Discussion Question

Discussion Question Order Description WRITE YOUR OPINION TO THE FOLLOWING ISSUES BELOW ABOUT THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. Sin" rel="nofollow">ince the Affordable Care Act was passed in" rel="nofollow">in 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued three (3) significant rulin" rel="nofollow">ings related to the Act, which has caused considerable debate across the country. � On June 28, 2012 the Supreme Court upheld the in" rel="nofollow">individual mandate requirin" rel="nofollow">ing Americans to buy health in" rel="nofollow">insurance or pay a penalty. The court ruled 5-4 that the mandate can stay as part of Congress's power under a taxin" rel="nofollow">ing clause. The court said that the government will be allowed to tax people for not havin" rel="nofollow">ing health in" rel="nofollow">insurance. "The Affordable Care Act's requirement that certain" rel="nofollow">in in" rel="nofollow">individuals pay a fin" rel="nofollow">inancial penalty for not obtain" rel="nofollow">inin" rel="nofollow">ing health in" rel="nofollow">insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in" rel="nofollow">in the rulin" rel="nofollow">ing. "Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness." On June 24, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the Act by rulin" rel="nofollow">ing in" rel="nofollow">in favor (6-3) of usin" rel="nofollow">ing nationwide tax subsidies on federal exchanges to help buy health in" rel="nofollow">insurance. � On June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that certain" rel="nofollow">in for-profit companies cannot be required to pay for specific types of contraceptives for their employees. The 5- 4 decision was a legal and political setback for a controversial part of President Barack Obama's healthcare reform law. RESPOND to EACH of these Supreme Court rulin" rel="nofollow">ings. a) Should the Affordable Care Act be implemented as a tax so everyone is assured of coverage if they become ill or in" rel="nofollow">injured? Or is the government "overreachin" rel="nofollow">ing" to require everyone to pay for a plan--usin" rel="nofollow">ing tax-supported subsidies--even if they do not want in" rel="nofollow">insurance coverage? b) Should the Affordable Care Act require for-profit corporations to pay for contraceptives for their employees if the CEO has religious objections? Sin" rel="nofollow">ince this rulin" rel="nofollow">ing targets women almost exclusively, is that fair to their female employees? Or should a corporate CEO be allowed to decide which benefits should be in" rel="nofollow">included in" rel="nofollow">in a health care plan if contraception (i.e., IUDs and emergency contraception pills) is not consistent with his/her religious beliefs?