A Quote by Ron Williams

King v. Burwell pointed at but did not directly challenge the ACA's most essential weakness: Government-mandated participation in health insurance exchanges as a precondition to receiving a subsidy is not the best or most effective means of achieving its goal of expanded access to health coverage.
The ACA's reliance on mandatory participation in exchanges as the only way to obtain a health insurance subsidy is fundamentally flawed.
The ACA - popularly known as 'Obamacare' - has been an important step forward toward an admirable goal: providing access to health insurance for all Americans. But like many reforms generated by the political process, the ACA is problematic.
The result was, of course, that today, tragically, more than 40 million Americans don't have health insurance, and for many, not having health insurance means they don't have access to good health care.
While the ACA's insurance expansions and reforms represent a great leap forward for the U.S., it is also true that when fully implemented by 2018, the U.S. will still have the most inefficient, wasteful, and unfair health insurance system of any advanced nation, even with the ACA reforms.
We are convinced that universal health coverage, with strong primary care and essential financial protection, is the key to achieving the ambitious health targets of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and to avoiding impoverishment from exorbitant out-of-pocket health expenses.
My biggest fear, that 27 percent of Americans under 65 have an existing health condition that, without the protections of the Affordable Care Act, would mean they would - could be automatically excluded from insurance coverage. Before the ACA, they wouldn't have been able to get insurance coverage on the individual market, you know, if you're a freelancer or if you had a small business or the like.
The U.S. government has been preoccupied with health care 'reform,' but this refers to improving access and insurance coverage and has little or nothing to do with innovation.
I think we should have a universal, a shared cultural or societal goal, of universal health insurance coverage. That's completely different from saying the government can solve all of those problems, or that it can micromanage every aspect of the health delivery system. I think we know that it can't do that.
We need to increase access to health insurance through Health Savings Accounts and high deductible policies, so individuals and families can purchase the insurance that's best for them and meets their specific needs.
To be without health insurance in this country means to be without access to medical care. But health is not a luxury, nor should it be the sole possession of a privileged few. We are all created b'tzelem elohim - in the image of God - and this makes each human life as precious as the next. By 'pricing out' a portion of this country's population from health care coverage, we mock the image of God and destroy the vessels of God's work.
The majority of Americans receive health insurance coverage through their employers, but with rising health care costs, many small businesses can no longer afford to provide coverage for their employees.
High-quality health care is not available to millions of Americans who don't have health insurance, or whose substandard plans provide minimum coverage. That's why the Affordable Care Act is so important. It provides quality health insurance to both the uninsured and underinsured.
Health insurance costs in the United States are on an unsustainable path. I've heard from hundreds of Montanans who are paying thousands of dollars every year for their health insurance coverage and thousands more for deductibles before their insurance provides any benefit.
The ACA is far from perfect, but through Kynect and expanded Medicaid, it enabled more than 400,000 Kentuckians - especially those with pre-existing conditions - to get affordable health insurance for the first time.
As a physician and a U.S. senator, I have warned since the very beginning about many troubling aspects of Mr. Obama's unprecedented health-insurance mandate. Not only does he believe he can order you to buy insurance, the president also incorrectly equates health insurance coverage with medical care.
There are several problems with the ACA's reliance on means-based inclusion criteria and mandatory participation in exchanges - the complexity of the exchange mechanism, and the potential for income-based subsidies to become a disincentive to earn if insurance rates escalate for those beyond the income threshold.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!