Political Consequences of ACA Repeal Paper

Political Consequences of ACA Repeal Paper Political Consequences of ACA Repeal Paper Regardless of political affiliation, individuals often grow concerned when considering perceived competing interests of government and their impact on topics of interest to them. The realm of healthcare is no different. Some people feel that local, state, and federal policies and legislation can be either helped or hindered by interests other than the benefit to society. Consider for example that the number one job of a legislator is to be reelected. Cost can be measured in votes as well as dollars. Thus, it is important to consider the legislator’s perspective on either promoting or not promoting a certain initiative in the political landscape. NURS 6050 Walden University Political Consequences of ACA Repeal Paper To Prepare: ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS Review the Resources and reflect on efforts to repeal/replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Consider who benefits the most when policy is developed and in the context of policy implementation. Political Consequences of ACA Repeal Paper BY DAY 3 OF WEEK 3 Post an explanation for how you think the cost-benefit analysis in terms of legislators being reelected affected efforts to repeal/replace the ACA. Then, explain how analyses of the voters views may affect decisions by legislative leaders in recommending or positioning national policies (e.g., Congress’ decisions impacting Medicare or Medicaid). Remember, the number one job of a legislator is to be re-elected. Please check your discussion grading rubric to ensure your responses meet the criteria. –> APA format, please refer to Rubric –> Please three current resource and use some resource provided. https://www.congress.gov http://www.senate.gov/senators/leadership.htm https://www.house.gov rubric_detail_2.pdf Rubric Detail Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout. Name: NURS_6050_Module02_Week03_Discussion_Rubric Grid View EXIT List View Main Posting Excellent Good Fair Poor 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) 0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with re!ective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Responds to the discussion question(s) and is re!ective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Responds to some of the discussion question(s). Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. One or two criteria are not addressed or are super”cially addressed. Is somewhat lacking re!ection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors. Lacks depth or super”cially addresses criteria. Lacks re!ection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Posts main post by day 3. First Response 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3. 17 (17%) – 18 (18%) 15 (15%) – 16 (16%) 13 (13%) – 14 (14%) 0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Response is on topic and may have some depth. Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. NURS 6050 Walden University Political Consequences of ACA Repeal Paper Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses posted in the discussion may lack e#ective professional communication. Responses posted in the discussion lack e#ective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Responses to faculty questions are missing. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. No credible sources are cited. Response is e#ectively written in standard, edited English. Response is e#ectively written in standard, edited English. Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%) 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) 0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Response is on topic and may have some depth. Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses posted in the discussion may lack e#ective professional communication. Responses posted in the discussion lack e#ective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Responses to faculty questions are missing. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. No credible sources are cited. Response is e#ectively written in standard, edited English. Response is e#ectively written in standard, edited English. Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three di#erent days. 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 di#erent days. Total Points: 100 Name: NURS_6050_Module02_Week03_Discussion_Rubric EXIT … Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10