Why the ACA Is Bad for U S Citizens

Affordable Care Act

Affordable Health Care

Healthcare is very expensive in the U.S. today but it is also something that everyone needs. That is why affordable healthcare would be a great program for families in America: they could have the care they require at a cost that would not impoverish them at the same time. However, with the passing of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), healthcare costs and premiums have actually gone up for many families (Durden, 2015). Through the ACA, the government is requiring healthcare insurance be mandated for every citizen in the U.S.; however, those citizens with a limited income or who cannot afford to pay for health insurance are penalized because the premiums offered by the insurance companies are too high. This paper will show how even though having mandatory healthcare for everyone is a great idea, seniors and low income families cannot afford the insurance premiums.

Affordable healthcare is needed for everyone as Nickitas (2011) has shown: "the American public wants a health care system that works for them -- safe, effective, patient centered, and high quality" (p. 57). Moreover, as Puffer et al. (2015) show, health care has long been something that the public has required but been unable to effectively and consistently receive at affordable prices: "serious flaws in our nation's delivery system have constrained our ability to achieve the Triple Aim" of healthcare (p. 598). However, the Affordable Care Act is controversial mainly because it is questioned as to whether it actually lowers rates and makes healthcare affordable. While there is no debate about people needing health care, as health care is one of the main drivers of the U.S. economy (Goodman, 2014), what is questioned is whether the ACA does anything to help this situation by making healthcare something that low income families and seniors can afford. Many are already on Medicare and Medicaid but with the ACA more people are getting on these welfare programs because they cannot afford to pay the premiums and do not want to be taxed for not buying health insurance (Health Care Reform, 2012). So instead of getting affordable health care from providers of their own choice, they are stuck receiving care from providers covered by their welfare program. Instead of rates being lowered, rates have gone up; instead of health care being something that people can afford, it has become even more unaffordable than before.

Thus it is that high insurance premiums affect low income families and self-employed citizens. Most employed persons receive health coverage from their employer as part of their incentive package for working there. But self-employed persons and low-income families typically have no such coverage and have to pay out of pocket for their health insurance if they want it. However, the monthly costs are high in terms of the premium and the deductible that must be paid before any health care is even covered by the insurance company is even higher. In short, there is no real coverage at all. The individual is simply paying for the right to be able to pay a high deductible. Such coverage only makes sense in the case of an expensive emergency room visit -- otherwise it is a waste on the individual's income. Low income families are already struggling to make ends meet without having to spend more money that they do not have on health insurance which does not even cover anything. Self-employed persons are generally in the same way as they have to make do with policies that are expensive and that only kick in after upwards of fifteen-to-twenty thousand dollars in deductibles have first been met. This is a disastrous policy for low income households, self-employed persons and seniors who live on savings or pensions.

There is also the question of whether doctors will be able to effectively provide proper healthcare due to increases in healthcare membership. Patient care is now being exported to "specialized" care givers who charge exorbitant fees for their services, which is what the ACA was designed to do -- boost the income and careers of specialists in the health care field (Sanghavi, 2009). Likewise, the increased number of patients expected to be covered means that there will be backlogs of clients with less time and care given to each one if the number of providers does not increase correspondingly. When the exchanges began there was no method in place of guaranteeing that the clinics already established were able to meet the demand of new patient increases with the same quality of care delivered prior to the opening of the exchanges. Scheduling appointments and receiving effective and proper care has become an issue, which is presently being addressed via discussions of and implementation of telehealth policies -- programs that allow nurses to monitor patients from afar, using monitors. Thus, with the increase of patients, service is becoming less personalized and more digitalized. Yet such policies are not likely to be used for low income families or for seniors who cannot afford them.