In the current essay I would like to consider the argument for and against Obamacare and its impact on the citizens of the United States. To begin with it should be noted that health care reform in the United States refers to proposals to change health policy in the United States, including efforts to increase the scope of health insurance and general health of the population over the last hundred years. As a fact, many reforms have laid the foundation for greater insurance coverage to more people, either privately or publicly financed. The tendency of the postwar era has been a steady expansion of publicly funded health benefits, but still the majority of treatments funded through private or employer paid insurance.
It can be said that the Obamacare reform is based on several principles. First of all, every American would have health insurance – if he refuses, then he may be fined. Secondly, the government will subsidize the company, which insures its employees, and low-income residents, who are unable to obtain such insurance. Third, some serious limitations on the actions of private health insurance companies are introduced. Fourth, authorities introduce new taxes that will cover the new costs, according to Pat Bartels (2010).
It should be noted that according to the Obamacare reform, 32 million of Americans, who until now could not afford to purchase health insurance, will receive access to health services. Moreover, the number of recipients of Medicaid will increase to 15 million people – the state insurance is paid for persons over 65 years old. In addition, the reform provides subsidies to private medical insurance for Americans with low-and middle-income.
The cost of this reform is estimated on the level of $ 940 billion, moreover, until 2019 new taxes will be introduced (with total amount of $ 409.2 billion by 2019) to wealthy individuals and industries related to medicine. Thus, the pressure on drug manufacturers will grow from 2011 on $ 2-3 billion; also, a majority of Americans in 2014 will pay an insurance fee of $ 695 or 2.5% of income. As a fact, tax pressure will increase to 1 million people and 4 million households with annual incomes above $ 200,000 and $ 250,000 respectively. According to the White House calculations, the reform will reduce the budget deficit by $ 143 billion over 10 years and another $ 1.2 trillion, according to Einer Elhauge (2010).
However, many studies show that 56% of Americans are negative about the plans of the radical restructuring of the health care system, to which Obama originally made main rate. It should be noted that transition to the “medicine of the future”¯, which remained unfulfilled dream of the leaders of the Democratic Party of the United States since President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and today stand ready to support only 33% of U.S. citizens. Most Americans have sharply negative attitude to the fact, that from now on the state will decide what insurance they should buy. In addition, the adoption of the law on compulsory insurance means significantly rising in taxes for every U.S. citizen, and such measure is rarely become popular, according to Sheryl Gay Stolberg (2010).
Nevertheless, proponents of the Obamacare reform believe that raising taxes will affect a few. According to their calculations, the new income tax in the amount of 3.8% will pay only those Americans, whose annual income exceeds $ 200 thousand per year. However, these arguments are not too convincing for the opponents of the reform. In turn, they believe that no one can really relate to the calculations of the authors of the reform, stressing that until now, it is unknown how many Americans really do not have health insurance. Moreover, supporters of the reforms believe that it will allow the government, over the long term, reduce high health care costs, and also destroy the system of fraud and abuse in healthcare. After all, profits from the current system receive insurance companies mainly due to the patients’ cost. In turn, critics accuse the President in an effort to establish a socialist system of health care, which will inevitably entail a decline in the quality of health services and force the government to control the private lives of citizens, according to Sharon Falsetto (2010).
To sum it up I would like to say that proponents of Obamacare reform argue that in the long term, these measures would not only facilitate and lengthen the lives of Americans, but will help to reduce the budget deficit and help the economy of the country. Opponents believe that these measures violate fundamental principles of American society (pointing to the mandatory purchase of insurance) and will result in financial disaster. Many experts stress that the main controversy is not turned around practical provisions of the new law, but on the basis of ideological differences. It is essential to note that the first two reforms in 1930 and 1960 were accompanied by the similar battles.