scholarly journals Vulnerable Hospitals and Cancer Surgery Readmissions: Insights into the Unintended Consequences of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

2016 ◽  
Vol 223 (1) ◽  
pp. 142-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Hong ◽  
Chaoyi Zheng ◽  
Elizabeth Hechenbleikner ◽  
Lynt B. Johnson ◽  
Nawar Shara ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 251-263
Author(s):  
Michael Thoene

This article examines the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA,) often referred to colloquially as Obamacare, from a financial and economic perspective in order to analyze the potential efficacy of the system. Research was gathered pertaining to the stated objectives of the program, and economic theory was applied in order to reveal if the aims of the program are congruent with economic theory. It was found that the authors of the ACA did not anticipate or under-anticipated several economic effects of the legislation, which will hamper the implementation and effectiveness of the program. Furthermore, the economic theories employed by the Obama administration relied heavily upon classical economic theory, with little or no attention given to Transaction Cost Economics (TCE). Moreover, the law itself is overly complex and controversial due to a myriad of provisions added through the intercession of lobbyists from the healthcare, insurance and special interest sectors. The end result is that Americans may obtain a slightly improved healthcare system, but the United States will most likely still lag behind the rest of the industrialized world in many key health statistics. 


2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 340-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina Villani

Although the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act provides some means to reduce disparities in cancer care, it may also have unintended consequences. Oncologists must go beyond its provisions to ensure quality care for all patients.


2013 ◽  
Vol 150 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Rocke ◽  
Steven Thomas ◽  
Liana Puscas ◽  
Walter T. Lee

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
OR BASSOK

AbstractAs long as the American Constitution serves as the focal point of American identity, many constitutional interpretative theories also serve as roadmaps to various visions of American constitutional identity. Using the debate over the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, I expose the identity dimension of various interpretative theories and analyse the differences between the roadmaps offered by them. I argue that according to each of these roadmaps, courts’ authority to review legislation is required in order to protect a certain vision of American constitutional identity even at the price of thwarting Americans’ freedom to pursue their current desires. The conventional framing of interpretative theories as merely techniques to decipher the constitutional text or justifications for the Supreme Court’s countermajoritarian authority to review legislation and the disregard of their identity function is perplexing in view of the centrality of the Constitution to American national identity. I argue that this conventional framing is a result of the current understanding of American constitutional identity in terms of neutrality toward the question of the good. This reading of the Constitution as lacking any form of ideology at its core makes majority preferences the best take of current American identity, leaving constitutional theorists with the mission to justify the Court’s authority to diverge from majority preferences.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document