Pros And Cons Of Obamacare

The recent debate about health care has been argued since the early 1990s with the introduction of the Clinton health care plan of 1993, which was pushed by the former First Lady, Hillary Clinton. In the most recent arguments about the state of the United States’ health care system, and repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act, the Graham-Cassidy health care bill is the newest in line to help reform the health care system to make it better for the government and for the citizens as well. Although, the bill has not come without its own internal and external criticisms as well. There are two opposing viewpoints either than the Graham-Cassidy bill is not doing enough for the free markets or that it is going to harm the current status quo.

He demonstrates this by the persistent ways and means that Congressional Republicans are trying to repeal and replace Obama Care, but constantly are short or have internal divisions that make their proposals fail. The author’s main point is that the best thing that Congress can do now for the healthcare system is to do nothing to it, but only improve the flaws in Obama Care at this point. The author states, “… while Obamacare has its troubles – and while the uncertainty intentionally created by the Trump administration is creating additional problems in health insurance markets – the system is not so dysfunctional that I cannot be left as it is” (Barro, 2017, para. 8). Here, the author illustrates that even though the Republicans want to repeal and replace Obama Care, it should be the duty to help provide improvements on the aspects of the Affordable Care Act to make it less dysfunctional. Furthermore, the author pushes that compromise is the best alternative to the repeal and replace action that the Republicans are going after. This is because both parties understand that aspects of Obamacare are here to stay, but the main issue is the stability of insurance markets and the cost associated with them. As the author states, “They could draw up a proposal that would provide funding to stabilize states’ insurance markets, provide

Not only do both sides bring up good points about their partisan aspects which they intend to promote and have some bias towards it, but they also illustrate some inherent defects on their side of the aisle. This helped provide some ethical and logically creditability to the authors and their arguments. The debate of healthcare is not coming to an end soon, and will be a current issue way after the time of this event. Although, these two authors provide critical representation of the two major opposing viewpoints that are presented in this overarching debate, more economic freedom and states’ rights, or a stronger central government providing for all. It is in my opinion, that I believe the Business Insider argument is more effective as it promotes bi-partisanship between the two parties and having compromise to improve the status and system of healthcare for