Affordable Care Act a divided issue

SUN CITY – It’s been two weeks since the Supreme Court upheld the majority of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), and responses from both sides are continuing to voice their approval or concerns with the passage.

Known also as “Obamacare,” the act drastically changes the options of healthcare for Americans nationwide, including eligibility to families who cannot afford proper healthcare, new mandates for businesses employing more than 50 full-time employees, and the elimination of a pre-existing condition determining someone’s qualifications.

The entire act is roughly 906 pages long and documents a number of provisions – estimated to be around 700 – that could go into effect as late as 2020. While there may be a number of provisions that have not seen the light of day yet, the act as a whole could see a full repeal come November if Republicans win the majority in the House and Senate and Mitt Romney becomes the nation’s 45th president.

Jim Nelson is a firm believer of the 10th amendment, which states that the federal government can only use the powers granted in the Constitution. Nelson, who belongs to the Huntley Tea Party, believes the passage of the PPACA violates that amendment.

“I think it will lead us farther down a road that we shouldn’t be going – one that will give more and more government control and less of a personal freedom. This issue is way beyond the scope of our government,” Nelson said. “It’s an overreach of our government.”

The Huntley Tea Party, according to member Bill Broderick, met the day after the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision, and although disappointed, they have set their sights on informing the public about the drawbacks of the act and campaigning for a Republican House, Senate, and White House.

“We know the burden is on us to turn this thing around, but we’ll just have to wait and see what happens in November,” Broderick said.

Romney stated one of his first acts would work on repealing and replacing Obamacare if the House, Senate, and White House fall under Republican majority.

Nelson, though, can see what he believes was an attempted compromise.

“They tried to make everyone happy and everyone unhappy at the same time. There are situations like these where everyone can see the logic of it but not like the outcome. Chief [Justice John] Roberts essentially made the citizens have the right to have the final say with the election this November,” Nelson said.

David Williams, a member of the Huntley Seniors for Progressive Action, believes that the Republican reaction nationwide has been “essentially ridiculous.”

“I mean, it’s not a perfect plan, but it’s a great step toward extending the coverage so people can get healthcare or preventative care, which can keep away those bigger losses. It’s a huge bill, don’t get me wrong, and there’s a lot of ifs and ands and things to figure out in the future, but the initial concept fits now,” he said.

The access to healthcare was a divided issue between Nelson, Broderick, and Williams, with Nelson and Broderick believing it should be up to citizens to pursue their own healthcare options and Williams believing that everyone should have access.

“The Declaration of Independence essentially gave us three rights – life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Everything else is on the individual. Paying for healthcare, acquiring it, and working toward getting that coverage, that kind of ethic built our country, and that’s why we’re an exceptional country,” Broderick said.

“When you start violating that, you jump over to the wrong side, which creates a big burden on the taxpayers that was never there before. If you were sick, your family usually took you in and took care of the expenses. Now you get the special care from doctors to make you healthy, but the cost of that would be shared between everyone. We can’t afford that,” he added.

“I think [the Republican party threats] are wrong,” Williams said. “What they’re threatening is to throw people in front of the bus because they can’t pay for healthcare, but we’re supposed to be a nice, civilized country that takes care of its population, and healthcare is something that should be afforded.”

One of the drawbacks to the enhanced coverage zone, which could insure up to 15 million individuals currently living without health insurance, Nelson believes, is that there are populations out there who simply do not want nor care about their insurance.

“What we can boil it down to is, are we going to pay for these 15 million more people who may not want it? There might be a lot of the younger generation who won’t buy into this, and that will leave us with picking up the rest of that tab. If I were to go into a job at the age of 65+, I would have to take on maternity benefits as part of my company’s plan, and since it’s included, I would have to pay for it, even though I wouldn’t need it,” Nelson said.

“That’s how young people are looking at it: I don’t need a new hip, I won’t be having a heart attack anytime soon, so I’m not going to pay for it. The whole issue remains that everyone’s paying for everyone else, and that’s flat-out wrong,” he added.

That issue is something Williams and HSPA are working to solve. In addition to their campaigns to get President Barack Obama back in the White House in November, they are educating the masses about what this healthcare plan really means.

“I think that people will begin to learn about it as time goes on. There are things in the law that people don’t know much about – in particular the ones that haven’t gone into effect. They may hear about them a little but don’t pay enough attention to what it is,” Williams said, adding that he believes Congress will look at what provisions are working and what provisions are suffering and may even talk about changing or dropping certain parts. “A trial by error,” he said.

---