Obamacare as it is widely known by US citizens is a national health care plan aimed at improvement the American healthcare system. The main focus of Obama care is to regulate the health insurance industry and reducing the costs spend on the healthcare. Obama care is aimed at providing medical insurance to US citizens of low and middle income Americans by providing subsidized discounts on federal run health insurance exchanges. Different authors from various media outlets have evaluated this issue and some of them have criticized the topic while others have supported it. For example, on this article Miles debates on the impacts of Obama care act it will have on the people of US, on his main theme is inclusion multi state plan, which will see the pooling of funds from different states to cater for the medical bills, in addition to this the author conveys the message that, for the safety of the Americans they need to vote for Obama so they can reap the benefit of affordable health care. According to Robert Pear who posted an article on The New York Times newspaper, with a heading that read ‘U.S Set to Sponsor Health Insurance’ for American citizens, this is true from the fact that the ObamaCare will provide affordable health insurance for all US citizens.
For writers against ObamaCare healthcare act, tried to criticize the people, for instance, Betsy McCaughey who published an article on Foxnews.com, the heading reading ‘ObamaCare’s cuts to hospitals will cost seniors their live’ on September 12, 2012 which was criticizing that Obamacare will deprive the aged access to Medicare, this being a false statement, according to ObamaCare act, it will give seniors access to free preventive care and cheaper drugs and this would result for the seniors health care costs go down. This essay explores the contents of the articles that were published concerning the Obamacare and gauging them according to the facts the bill presents.
This essay explores two articles from Miles J. Zaremski from Huffingtonspot.com and Betsy McCaughey who writes for Foxnews.com. According to Zaremski, he claims that the insurance companies fear the pass of ObamaCare act; this is true due to the fact that ObamaCare does ration health care as the insurance company does. Obamacare act will protect consumers from health care rationing and this will cause the private insurance companies to lose a bigger share in the market hence losing millions. The other fear that insurance companies have over the approval of ObamaCare, is that they will be regulated to from hiking their premiums for the advantage of gaining more profits, ObamaCare calls for justification of such increments to the state governments (Ricardo).
According to McCaughey, he critiques that ObamaCare is soliciting the elders with empty promises to protect Medicare as they have known it, tries to win the trust by arguing that ObamaCare will withdraw $716 billion from the Medicare to financing the ObamaCare initiative, this is wrong information because the author did not explain how the funds will be regulated, that is, the initiative cuts $716 billion of waste from Medicare from private insurance Medicare and reinvests it to ObamaCare healthcare initiative. This means that $716 billion is saved and reinvested back; meaning is a win-win project for the citizens. McCaughey continues to claim that ObamaCare will cause unemployment among the nurses and her defence on this notion purports that ObamaCare will cut the wages for the doctors and nurses, which definitely lead to poor deliverance of services and that most doctors do not approve the act. Obamacare act points out that it will provide more employment opportunities, and not causing unemployment as McCaughey claims, more so the policy will allow the Americans to stay on the current medical plan they have and will not offset it.
The two authors try to gain the confidence on their political basis to get people to vote for or against the Obamacare act. For instance, Miley indirectly argues that if Americans will vote for Romney, they would have lost the chance of having access to affordable health care, insurance premium monitoring and finally the ability to save more money while on the other hand McCaughey want the seniors who are the elderly to disapprove the passing of the act, McCaughey uses decisive factor to lie to the seniors that their health’s are in danger, if the bill is passed. The elders are lured into believing this perception despite the fact that ObamaCare aims at providing healthcare for those who cannot afford private healthcare.
In conclusion, the authors (Zaremski and McCaughey) have articulated their views in a way that they think fit, although through thorough analysis and comparison of their claims is evident that they had different motives on publications of the documents. For Zaremski article, he represents his ideas of factual basis without biasness of the information presented while at the same time McCaughey propagate the wrong information to the Americans of which the claims are baseless and they got evidences to support it and that the ideas are just from her personal expression and thinking which lack considerate facts. For example she claims that elderly patients who are treated at the low spending hospitals get less care and have minimal chances of survival compared to their counterpart who receive healthcare from higher spending facilities, this allege does not affect the ObamaCare initiative but the act will save more lives by providing cheap medical products and services.
|President Pro Tempore||The Communist Manifesto|