The Affordable Care Act - 275 Words

The Affordable Care Act (Other (Not Listed) Sample) Content: Studentà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Name Professorà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s Name Course Date The Affordable Care Act Introduction In the United States, The Affordable Care Act (ACA) represents a health care declaration constituted by the federal government, widely mentioned to as Obamacare. Adopted by the US President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010, the act remains an issue within the American legal and political system. The fundamental objective of this law is to ensure reforms within the United States health care system by offering and improving access to affordable and quality health services, health insurance, and giving Americans the right and protections by subsidizing health care expenditure for both the government and individual citizens. In the event, the ACA sought to implement procedures that will lower costs, eradicate industrial practices that mention denial and coverage due to pre-existing conditions, as well as improve efficiency. After a law or regulation discourages economic players from the choices they desire, it is reasonable to assert that the law imposes effective taxes on the very choices . Since the key provisions of the ACA came into effect in 2014, the law imposed effective taxes on various decisions influencing low and moderate-income earners in America. In appreciation of this, the ACA has presented myriad issues within the American political and legal system in a bid to reform the health care sector. Overview of the US Health Care Reform The debate surrounding the reorganization of American health care raises numerous and multifaceted legal issues, comprising those of cost-effective, user-friendliness, accountability, and eminence of health care. Fundamental these legislative framework deliberations highlight the concerns of health delivery as both a constitutional as well as a legal right (Gamage 4). In the event, the ACA is one of the health care reform pieces that has come with constitutional and legal issues connect to the right to health care in addition to the power of legislative or political players to ratify and fund programs on health care. The ruling of the US Supreme Court in National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius upheld most of the Affordable Care Act and Patient Protection. Nevertheless, the Constitution of the US does not offer the obvious right to care, and the Supreme Court has certainly not delivered a constitutional interpretation as assuring the right to health care service s from the federal government, especially for persons experiencing affordability challenges. In regards to this, the US Supreme Court has held that the government owes the American citizens the duty to provide medical care, at least in various limited circumstances, for example, for prisoners. At its core, the Obama care, through the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act involves every authentic citizen of the United States to receive insurance on health or pay tax. The process of registering occasions modest steps beginning with sign up, primarily done over and done with a direct provider, insurance market, or a broker. The law functions by providing cost subsidiaries to low and moderate-income households besides small businesses based on taxation of the health care supporters and high-income earners. Contingent upon the income levels, an individual, has a duty to pay a monthly health plan that can be Platinum, with the highest rate of premium, Gold, Bronze, or Silver plan. In the meantime, the lower most rate of premium comprises a minimum of ten rights on health care alongside protections. As such, those in the uppermost rate of premium incur less disposable overheads and the more health care providers and doctors an individual can contract. Despite the benefits of mak ing health care services affordable and accessible to nearly every American citizen, the Obama care has received myriad constitutional challenges. Health Care Rights Under the United States Constitution The World Health Organization pronounces health as a state of complete mental, physical, and social wellbeing rather than a mere absence of disease. Health care concept implies a procedure for the attainment of health, as in the services, care, or supplies associated with a personà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s health. The Constitution of the United States does not explicitly describe the right to health care. Instead, the phrases, "medical care" or "health" does not occur anywhere in the constitution of the US. Constitutional provisions connote that the founding fathers somewhat expressed concerns with guaranteeing freedom from government compared to giving to specified rights to services of the government, such as health care (Swendiman 1). The addition of Bill of Rights to the US Constitution in 1791 promoted further amendments after the Civil War. In the process, proposals have emerged over the exact right to health care as a core US Constitution Amendment. In 1944, for example, Franklin Roo sevelt during his State of Union address, innovated the concept of "Second Bill" of Rights, which as proposed, included the right to medical care alongside access to good health. Even though the Constitution falls short of explicit mentioning of the right to health care, the decision of the Supreme Court in matters mentioning the right to privacy as well as bodily integrity hints its explicit provision of the individual right to access services of health care at the personal expense from willing health care providers. Reasonably, legal issues regarding health care accessibility do not necessarily entail access where an individual has the means as well as the ability to pay for health care. Nonetheless, they involve instances where an individual has difficulty in meeting the costs of health care, which makes the focus shift on the governmentà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s role to provide care rather than the right to health care. Suppose the US Supreme Court were to describe an understood right to health care for households incapable of paying for such care, it is judicious first to determine if the Constitution guarantees such a right or the law that considers a person d ifferently based on financial needs, thus creating a suspect classification (Swendiman 7). In either scenario, it is the Courtà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s duty to examine the constitutionality of the legislative enactments within the lens of ACA, which unreasonably encumbrance such rights under stern scrutiny of appraisal standards. For that reason, the highest degree of constitutional protection within the context of ACA guarantees of the US Constitution. While the US Supreme Court has observed that, the Constitution implicitly deliberates a vital right to privacy; it is yet to examine health care to the classification...