Obamacare should be repealed.

R1: Proper Passage The bill was passed with open hearings. The Committee that wrote the PPACA composed of 3 Republicans and 3 Democrats. Together, they had open discussions over 60 hours long, and were publicly broadcasted on CSPAN. Eventually, the committee formed the eventual Senate bill. The Senate passed this legislation, and the House passed a different bill. So, Obama created a Senate-like health reform bill, and the House later passed it. [1] The provisions in the bill, as I have earlier said and have been left unrefuted, are largely popular with the American public. The ideas like everyone should have access to care, insurance companies should spend more on health care than administrative costs, the risk pool should be expanded to lower risk and therefore costs, and people with preexisting conditions should have coverage all have strong support among the U.S. population. This bill has bipartisan ideas from both sides of Congress. It has a Medicaid expansion, protections for consumers, and a strengthening of Medicare. For Conservatives, it has state exchanges, greater competition for insurance plans, an individual mandate (some Cons like this part — like Newt Gingrich), and for both sides it expands the risk pool. In conclusion, this bill has bipartisan elements from both sides of the aisle, and enough from both sides to ensure realistic passage. The committee bill was processed via transparency and open hearings, visible fully on CSPAN. The Constituional guidelines in place were followed, and as well as being passed in Congress, the American public support the provisions in the bill. R2: Enhances Medicare Efficiency Pro has brought up this point numerous times, so I will resolve it for good. The PPACA strengthens Medicare. It increases its tax base primarily on high income taxpayers, as well as using preventive care, and making payments to insurance providers more efficient and reducing fraud. So, Medicare spending is reduced by $500 billion, by using more efficiency and preventive care. The CBO has upheld the idea that this bill has strengthened Medicare's financial position. [2] So, Obamacare enhances Medicare efficiency and bolsters its solvency. R3: More Affordable Health Care Pro claims that the USA has a universal access system. This is absurd. First, the tens of millions of uninsured Americans, (which was reduced by 30 million because of Obamacare) suffer substantially worse health outcomes than the uninsured. [3] Then, Pro horribly rewords my statements. "Obamacare does nothing to reduce any of those emergencies, and Con says 85% of the patients are true emergencies." I supported with empirical evidence earlier that 85% of emergency room visits ARE NOT emergencies, and many of those people come because they are uninsured. Obamacare, because it reduces the uninsured by 30 million [5], it reduces the amount of uninsured emergency room visits by at least 26%. [6] Pro also states,"half of physicians won't take new Medicare patients." Factual evidence shows that in fact, only 10% of Medicare patients said their PCP wouldn't take their insurance, while those with private insurance showed that 17-24% of patients said that their PCP wouldn't take their insurance. Medicare has better access to care. Pro says that many doctors will quit because of Obamacare. This is similar to the studies done right after Medicare was initially passed. Many physicians were considering to quit because of the new health insurance program. However, after they realized the benefits, they realized they had nothing to fear. [7] So, many doctors may think about quitting, but like under Medicare, they will likely universally realize that the PPACA is good for all, some of the benefits identical to the ones I have described in this debate. Pro then says we cannot afford Obamacare. Still, the evidence says otherwise. The CBO says that Obamacare reduces the deficit by $210 billion between 2011-2021. [7] So, if you repeal Obamacare, you vote to increase our debt, vote to increase health care costs, and all the other negative externalities that I will summarize soon. The Independent Advisory Payment Board, which will help reduce Medicare spending by tens of billions [9], does not make certain procedures complusory to what they find. They simply rank the efficacy of certain treatments and procedures, send the results to PCPs, and let doctors practice with greater success and effect. The example that Pro brings up has been twisted. Obama simply says that if no treatment would work that well for the person, and the doctor thinks that the person has good "spirit", they could just take a pain pill instead. If the patient agrees, of course. Basically, the Independent Board ranks treatments so that doctors can practice with more effect. The information provided is not compulsory, as the Medicare cuts are made to providers such as insurance providers. In fact, the Republican plan also expands onto these Medicare cuts. [2] About the tax code, I am greatful of Pro's explanation. However, the words in the PPACA does not accurately configure with the tax code. This bill legislates many things, some of it does direct to taxes, and how much people can receive in federal subsidies for health care, but many of the words also construct how to make Medicare more efficient, the guidelines for the state exchanges, the new regulations to protect consumers from the insurance companies, all these provisions and more do not effect tax compliance costs. And the CBO did re-adjust their initial costs, they estimated that the new taxes would increase costs by $8 billion. [7] I said that employer sponsored health insurance will only modestly change, because how it relates to the previous situation. In the past, an employer could choose to sponsor health insurance, or not. Now with the PPACA, an employer can sponsor health insurance, and be aided with various tax credits to gain from providing insurance as well as healthier workers, or they can give no insurance and pay penalties. --So, as you can see, Obamacare provides no new incentives to drop insurance. It only incentivizes it. This is why in Massachusetts employer sponsored health insurance increased. [10] Obamacare is not fully implemented, the mass of the bill takes effect in 2014. R3: Freedom Basically, the insurance mandate eliminates the problem of free riders. It is like car insurance, which people are required to have, so that all car drivers are safer. Except, this case makes it so that our citizens are healthier, so if they land in the E.R., we have less of a collective burden. The PPACA reduces costs, improving economic freedom for many individuals. It helps doctors provide more effective treatments. The Constitutional law will help people get health care, and make it more affordable and secure. Conclusion Obamacare has many benefits: Reduces the Deficit, by $210 billion over 10 years [7] Health Care is more Affordable, saves about 7-20% for the average person [11] Builds upon bipartisan ideas [1] Reduces health care inflation [7] Increases Efficacy of Health Treatments [9] Improves insurance industry's accountability [5] Protects Patients from industry abuse [5] Passed via Constitutional path with transparent visibility [1] Enhances and Strengthens Medicare's Efficiency and Solvency [7] Reduces the uninsured by 30+ million [5] Expands the risk pool, thus lowering risk and lowering costs. [5] ------------------------------------ The resolution is negated. [1] http://tinyurl.com... [2] Kessler, Glenn. "Time For A Checkup." Grand Rapids Press 15 7 2012, n. pag. Print. [3] http://tinyurl.com... [4] http://tinyurl.com... [5] http://tinyurl.com... [6] http://tinyurl.com... [7] http://tinyurl.com... [8] http://tinyurl.com... [9] http://tinyurl.com... [10] http://tinyurl.com... [11] http://tinyurl.com...