he article, The American Health Care Act, published by the Steve Knight talks about the passing of the American Health Care Act (AHCA), the reason why it was passed, and the purpose of the act. According to the article, the act was passed to repeal some of the provisions of the Accountable Care Act (ACA) and include some policies that are aimed at improving the quality of care. The article suggests that since the ACA does not provide the US citizens with choices regarding health care insurance, it negatively influences the quality of health care that is currently being provided in the US. The article clarifies most of the commonly asked questions regarding the AHCA and according to Knight, the new law will ensure that every citizen can access affordable and quality care as it allows for financial support to those purchasing private and insurance (Knight, 2017).
The article goes on to refute the allegation that the AHCA will deny people with preexisting conditions insurance coverage. Rather, Knight claims that the act requires insurance providers to also cover people with preexisting conditions. In addition, states could lower premiums for insurance companies if the companies establish programs that specifically cover people with preexisting conditions. The article concludes by claiming that the AHCA aims at repealing some parts of the ACA, it will retain some parts of the ACA like protection of people with preexisting conditions, coverage of children up to age 26 and protection of the vulnerable populations like women.
The article does a good job in clarifying some of the misconceptions regarding the AHCA and its purpose. By using the question and answer approach, Knight manages to address key concerns regarding the passing of the act and what it means for ordinary Americans. However, only a few questions were asked and answered but the author has made the effort to provide a link of the law so that people could get to read the article themselves.
The article was written as a result of rising concerns and questions regarding the AHCA and whether or not it would be replacing the ACA. According to Knight, the reason why the senate passed the AHCA is to repeal some failing parts of the existing ACA for the purpose of ensuring quality in the delivery of healthcare. The article was published mainly to answer some of the major concerns regarding the AHCA and to educate the public on what the act really covers and how it will enhance healthcare quality. This makes the AHCA more acceptable and more appealing to the public as it rules out the negative opinions and claims about the purpose of the act.
The consequences of this article are that more people will be enlightened about the new act and some of the misconceptions will be clarified. In addition, the article will help in advocating for support of the act from the public as well as private institutions. Furthermore, by clarifying the most frequently asked questions, the article helps the debate for those supporting the law. However, the article should have gone further to provide more information regarding how healthcare providers will be affected by the new act and the adjustments that they should make. The article is also not clear about the role of citizens and the general public regarding the act and its implementation.
The article, Internists say the American Health Care Act Will Negatively Impact Patients and Reverse Coverage Gains from the ACA, published by the American College of Physicians talks about how the American Health Care Act (AHCA) will negatively affect the quality and access to acre. In the article, it is argued that by passing the AHCA, millions of Americans will lose insurance coverage as well as protection as the law takes away the subsidies that came with the ACA. This implies that the poorer and older citizens will no longer afford health insurance and that this would force states and insurance providers to restrict health coverage eligibility.
The article goes on to claim that the AHCA will reduce the government contributions to Medicaid and ultimately, reversing the benefits of the ACA and bringing down the quality of care that the majority of Americans enjoy under the ACA. The American College of Physicians noted five key areas of the AHCA that is considered unacceptable including: opposing the reduction in the Medicaid federal contributions, the belief that the AHCA’s age-based credits will make quality healthcare inaccessible to the poor and the old, concerns that people with preexisting conditions might no longer be covered, concerns that the repeal of the ACA will increase the cost of accessing specific services like maternity, and opposing any regulatory attempts to discriminate against clinics that offer quality care for women.
It is agreeable with the article that there are indeed genuine concerns regarding the AHCA and how it will affect the American citizens. The concerns expressed by the author are clear, direct and touch on critical issues regarding the delivery of quality care. However, the article should have also included parts of the act that it agrees with or those that appear to be beneficial. I find this article quite biased and based on assumptions rather than facts.
The article was published mainly to express the concerns and worries of those opposing the AHCA, especially physician interns and medical students. The ideas expressed in the article also reflect the opinions of the American public and healthcare providers who are opposing the AHCA and the repeal of the ACA. The intention of the article is to seek answers regarding the downside of the AHCA and how the AHCA could replace the ACA without necessarily reversing the gains of the ACA. It is therefore the duty of the congress and the senate committee that passed the bill to clarify and address the issues expressed by the American College of Physicians.
The consequences of this article are that the AHCA still remains unclear to many people especially healthcare providers and that much more needs to be done to inform all the stakeholders regarding the benefits of the law. Another consequence is that the federal government will definitely need to address the concerns of the American College of Physicians and other groups and stakeholders opposing the law. One thing that should have been added in the article is under what conditions that the body would support the law. In addition, the authors of the article should have addressed the potential benefits of the passed law. The article should have also included recommendations on how the law could be used to improve the quality of healthcare provision.