Post an explanation for how you think the cost-benefit analysis in terms of legislators being reelected affected efforts to repeal/replace the ACA. Then, explain how analyses of the votes views may affect decisions by legislative leaders in recommending or positioning national policies (e.g., Congress’ decisions impacting Medicare or Medicaid). Remember, the number one job of a legislator is to be re-elected. Please check your discussion grading rubric to ensure your responses meet the criteria.
APA format ANd 3 references
https://www.congress.gov
https://www.nursingoutlook.org/article/S0029-6554(17)30262-2/fulltext
https://www.senate.gov/senators/leadership.htm
Then respond to two students on apa format and two references each
by expanding on their explanation and providing an example that supports their explanation or respectfully challenging their explanation and providing an example.
Student 1
For very many American citizens, the fight over repealing Obamacare on the “Affordable Care Act (ACA)” isn’t about electoral strategy or vote counting, whether or not they will indeed be able to pay for their hospitalization and medications once the issues have passed is a major concern for many families. (Willison & Singer 2017). Regarding healthcare practitioners, this is about being able to service all of their consumers without being overburdened by the expenses of uninsured patients. In addition to protecting employment and companies, states must have the resources to deal with the opioid issue and other health care crises, such as the Ebola outbreak. Therefore, it is essential to look at the “repeal and replacement of the affordable care act” through legislators.
There’s no doubt that the “Obama administration’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA)” was a ground-breaking piece of legislation. (Thompson et al. 2018). A significant endeavor was made for the first time to address healthcare equity in the US. With Republican members publicly opposing the measure, the policy was plagued from the beginning by political connotations. When Trump took office, one of his top priorities was repealing, defunding and replacing the “Affordable Care Act.”
The Senate approved a motion in the beginning of 2017 by a majority of 51-48, a move to begin discussing the budget measure. (Thompson et al. 2018). Budget and tax-related provisions of the ACA were suggested for removal in the budget resolution. The final law was anticipated to abolish measures that gave tax credits for low-income persons to purchase health insurance, mandated all individuals to have insurance, and compelled companies to provide insurance to their workers to repeal these provisions.
In a vote taken on July 25, 2017, the Senate approved a move to advance to the passed repeal and replace measure, the “American Health Care Act of 2017 (AHCA).” The vote was 51-50 in favor of the proposal. Senators Murkowski and Collins voted against the proposal, as did all Senate Democrats. It was Vice President Pence’s voting that broke the 50-50 tie. In spite of his recent diagnosis with brain cancer, Republican Senator McCain came to Congress to vote in support of the measure. In the absence of his vote, the proposal would have been defeated. Finally, there was a tax reform budget to be reviewed and the bill was not voted on.
The impact of re-election prospects on the ACA repeal and replacement effort
It quickly became clear to the lawmakers, both Republican and Democrat, that ‘repeal and replace’ was not going to help them win re-election because of its wide-ranging negative effects. (Willison & Singer 2017). Legislators quickly realized that the new ‘repeal and replace’ ideas would have a negative impact on the average American voter. A growing number of Republican lawmakers began to realize that their prospects of re-election were diminishing as a result of their support for repealing and replacing Obamacare. According to research, the “repeal of the Affordable Care Act” would save the central government $91 billion in 2021 plus $930 billion from 2017 and 2026, which seems to be among the aims of those favoring repeal. That’s a drop of 21 percent, which is a significant change. (Willison & Singer 2017)
The new approach, as shown above, would have left many Americans without access to affordable medical care. (Jacobs et al 2021). The “American Academy of Family Physicians,” for example, criticized the AHCA’s measures because they increased health vulnerability for Americans. Because of their age, health, or socioeconomic condition, the AAFP says that this new policy is driving up expenses and denying coverage to people. (Jacobs et al 2021). Additionally, the expected effects on budgetary allocations and the entire employment market show just how essential the health care industry to our economy is. The research encourages us to look for unforeseen repercussions in whatever changes we contemplate making.
Student 2
A cost-benefit analysis is a systematic approach to estimating the strengths and weaknesses of alternatives (2021). Many companies across the world use cost-benefit analysis to make decisions. Congress also sometimes allows cost-benefit analysis to be taken into consideration by legislators. The first job of a legislator is to be re-elected, and to be re-elected, the legislator must consider the wishes of their constituents.
Cost-benefit analysis is considered a decision helping, not a decision-making tool by legislators. The risks, costs, and benefits under scrutiny are usually difficult to establish with precision (2021). The cost-benefit analysis turns all outcomes into a monetary value, allowing lawmakers multiple options to ensure the best results for the lowest cost (2022).
As some legislators talk about repealing or replacing the Affordable Care Act, the cost-benefit analysis could come into play. When the ACA was passed, it was meant to expand affordable health care to all Americans, lower costs and improve quality and care coordination (Management, 2015). Less than 50% of Americans statistically support the Affordable Care Act. Many Americans oppose the government’s role in healthcare and have little trust in the government. Republicans posted many negative television ads against the ACA in 2012, which skewed Americans’ knowledge of what the ACA truly is. Almost 60% of Americans say what they know about the Affordable Care Act is from television (JS).
Although there are many positives to the Affordable Care Act, health insurance markets can only stay afloat because of federal subsidies, and middle-income families without employer-provided insurance and small businesses have increased healthcare costs. ACA has damaged the individual market for healthcare insurance (Blase, 2022). National policy is affected by a legislator’s conservative versus liberal viewpoint and by the desire to be re-elected by their constituents.
The ACA is complex, and there has been no reasonable alternative to repeal and replace it. Alternatives mentioned are health care savings accounts and working with individual companies to lower costs. Repealing the Affordable Care Act without replacing it is not an option due to leaving millions without healthcare.
