Healthcare is a highly-debated topic within the United States. Within the past several years, conversations about health insurance and healthcare reform have been on the rise. Most people can agree that healthcare reforms are needed within the United States. Barack Obama enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would slowly be integrated into the healthcare system, providing health insurance coverage for Americans. Much debate has risen since the law was put into practice, with people calling for revisions or a repeal. The Affordable Care Act must be revised rather than repealed because if it is repealed, it will cause problems for the millions of previously uninsured Americans, those with preexisting health conditions, and the cost of health insurance for all Americans will increase. 

Former President Barack Obama proposed and enacted the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act during his presidency. One of Obama’s goals was to move the power away from the health insurance companies, since prior to the PPACA insurers “held most of the power over policyholders. They could deny coverage to just about anyone,” (Health Care Legislation) inhibiting those in need. The PPACA also aimed to lower the costs of healthcare. The benefits of the PPACA slowly came into action, with “most of the provisions in the new health care plan [rolling] out in 2014” (Health Care Legislation). Programs were enacted in 2010, helping people who had been denied coverage. The purpose of the act was to improve healthcare in the United States, provide affordable insurance for all Americans, and lower the overall cost of healthcare for everyone. The law included benefits for healthcare providers, such as bonuses and reimbursements (Davis, Abrams, Stremikis). There is debate that while Obamacare has improved availability and affordability of insurance, it is now more difficult to receive care. Nearly all Americans agree that the healthcare system needs major reform, but not all believe that Obamacare is the appropriate response to its problems. Most people who oppose the Affordable Care Act think that if the law were to be repealed, it should be replaced.

The law has been dubbed Obamacare, a name that has not benefitted the bill. The Affordable Care Act received support from the democratic party, but has lacked major support from republicans. Many resisted because it would “be funded by new taxes and fees on individuals, businesses, and health care providers” (Health Care Legislation). This meant that all taxpaying Americans were affected by the act. They would have to pay taxes towards funding it and/or they would be receiving care because of it. Those who opposed the act filed lawsuits. This included states and private and public organizations. 

The Affordable Care Act can simply be defined as a law put in place to improve care, affordability, and access to healthcare within the United States. Private insurance is any insurance that is not purchased through a state or the government. Prior health conditions that would affect whether a person could be insured include diseases and conditions such as cancer and black lung disease (Luhby). Essentially, any condition that puts a person at risk and would cost an insurance company a significantly higher amount of money than an average, healthy individual could be considered a prior health condition. Insurance pools were common practice prior to the Affordable Care Act. An insurance pool is when people pool together their money so in case of an emergency, they would have some form of insurance coverage. Medicaid is an insurance program offered through Obamacare for low income families or people.

The Affordable Care Act is necessary now because it is needed by all the people it has provided insurance to. Prior to the act, it was legal for people to go uninsured, or with little to no coverage, causing their problems to escalate. Prior to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, most people covered by Medicare barely received coverage. Since the act has been enforced, the number of people on Medicare has increased. Often when people who are uninsured go to the doctor, they have been lacking healthcare for extended periods of time. Due to this lack of care, their health problems are usually much more severe and costly than they would be if they had seen a doctor sooner. These patients often cannot pay their medical bills and can become overwhelmed by the debt. Thanks to the ACA, individuals who were previously uninsured could gain coverage. This makes going to the doctor more accessible and less expensive, therefore decreasing the risk of having health problems progress. If Obamacare were to be appealed, these individuals who are insured through the ACA would lose their coverage, and without a plan put in place, that could return them to conditions similar to prior to the enactment of the Affordable Care Act. This would be detrimental to our society because the price of insurance for all individuals who have it would increase to compensate for the uninsured. Also, people might allow their health problems to progress again, leading to future expensive healthcare bills. People who could not afford insurance are not the only people who would be affected if the Affordable Care Act was to be repealed. 

If the Affordable Care Act were to be repealed, it would directly impact people with preexisting conditions and diseases. People deserve to be seen by health care professionals; it is not a luxury to receive healthcare services. Patients with prior health conditions or problems that require extensive treatment must wait longer amounts of time to see a doctor compared to those who don’t have a preexisting medical condition. These diseases or conditions can range from long term problems to things that can happen in an instant (Lee). For example, in McGinley’s article titled “Cancer Patients, Survivors Fear GOP Efforts to Dismantle the Affordable Care Act,” the cases of cancer patients and survivors specifically are discussed. McGinley argues using first-hand accounts, that the Affordable Care Act cannot be repealed without major consequences for cancer patients. Survivors emphasize the importance of Obamacare and what it has done for them. One survivor can be quoted as saying “’for cancer survivors, we literally live and die by insurance,’” (McGinley) which displays the need for the ACA. Cancer is a major expense for patients and their families; with cancer being “the second-leading cause of death” (McGinley) in America, the treatment of these cases cannot be ignored. The Affordable Care Act helps to insure cancer patients and survivors because they often cannot afford or are denied private insurance. It also makes up for places where some insurances would lack and made treatments more affordable for the patients and their caregivers. If the Affordable Care Act were to be repealed, this would cause turmoil among those reliant on the law for their treatment and separate laws would need to be put in place to protect those that are being or have been treated for cancer. Also, noted by McGinley is how the Affordable Care Act has replaced insurance pools which had been used in some states prior to the passing of the law. Insurance pools were expensive and had insufficient benefits. McGinley’s article articulates the need for the Affordable Care Act within the cancer community because of their past and present diagnoses. With a previous medical condition, it is nearly impossible to receive affordable insurance without the help of the Affordable Care Act. Also, affected would be the families of coal miners. Coal miners often develop black lung disease overtime while working in coal mines. The Affordable Care Act supports the families of those with black lung disease while they are sick and after their death (Luhby). An Obamacare repeal would hurt this community and their families. 

In five years, the Affordable Care Act has helped to insure more than thirty million Americans (Blumenthal, Abrams, Nuzem). This number includes Americans who may have been previously insured, but have used Obamacare since its enactment. A large proportion of those now insured include people with preexisting health issues. Preexisting health issues allow for insurance companies to deny a person coverage. It is believed by insurers that a person with a preexisting condition will cost the company more overall. With more people having insurance overall, the cost of insurance is set to lower for the average American. When more people can afford and have insurance, the cost of insurance for everyone else goes down (Blumenthal, Abrams, Nuzem). If the ACA was repealed, that would cause less people to be insured, spiking price surges in insurance for people who do not personally rely on the ACA. Therefore, a repeal of the Affordable Care Act would not be a sufficient answer for people who claim their insurance rates have increased. 

There is exploration of reasons why people oppose the Affordable Care Act in an article by Mark Blumenthal and Jonathon Cohn. Obamacare lacks a widespread support by Americans for many reasons. Democrats and republicans are often found simply siding with their leaders, however the main issues are rooted deeper. Through statistics shown and discussed in the article, it appears that the Affordable Care Act has a low approval rating among Americans. However, it is also shown that most people agree that the law is necessary and should not be repealed. Some argue that they are disappointed because they wish the ACA covered more. It is shown that through the development of Obamacare, private insurers had to change some of their previous plans to comply with the affordable care act. The newer plans were sometimes more expensive, and the Obamacare option was also more expensive. There is a large tie to politics as well for people who oppose the ACA. A much larger portion of democrats favor the ACA rather than republicans. This may have to do with the term ‘Obamacare’ itself, for it the ACA is automatically tied to Obama when it is referred to as Obamacare. (Blumenthal, Cohn)

 The Affordable Care Act is deeply debated among Americans, with most completely for the act or calling for a reform in its entirety. In an argument presented in the article, it leads with “insurers responded by canceling the old plans, charging higher premiums to some existing customers or some combination of the two” (Blumenthal, Cohn). However, this claim is not entirely valid. While it is true that some insurers raised premiums, it must also be noted that the price of insurance increases every year, with only some of the additional cost resulting from the Affordable Care Act. It can also be argued that the offset of this price change benefits more people than it affects. An overwhelming number of people who are now insured post-Obamacare enactment are satisfied by the insurance they now have; it closes previous gaps and insures people who could not previously obtain insurance. For those that wish for the ACA to cover more, a revision would suffice rather than an appeal of the current law. A revision allows for the law to be expanded from where it stands today. Another argument made in this article was “overall, 64 percent of Democrats in the non-group market rate the ACA favorably, compared to just 19 percent of Republicans” (Blumenthal, Cohn). The polling and interviewing done for this article clearly states that republicans were more likely to respond to the bill negatively, than democrats were to respond at all. This can result in bias for surveying and statistical reasoning. 

“…People are holding the law responsible for all of the problems of the health care system — including those like rising deductibles, narrowing hospital networks, or even long waits at the doctor’s office that most experts believe have little or nothing to do with the law itself,” (Blumenthal, Cohn)

shows some truth that is pointed out by the author of the article. There has been an increased difficulty in scheduling and obtaining medical care. However, as stated at the end of the quote, this is not the direct result of the Affordable Care Act. It can be deducted that through the ACA, the cost of insurance for most individuals has been lowered, their access to healthcare has improved from none to something, and places where insurance had previously been lacking have been compensated for. In short, if the Affordable Care Act were to be repealed, none of the issues brought up by the article would be resolved. The only truly valid claim is that health insurance for some people who had insurance prior to the ACA has risen, however, it would continue to rise more if the act were repealed. Insurance is higher for everyone when there are less people with it to begin with. 

A major argument against the Affordable Care Act is the access to health care is in high demand. With millions of more people having access to insurance, long waiting lists for Medicaid and doctor’s appointments have been formed. This is a problem because with the progression of any disease or condition, immediate medical attention is always the best option (Lee). In some cases of Medicaid patients, they are not always able to get to their appointments. Lee gives the example of a single, working parent who needs to care for their children when they are not on the clock. Since more people are insured, it is more difficult to get appointments at doctor’s offices. Also, some practices are unwilling to care for patients on Medicare because of a delay of payment by the government. While this is a strong argument, it is still beneficial that people are getting access to healthcare in general. When some people had little to no access to healthcare prior to the ACA, it is important to acknowledge that they can now see a doctor at all. Incentives for doctors to see Medicaid patients have also been introduced. These benefits include paying practices for their treatment of Medicaid patients. A revision or repeal of the Affordable Care Act could not directly prove beneficiary for this argument, but the argument is still valid and should be addressed. 

The Affordable Care Act is completely necessary for the United States now. Without Obamacare, millions of individuals would lose their access to healthcare and insurance. Without this coverage, people can become extremely sick or build up hospital bill debt. Also, much of the opposition against the Affordable Care Act could be done through revisions. There is call for the act to cover more. Most of the counterarguments against the Affordable Care Act would not be fixed or addressed if the law were to be repealed. People’s insurance would still be expensive and on the rise if the act was repealed. If the ACA is repealed, it would take time to see if access to healthcare would become more accessible. It may still be too early to truly tell if the Affordable Care Act is truly effective or not. All calls for the Affordable Care Act to cover more would not be resolved if it were repealed. However, it seems that so far there is proof that the healthcare system has improved for those who have had insurance prior to and after the enactment of the Affordable Care Act. The full benefits and effects may need more time for full research and data to be produced (Shartzer, Long, Anderson). I think that the Affordable Care Act should be revised to extend coverage. Also, to address the people who could afford insurance prior to the ACA but were forced to change to a different plan that they do not agree with, I think they should be able to move back to their plan if it meets all minimum criteria for insurance coverage. For this to happen, the United States’ government will need to work together to create revisions for the Affordable Care Act so it can hopefully meet most people’s expectations and needs. Universal healthcare is done effectively and efficiently in many other countries so the government need only look to its neighbors for help, support, and ideas. 
