The ACA was passed in 2010 as the “Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act” and was dubbed “Obamacare” by opponents. President Obama
has encouraged supporters to use that term to remove any negative connotation
and to help clarify that they are one in the same. Imagine, if you would, a
person who is in favor of the benefits offered under the Affordable Care Act,
but is opposed to mandatory coverage under Obamacare. It isn’t too hard to see
the confusion that stems from Democrats and Republicans using different names.
I must offer this disclosure: The ACA is extremely long and
I have not read it all. What I have read is information from the Center for
Medicare and Medicaid Services, a variety of provider newsletter editorials,
articles written in the popular press, and documents prepared specifically for
public health professionals. I have also attended multiple workshops on various aspects of the quality innovations and demonstration projects that stem from the Act. My goal in writing this synopsis is not to persuade you that the ACA is either good or bad, but to help you feel a little more confident about fielding interview questions. Frankly, I think that it is a mixed bag. There are many good aspects of it, but implementation posses many problems. Many, many problems. Sometimes great ideas can go amiss. In the 1980s, the HMO was seen as a remarkable concept that would save US health care, only to bring us where we are today: one of the most expensive places to get care with some of the most abysmal morbidity and mortality among the developed world.
The Act contains ten “Titles” that fall under the general scope of improving access to care, quality of care, and reducing costs. One of the titles was struck from the act prior to passage, but the numbering remained the same. Because the ACA is so big, I’m breaking up my posts to reflect the three main focus areas. Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment