seems to have other plans when it comes to keeping that legacy. He has stated that he has intentions of getting rid of Obamacare entirely, which is also known as the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In order to make up for the absence of Obamacare, Trump has proposed to replace it with a new health care, the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA), also known as the American Health Care Act (AHCA).  He believes his new healthcare concept will benefit the nation more efficiently than Obamacare had. Trump, and many other elected officials and citizens of the United States feel that Obamacare was economically unfair for the upper class citizens in our country. Although this is true, Obamacare was able to help the lower class citizens, who are the ones who need healthcare benefits the most. Lower class citizens who were unable to afford other health insurance plans were able to receive the healthcare they needed by having Medicaid which required every insurance plan to cover essential health benefits. It also ensured that there were no discriminatory price changes based on one’s age or gender.

Supporters of the Better Care Reconciliation Act oppose the expansion of Medicaid to help the middle class by providing little to no financial support. The article “Why the GOP Is So Hell-Bent on Passing an Unpopular Health Care Bill” mentions this when it states, “Many conservative activists and politicians say Medicaid should be be available only to the poorest Americans, not a program that covers more than 70 million people, as it does now.
The Republican health care bill, in some ways, redistributes how health care dollars are spent” (Bacon, “Why the GOP Is So Hell-Bent on Passing an Unpopular Health Care Bill”). Many conservative people are wealthy and want their money to be spent wisely when given to the government for funding. They want their money to go to the people that they believe need it the most. The supporters want the rest of the people, the ones that they feel should not need help with funds, to find another way to be able to afford healthcare. This is an issue because if they cannot find a way to pay for a good healthcare insurance plan, then they will not have it; thus leaving them without the basic care needed in case of an accident, a common cold, or a terminal illness. Sarah Kliff, author of the article, “The American Health Care Act: the Obamacare Repeal Bill the House Just Passed, Explained”, goes into detail about what the bill will do to healthcare in our nation and and how it affects both the rich and the poor when she states,

“This new tax credit structure could also hurt many low-income Americans, whose subsidies would fall substantially. The CBO estimates that a 64-year-old who earns $26,500 would see her post-credit annual premiums increase from $1,700 under current law to $14,600 under the AHCA.  Higher-earning Americans, however, could see their benefits increase significantly” (Kliff, “The American Health Care Act: the Obamacare Repeal Bill the House Just Passed, Explained”).

The bill basically rewards the rich rather than aiding the poor which is not beneficial to the country as a whole since the majority of the country falls within the middle class and below. This means that a lot of Americans will be without health insurance and will need to be able to take care of themselves financially. It is almost an exact replica of the economy in the Great Depression where the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Soon, the rich and healthy will thrive while the poor and sick become sicker and eventually die off.

Within Obamacare, each plan requires doctors to make sure that all health benefits are taken care of. Alison Kodjak mentions in her article,  “Here Is What’s In The House-Approved Health Care Bill”, how in the Better Care Reconciliation Act the essential health benefits are not covered in some states when she explains, “States could apply for waivers that would allow insurance companies in their states to … Eliminate required coverage, called essential health benefits, including maternity care, mental health and prescription drugs, that were required under the Affordable Care Act; …” (Kodjak, “Here Is What’s In The House-Approved Health Care Bill”). These health care benefits listed are what many depend on. They do not necessarily apply to everyone, but some people need them. The people who created the bill are withdrawing their support for basic care simply because it is expensive. The bill was initially created to save tons of money by making cuts. Those who need their prescriptions will be unable to retrieve them since it is not covered in the bill. Thus meaning they will have to go without it or find some sort of alternative. Doctors know what is best for their patients and if the patient is not able to follow the doctor’s instructions, then the results could potentially be fatal. While the government saves money and boosts the economy, it’s citizens are on the verge of dying because they don’t have the proper care they need. Most companies do not cover pre-existing conditions, however, Obamacare does. Kodjak continues to discuss budget cuts when she writes how the bill will, “Charge more for or deny coverage to people who have pre-existing health conditions, such as cancer, diabetes or arthritis” (Kodjak, “Here Is What’s In The House-Approved Health Care Bill”). Most pre-existing conditions are critical. They require the attention of a doctor, testing, and a lot of money for cures. Because of this,  insurance companies don’t want to support covering these conditions because of the expenses. Obamacare is one of the only insurance companies that actually was able to cover the intensive care people needed, no matter the expense.This was one factor that led to many people switching to Obamacare. Now that the new bill is taking this factor away, people with life-threatening conditions will either have to look for another insurance company that suits their needs, which is not very likely.

Obamacare also had some unique features when it came to gender equality. In the article “Obamacare vs. Republican Plan Compared” by Anthony Zurcher, the changes in the GOP bill are listed when Zurcher explains how, “Insurance companies still banned from charging women more, but states could allow insurers to drop maternity care and contraceptives from basic benefits. Also bans women from using federal tax credits to buy a plan that covers abortion” (Zurcher, Obamacare vs. Republican Plan Compared). The basic benefits for women were made because women have different needs than men, which does not mean that they should have different coverage than men. This is not fair because women have to take care of themselves differently than men. In terms of the ban on abortion, it is drawn from one of two reasons. The first is money. The government is making budget cuts, as mentioned earlier, and the main explanation for the changes to the healthcare act draws back to the economy. The second reason is the executive branch’s views on abortion. Since they are not pro abortion, they are not providing money to allow this to happen. It is against their morals as politicians and as people. It is disheartening that they have forgotten that people are entitled to do what they want with their bodies, especially if it does not affect anyone else. Everyone’s life is unique so everyone is going to make different choices. The GOP can’t stop that. By taking the tax credits away, they are definitely making it harder for women to live their lives the way they want to live them. Another unfair change happening in the Better Care Reconciliation Act is that they are charging older patients a lot more than younger patients. Tami Luhby and MJ Lee express this in the article “22 Million Fewer Americans Insured Under Senate GOP Bill” when they give an estimate of how a, “64-year-old with an income of $56,800 would pay $6,800 for a silver plan under current law. But that consumer would pay $20,500 for such a plan under the Senate bill” (Luhby et al, “22 Million Fewer Americans Insured Under Senate GOP Bill”). This is extremely unfair because older people will have health problems as they age. They need to be taken care of a lot more than the people who are healthy and are not prone to accidents. This will cause them, in the long run, to have to pay more because they are prone to more accidents. However, these older members of our nation are being neglected fair care. Raising the price will only make them want to stay home and neglect their discomfort, rather than going to the hospital. As mentioned before, this all just related back to the economy because the government’s main priority is the nation’s capital coming back instead of the health of their people no matter what age they are.

In summary, the creators and supporters Better Care Reconciliation Act favor the condition of the economy over the condition and health of the citizens in the country. If Obamacare was kept and left alone, or if similar functions of Obamacare were still established, more people would have healthcare insurance, get the care that they need, and there would not be any segregation with prices within healthcare plans. When the GOP has to vote on this bill this fall, hopefully they take into consideration the rich, poor, young, old, healthy, and sick, and make sure that it benefits them all.

Works Cited

Bacon, Perry, Jr. “Why The GOP Is So Hell-Bent On Passing An Unpopular Health Care Bill.”

Google. Google, 15 June 2017. Web. 28 July 2017.

Kliff, Sarah. “The Obamacare Repeal Bill the House Just Passed, Explained.” Vox. Google, 4

May 2017. Web. 28 July 2017.

Kodjak, Alison. “Here Is What’s In The House-Approved Health Care Bill.” NPR. NPR, 04 May

  1. Web. 28 July 2017.

Luhby, Tami, and MJ Lee. “22 Million Fewer Americans Insured under Senate GOP Bill.”

CNNMoney. Cable News Network, 26 June 2017. Web. 28 July 2017.

Zurcher, Anthony. “Obamacare v Republican Plan Compared – BBC News.” BBC. Google, 14

July 2017. Web. 28 July 2017.

Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Thank you for visiting CSR Match

The funding platform for corporations and SDG compatible projects

We’ve now concluded the beta- phase of the project and we’re getting ready to take the next step in our journey. Please come back and check on us soon!