Personally
speaking, I have not given much attention to the debate over mandatory
healthcare, only because I have healthcare provided through my employer. When I
came across this particular article, I was curious to inquire about the fuss
over President Obama's Healthcare Plan. In reading this article I was clarified
on grey areas I did not fully understand, again, I have not given much
thought to this particular issue because I felt it did not pertain to me. I was
wrong.
The author, Jeffery Young, presents the
current hard pressed task the Supreme Court faces in deliberation on the future
of this reform. The decision will affect hundreds of millions of Americans. The
author points that a hot button is the mandatory coverage of all Americans, even if they feel they do not need it or face a
fine.
Some argue that making health insurance mandatory
is unconstitutional. It is simply another attempt to infringe on our right to
choose and refuse.
He writes "A ruling against the law
would be a major blow to Obama, who achieved a goal that eluded presidents from
Roosevelt to Richard Nixon to Bill Clinton". For the President to attempt
to go against a few to take care of millions shows affirmation to make a better
future. Yet, where is the President allowed to make changes on our behalf if we
do not want it, even if it may be our best interest. Unfortunately, the public
is mainly concerned with one main part, a fine. These
citizens with this thought unfortunately exclude those who would breathe a sigh
of relief from the simple fact of acceptance of coverage to alleviate the
financial burden.
The writer in my opinion, is unbiased on
the issue, only presenting the layout about the situation, which is hard to find
in today’s media. This particular article was intended to inform all instead of
a few without a one sided view on the subject. I can appreciate this with all
the one sided journalism in today’s world, aimed at pushing their own agenda
instead of the greater good. He added
clickable links to men, women and children, young and old, which are examples
of those this change would help significantly. Those who are rejected coverage
but desperately need it. He adds "Cutting out the mandate alone will reduce
the number of newly covered Americans and make health insurance more
expensive". This is true, if the health care insurers are not required to
offer coverage to all, they will continue to discriminate against pre-existing
conditions, age and gender. Prime example, the few mentioned above. In addition
he adds “The Obama administration insists it is within its rights to regulate
how Americans pay for health care services they inevitably will consume during
their lives", true in theory, but how to convince those who feel they will
never need health care or those who feel they will not need enough care that
requires coverage? that is the issue that needs resolving to make this accepted. The writer does a wonderful job of conveying the necessary
information to those like myself who were wary due to the display that this
reform was another way for the government to continue to control out
pocketbooks.
Link to article:
No comments:
Post a Comment