Politics and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Regardless of political affiliation, individuals often grow concerned when considering perceived competing interests of government and their impact on topics of interest to them. The realm of healthcare is no different. Some people feel that local, state, and federal policies and legislation can be either helped or hindered by interests other than the benefit to society.
Consider for example that the number one job of a legislator is to be reelected. Cost can be measured in votes as well as dollars. Thus, it is important to consider the legislator’s perspective on either promoting or not promoting a certain initiative in the political landscape.
Resources
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES
To Prepare:
Review the Resources and reflect on efforts to repeal/replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Consider who benefits the most when policy is developed and in the context of policy implementation.
By Day 3 of Week 3
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 voters 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.
By Day 6 of Week 3
Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two different days by expanding on their explanation and providing an example that supports their explanation or respectfully challenging their explanation and providing an example.
*Note: Throughout this program, your fellow students are referred to as colleagues.
YR
Yohanka Perez Rodriguez
Sep 4 8:07pm
Reply from Yohanka Perez Rodriguez
Hey Class,
For this week’s discussion, I wanted to start by explaining the question provided. Certain individuals stand to gain the most from the development and implementation of a policy, as evidenced by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2020 (ACA). This healthcare reform law, introduced during the Obama administration, aimed to enhance access to healthcare by reducing the number of uninsured individuals in the United States. As a result, the legislation included various provisions designed to achieve this goal, such as the individual mandate, reforms to health insurance, the establishment of affordable insurance exchanges, requirements for employers, and the provision of premium credits to eligible individuals and families (Nadash et al., 2018). Nevertheless, the Trump administration sought to overturn certain ACA provisions, including the individual mandate. The Trump administration’s attempts to repeal and replace the ACA were hindered by insufficient support from lawmakers (Nadash et al., 2018). Following a thorough cost-benefit analysis, numerous lawmakers retracted their support after realizing that the potential impact of repealing and replacing the ACA would negatively affect the average American voter, ultimately jeopardizing their chances at re-election.
One of the initiatives to repeal and replace the ACA was the introduction of the American Health Care Act (AHCA), which proposed income-based tax credits rather than age-based ones. In March 2017, House Republicans presented a bill that, if passed, would result in approximately 24 million Americans losing their health insurance coverage. The bill’s objectives included the elimination of individual and employer mandates, reductions in Medicaid spending and eligibility, the removal of tax credits for healthcare expenses, and modifications to rules concerning pre-existing conditions (Nadash et al., 2018).
Legislators use cost-benefit analysis to assess the potential impact of their actions and opinions on their re-election prospects. The concept of cost-benefit analysis played a significant role in the legislators’ decision-making process regarding the repeal and replacement of the ACA. One of the attempts to repeal the ACA was through the introduction of the American Health Care Act (AHCA), which greatly influenced the outcome of the 2018 midterm elections. A considerable number of House Republicans who supported the AHCA were not re-elected, resulting in 33 of them losing their seats (Bussing et al., 2020). As a result, many House Democrats were re-elected, indicating that legislators who backed the bill were more likely to face defeat in their re-election campaigns. In addition, to improve their chances of getting re-elected in the 2018 elections, several legislators withdrew their support for different attempts to repeal or replace the ACA (Bussing et al., 2020).
Legislators’ stances and approval of efforts to repeal/replace the ACA had an impact on voters’ choices in re-electing legislative leaders. Elected by voters, senators and representatives in the House of Representatives hold political positions influenced by their views and actions on policy formulation and implementation, which in turn shape voter sentiment about their re-election prospects and policy positions. The legislators’ decisions and stances on repealing and replacing the ACA influenced voter perspectives, leading to the ousting of several legislators who backed the AHCA in the 2018 midterm elections, as voters sought to replace them (Bussing et al., 2020).
Bussing, A., Patton, W., Roberts, J. M., & Treul, S. A. (2020). The electoral consequences of roll call voting: Health care and the 2018 election. Political Behavior.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341261029_The_Electoral_Consequences_of_Roll_Call_Voting_Health_Care_and_the_2018_ElectionLinks to an external site.
Nadash, P., Miller, E. A., Jones, D. K., Gusmano, M. K., & Rosenbaum, S. (2018). A series of unfortunate events: Implications of Republican efforts to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act For older adults. Journal of aging & social policy.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29634455/Links to an external site.