The existing healthcare system of the United States is often referred to as imperfect, as instead of mitigating problems like poverty and inequality, it deepens them because of the problems with universal coverage and accessible medical and preventative services for all citizens. The present paper is designed to discuss the recent news article about health policy reforms from the perspective of the public policy paradigm.
The article informs about President Obama’s decision to intensify the governmental regulation of the healthcare system. The President’s aim is “to establish a public insurance program to compete with private insurers and would require employers to contribute to the cost of coverage for their employees or to the cost of the public plan. Insurers oppose the idea of the new public plan” (Pear and Stolberg, 2009). Due to the problems with the inclusion of citizens into the insurance system, the leader of the administration states that it is necessary to obligate individuals to purchase public insurance. However, there is also a fear that private companies, which provide the corresponding services, might be overwhelmed by this innovation, since the government is taking control over the competition in this market. The President also suggests that it is necessary to reduce the value of deductions that wealthier citizens can take for charitable gifts and certain taxes. This way of financing the new insurance program was widely criticized, as a number of the Congress members assume that it is likely to result in the decline of charitable activities and contributions.
The first obvious problem this article involves is the rejection of advocacy from non-government structures. In the introduction, it is clearly stated that the President is reluctant to cooperate with lobbyists and those who are pursuing “special interests” (Pear and Stolberg, 2009). On the other hand, it needs to be noted that private insurers are not enjoying strong and comprehensive advocacy nowadays, as they have been consistently targeting policies that do not respond to people’s needs and make individual suggestions concerning agenda-setting; at the same time, private insurers and their factions are not capable of presenting a systemic approach to healthcare reform which would ensure full coverage and easier access to the corresponding services. For this reason, the administration and the President are taking the initiative into their hands. At the same time, the article stresses the bureaucratic nature of promotion Obama and his group are performing; positioning themselves as the only experts in the area, they also seem to present private insurers as lacking professionalism.
Another important issue raised in the given article is the dissatisfactory implementation of public policy by nongovernmental entities. As the responsibility for managing the provision of healthcare services to the population was delegated to private companies, they were expected to achieve the goals, formulated in the earlier public policy programs. However, because private insurers are not entitled to impose their services on individual citizens and enterprises and also because of their focus on market competition rather than on the coordination of their effort with the government-driven public policy, approximately 40 percent of contemporary Americans are not involved into the insurance program. Moreover, increasingly more citizens are losing their jobs due to the current financial crisis, whereas private insurers are being concerned predominantly about their survival in the market rather than about their compliance with the public policy priorities. As a result, the government’s interference is both a logical and desirable step.
Works cited
Pear, R. and Stolberg, S.G. “Obama Says He Is Open to Altering Health Plan”. New York Times, 2009, Web.