After reading my article, I got the sense that the author thought that Obama's "keep your healthcare if you like it" promise came as a result of misinformation and miscommunication. On the one hand, he meant to say that the 95% of people with insurance from their employers/medicare/medicaid could keep their coverage, and that he thought a grandfather clause would cover the other 5% who wanted to keep their coverage. However unlikely I think it is that he was not 100% informed on this law, I also realize that he wasn't actually the one writing the law, because it was probably different congressmen and their staffers writing the law, which could explain any misinformation on his part. I don't think he was flat out lying; however, the way that this is being portrayed to the public is making it seem like he flat out lied.
Even though politically the Obama Administration would need to do something to appease people who are angry about having their coverage taken, I ultimately think this is just various congressmen using this to criticize Obama for their own political gains. When you look at the big picture, the people who couldn't keep their coverage would actually be getting better coverage, and in the long run wouldn't have to pay more for emergency medical expenses. Ultimately I believe that if the Obama Administration can keep any significant legislation from being passed to change the law it will be effective and will eventually work out. Granted, the website issues didn't cast Obamacare in a good light, and then all of the current issues with politics surrounding the law are not working out, but in the end it will be beneficial for everyone and hopefully people would look favorably on the law in the 2016 election. At the same time, health care is going to be a big issue in the next elections (presidential or otherwise) so whatever stance politicians take will have to be very clear cut because of how divisive this law has become.
No comments:
Post a Comment