Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Days earlier, Democratic Senator Pat Moynihan said pretty much the same on Meet the Press.
Yet the public continued to demand changes. The changes they eventually got are still to be seen, as to their level of effectiveness. Changes that many see as temporary and not far reaching enough, such as when any sort of national health care plan was squashed by the stakeholders, fearing loss of revenue and convincing the public of the potential loss of availability for lifesaving care and difficult decisions that would bar many from demanding it the system instead created such things as a highly complicated and entirely privatized Medicare D. drug benefit, more than ten years after the debate had begun. The collective agenda of the stakeholders, was first to defend the system as it stood, which was not allowed by the public or the media, and then to make small changes that kept the system intact and reacted to the defensive stances of the stakeholders, such as their continual need to press the point that the system is good because it is based on the capitalism that founded our nation. This is why the rather small strides that have been made, thus far are limited to programs that are privatized, with literally hundreds of insurers buying in to the program and being allowed to limit its usage and benefits, as thy always have. Now more than ten years old the debate still rages, and only limited changes have really been made. In a sense the policy makers, adamantly apposed to public health care delivery systems, as well as delivery agents (large stake holding health care companies) and insurers are the winners, despite the fact that the U.S. public is still being underserved and overpaying for the services they are able to receive. Health care bankruptcy has become a common occurrence and yet the system is still failing many individuals and families and more and more people are losing coverage options daily. The winners are, those with the deepest pockets, the delivery giants and the health care insurance providers that wish to continue to profit, regardless of the public concerns, no matter how real they are and no matter how temporary or cumbersome the fixes offered are.
Which group has been most successful in influencing this issue and why?
Probably the group that has been most successful in influencing this issue are those moderates who wish to demand system change only within the systems that currently drive the health care dollar. The insurers and providers have been able to not only maintain a status quo but have also been able to keep growing prices and keep limiting services and availability.
References
Cauchi, R. (2004, July/August). What's the Benefit? A New Federal Medicare Drug Plan Stimulates Independent Actions and New Ideas, but What's the Future Role for States?. State Legislatures, 30, 28.
The Health Care Crisis. (2007, March 18). The Washington Times, p. B04.
Mckenzie, N.F. (1994, February 28). The Real Health Care Crisis. The Nation, 258, 266+.
Nancy F. Mckenzie, "The Real Health Care Crisis," the Nation, 28 February 1994.
While many insurance companies may have limits in place, those limits are easily raised when requested by doctors (Maschue 2012). Under the current Medicare and Medicaid plans, however, the government sets specific amounts that doctors and hospitals may bill and any amount over that will not be paid. This limit leads to many doctors refusing to accept government patients or reducing the amount of care for those patients (Maschue
Even with all of this federal intervention, however, the issue of Americans being able to afford healthcare would rear its ugly head time and time again in the succeeding decades. This issue would be tossed about like a political hot potato until the election of President Bill Clinton, when then First Lady Hillary Clinton embraced the issue of affordable healthcare for all Americans and made an attempt to institute
American Healthcare System has been at the center of debate for many years. One of the most pressing issues confronting the healthcare system is Medicare and its beneficiaries. The purpose of this discussion is to focus on the ramifications of moving Medicare beneficiaries into managed care organizations (MCOs). Our investigation will illustrate that moving the Medicare beneficiaries into MCOs are a bad idea because there will not to be
Admittedly, there have been some minor improvements since 2007. Specifically, legislation enacted in 2009 by President Barack Obama eliminated the ability of health insurance companies to exclude certain individuals from coverage and to deny coverage to beneficiaries in need of expensive healthcare services by simply canceling their policies. That legislation extended the maximum age that children may remain on their parents' policies as well. Unfortunately, the Obama administration essentially gave
Second, the fact that medical costs are billed to health insurance companies is responsible for an industry-wide culture of financial irresponsibility where little concern is given to avoiding unnecessary or duplicated costs of healthcare services (Kennedy, 2006; Reid, 2009). Unfortunately, political opposition to healthcare reform throughout 2009 made it impossible for the Obama administration to achieve this essential goal but it is likely that the current system cannot be sustained
The natural history of disease is an epidemiological model, showing how an individual’s health condition will progress over time without any interventions. Intervening at the weakest link in the chain of progression of specific diseases sometimes means addressing the symptoms of a problem long after the disease has progressed past a treatable point. Usually, high technology, high-cost solutions are required when intervening late in the stage or progress of a