The last few days as I’ve been waking up for work, the radio has been playing live clips of the Supreme Court’s hearing on the Affordable Care Act, a health care law commonly referred to as “Obamacare.” I feel, even when trying to research the subject and discuss it with acquaintances whose expertise I value, I keep getting the picture in segments. So I wanted to present how I see the Affordable Care Act and open up the subject to any Good Feed readers that have more details to fill in.
The heart of Obamacare is a mandate that makes health insurance like car insurance, a necessity for owners of a vehicle who want to use it as well. The difference being, obviously, we have to use our bodies, and cannot park them in a garage when we can’t pay the insurance bills.
The government’s issue is trying to handle the bills that people without insurance accumulate. Ideally, when a problem occurs with our bodies, like with our cars, our bills do not become someone else’s bills. Conservatives calls this socialism, because when you are healthy, your insurance payments are paying for someone else’s bills. However, when possible, most people try to stay on a health insurance plan even when they’re healthy knowing that waiting to get insurance till you’re sick carries exorbitant penalties.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of the mandate, and today they dealt with the individual parts of the Affordable Care Act.
Some of the parts include an extension of Medicaid to people under 65 that would have states footing a huge bill by 2014. In fact, the case that put the Affordable Care Act in front of the Supreme Court is being brought by 26 States.
Today, Obama’s 2012 campaign released a graphic that presented how the Affordable Care Act will prohibit gender discrimination for the price of health care. The graphic, which displays a map of the United States, appears to make the claim that some states, such as Arkansas, make women pay 76-100% more for health insurance than men. I am really unsure of how this will come about, but am guessing it has to do a provision in the act that puts premiums on a sliding scale based on an individual’s income, as opposed to gender. I would love any input on the sliding scale provision or gender equality claims.
One of the biggest parts of the Affordable Care Act, as I see it, is a clause that prohibits denial of claims or coverage due to pre-existing conditions. As someone who has bounced around from my parents’ insurance, to student insurance, to government insurance (through Peace Corps), I am forever concerned that one day I’m going to find myself saddled with huge bills due to some pre-existing condition. Or at worst, completely unable to get insurance at all.
At this point, “Obamacare” looks great to me. I have a car, and I pay a little extra every month to participate in a governmentally-mandated program that insures that if something out of my control happens to that property I care so much about, ultimately, it will get fixed.
Why wouldn’t I do as much, if not more, for my body?
Also, before I open this for comments, Ruth Bader Ginsburg – does she make good zingers, or the best zingers? I could listen to her on the radio every morning.