Abstract has allowed for the radical reform

AbstractHealth insurance remaineddiscriminatory since 1965 until the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)in 2010.

The changes to the health insurance laws have allowed nearly 40% ofthe previously uninsured persons’ access insurance and improved the health ofthe population. The Obamacare as it is commonly referred to, has ensured theuninsured and marginalized groups based on their medical history or povertylevels were forcefully integrated into the insured bracket to increase thenumber of insured persons across the globe and expected to attain fullinsurance by 2019. The legislation has allowed for the radical reform of boththe public and private health insurance sector.

Sometimes it is hard to do all the work on your own
Let us help you get a good grade on your paper. Get expert help in mere 10 minutes with:
  • Thesis Statement
  • Structure and Outline
  • Voice and Grammar
  • Conclusion
Get essay help
No paying upfront

The enactment of the lawallowed for the improvement of the health system across the nation.Constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act has been digressed by the SupremeCourt in two landmark proceedings. The three critical points of the insurance actresonate with the rulings of the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of thelegislation.         Health Law EssentialsHealthinsurance remained discriminatory since 1965 until the enactment of theAffordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010. The changes occasioned by the Act haveresulted in a series of lawsuits filed across various jurisdictions across thenation, and which are expected to alter or strengthen the legislation(Teitelbaum & Wilensky, 2017).

The Obamacare as is it’s commonly referredto, has ensured the uninsured and marginalized groups based on their medicalhistory or poverty levels were forcefully integrated into the insured bracketto increase the number of insured persons across the globe and expected toattain full insurance by 2019. The changes have allowed nearly 40% of thepreviously uninsured persons’ access insurance and improved the health of thepopulation. Analysts believe the legislation enforced population health in aneconomy deemed to prefer capitalistic tendencies in all nearly all facets oftheir lives. The feature has attributed to the increase in health levels acrossmost jurisdictions across the globe. Secondly,the legislation has allowed for the radical reform of both the public andprivate health insurance sector. The legislation introduced bands which aredifferent sets of groups lumped together to create specific bands, which accesshealth insurance at different prices. Wealthy and middle-income earners pay thebulk of the premiums collected to ensure the continuity of the program(Courtemanche, Marton, Ukert, Yelowitz, & Zapata, 2017). Persons under thegovernment levels receive subsidies and only required to pay a small fractionof their premiums.

Finally, the enactment of the law allowed for theimprovement of the health system across the nation. The law required allhealthcare institutions to improve the quality of healthcare provision, whichhas resulted to better healthcare systems and improvement of population healthacross the nation. The three key points elaborate on the importance of the actin ensuring that reforms were victorious in the insurance sector, improvementin the healthcare systems and reallocation of assets to all marginalizedindividuals (Uberoi, Finegold, & Gee, 2016).Constitutionalityof the Affordable Care Act has been digressed by the Supreme Court in twolandmark proceedings.

The first proceeding centered on two critical issuesbeing; expansion of the Medicaid through the Health secretary and the authorityto tax and spend on non-exempt individuals within the realms of the legislativetax power imposed on the Congress. The issues were in authority of ambiguousinterpretation of the legislation and misuse of the provisions in the futurewithout the adequate explanations provided by the Supreme Court. The Court in amajority ruling of 5-4 ruled that the legislation was constitutional. The courtruled that the secretary of health had only power to control new funding toMedicaid and could not repeal existing Medicaid support to even non-compliantstates.

Secondly, minimum essential coverage is only a requirement based on thecongressional taxing power and not its commerce power (Rosenbaum, 2011).Minimum essential coverage is critical in ensuring that the uninsured personssafeguarded under the law get insurance within the realm of the law. Finally,the individual mandate can never be barred based on the provisions of the Anti-InjunctionAct.

Theconstitutionality of the requirement by most Americans to have insurance or paytaxes as established by the Congress based on the commerce power was alsoupheld by the Supreme Court in reaffirming the constitutionality of the Act. Thelaw provides that all individuals covered under the Act must purchase insuranceor pay penalties for failing to have insurance. The procedure ensures that theexpected effect of the legislation is achieved across the nation. The threecritical points of the insurance act resonate with the rulings of the SupremeCourt on the constitutionality of the legislation.ReferencesCourtemanche, C., Marton,J.

, Ukert, B., Yelowitz, A., & Zapata, D. (2017).

Early Impacts of the             Affordable Care Act on Health InsuranceCoverage in Medicaid Expansion and Non?       Expansion States. Journalof Policy Analysis and Management, 36(1), 178-210.Rosenbaum, S. (2011). ThePatient Protection and Affordable Care Act: implications for public healthpolicy and practice. Public health reports, 126(1), 130-135.Teitelbaum, J. , S.

(2017). Essentials of health policy and law. Burlington,       Massachusetts: Jones & BartlettLearning.Uberoi, N., Finegold, K.,& Gee, E.

(2016). Health insurance coverage and the Affordable Care               Act, 2010-2016. United StatesDepartment of Health and Human Services.  


I'm Gerard!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out