The controversy surrounding the Affordable Health Care for America Act commonly known as Obama-care, never seems to die down. The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of the act. The court may choose to uphold it in its entirety, remove certain parts or reject it completely. If upheld this would mean insurance coverage for those who had been previously excluded due to per-existing conditions or inability to afford insurance. The act prevents insurance companies from cherry picking customers and pricing policies to hedge most of the risk. Proponents of the legislation claim that it is a ‘win –win’ situation for the insurers and the insured, with the insurers benefiting from provisions that make it mandatory for Americans to have health insurance.
The opponents of the legislation claim that the individual mandate is a case of legislative over- reach, as the Constitution prevents Congress from forcing individuals to engage in a certain economic activity. However, proponents claim that ensuring young people are a part of the insurance pool would help keep premium low, spread risks and even out costs. Analysts have pointed out that a young and healthy pool of workers would prevent premiums from snowballing and making insurance enviable for most people. Major insurance companies have been amenable to the act.
“The protections we are voluntarily extending are good for people’s health, promote broader access to quality care and contribute to helping control rising health care costs. These provisions make sense for the people we serve, and it is important to ensure they know these provisions will continue,” said Stephen J. Hemsley, president and CEO of United Health Group. “These provisions are compatible with our mission and continue our operating practices.”