Introduction
Policymaking activities are essential for nurses since they allow the healthcare professionals to shape the medical industry and lead to better health outcomes. The necessity to engage in this sphere increases in times of crisis, and the Covid-19 pandemic is among them. It means that appropriate legislation pieces should appear to address the new challenges and problems. That is why the given paper will identify a current and health-related bill and comment on it. Thus, this paper’s purpose statement refers to locating such a bill, analyzing it according to the specific grid, and advocating for this legislation piece by refuting possible opposing arguments.
Legislation Grid
Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement
There is clear reasoning behind passing bill H.R.666 Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021. Firstly, the coronavirus data have demonstrated that people’s health outcomes significantly depend on their ethnicities. It is so because representatives of many minority groups account for a larger part of all Covid-19 cases in the United States. In addition to that, Cineas (2021) argues that white Americans have better access to vaccination when compared to people of color. Secondly, the previous year witnessed massive demonstrations against police violence since it can directly affect people’s physical and mental health, leading to fatal outcomes in some cases. Simultaneously, Congress.Gov (2021) demonstrates that the bill under analysis tries to mitigate the impact of structural racism and law enforcement brutality on society. This information allows for advocating for the bill under consideration since it has the probability to protect people’s health and well-being from harmful effects.
Even though it has been mentioned that the bill has witnessed many supporters, it is impossible to exclude a chance that some opponents will not exist. Thus, one should explain how it is possible to refute their opinions. For example, Taylor et al. (2017) mention that some criticism can emerge because experts believe that legislation pieces bring politics and ideology to clinical practice. As for bill H.R.666, it can result in the fact that minorities’ needs will be overvalued in the medical industry. However, one can address this point of view by stating that the bill is necessary since policymaking efforts typically lead to improved patient outcomes (Milstead & Short, 2019). Since it has been noted that minorities received insufficient care, specific and dedicated efforts are needed to improve this situation. According to Canale and Poggi (2019), this refutation refers to the concept of legislative intent that explains what change a bill wants to achieve in society. This information demonstrates that it is not reasonable to oppose passing the bill under consideration.
Conclusion
The paper has commented on bill H.R.666 Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021. It has been determined that this legislative piece is necessary to address topical issues in today’s American society. They include racial disparities regarding health outcomes and law enforcement violence. Thus, these two problems result in the fact that an essential part of the US population suffers from decreased health and well-being, meaning that an adequate solution is necessary. It seems that the proposed bill is a suitable option since it offers to establish a body that will be responsible for tracking the issues and taking specific actions to mitigate their impact. The paper has also considered an opposing opinion regarding the bill and identified that sufficient reasoning exists behind passing the legislation piece under analysis.
References
Canale, D., & Poggi, F. (2019). Pragmatic aspects of legislative intent.The American Journal of Jurisprudence, 64(1), 125-138. Web.
Cineas, F. (2021). Exclusive: Pressley, Warren, and Lee introduce bill to fight racism in public health. Vox. Web.
Congress.Gov. (2021). H.R.666 – Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021. Web.
Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Taylor, D., Olshansky, E. F., Woods, N. F., Johnson-Mallard, V., Safriet, B. J., & Hagan, T. (2017). Corrigendum to position statement: Political interference in sexual and reproductive health research and health professional education.Nursing Outlook, 65(2), 346-350. Web.