Discussion: Presidential Agendas

            The topic of women’s health rights and abortion has been a heavy topic of discussion amongst politics. Although abortion was legalized in the United States in 1973 as an outcome of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court case, each president has their own opinion on whether the law should be abolished or not. In 1973 the overall ruling was that a woman’s pregnancy decision was based on the freedom of personal choice in familial matters protected by the 14^th Amendment (BBC News, 2020b). According to the CDC in 2017, the total number, rate, and ratio of abortions have decreased by 22%, 24%, and 16% (BBC News, 2020b). For the purpose of this Discussion Board post, I will analyze the views of the past three United States presidents—Donald Trump, Barack Obama, and George W. Bush.

George W. Bush served as president from 2001-2009. His views on abortion were pro-life, meaning against it. In 2003, George Bush signed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. The overall goal of the initiative was to reduce abortion rates in America. It also was created to amend any act of performing a partial-birth abortion, except when necessary to save a mother’s life. (Library of Congress, n.d.).  In his second 2004 debated, Bush stated that “partial abortion was a brutal practice and taxpayers should not pay for abortions (OnTheIssues,n.d.-a, para.#4). In his third 2004 debate, Bush stated “the ideal world is one in which every child is protected in law and welcomed to life” (OnTheIssues,n.d.-a, para.#4).

Barack Obama held presidency from 2009-2017. Known to be pro-choice, or in favor of women deciding their health choices, Obama’s goal throughout presidency was to reduce the number of abortions while still allowing women to their right to choose. In 2008 during the Democratic Compassion Forum, Obama stated that one approach to reducing abortion rates was to ensure that teens were educated and aware of sex education and abstinence (OnTheIssues,n.d.-b, para.#9). He also stated in his second presidential debate that he believes that contraceptive coverage needed to be covered in health insurance plans to support the advocacy of economic issues (OnTheIssues,n.d.-b, para.#7). He has also stated that he trusts women to make adequate health decisions for themselves.

In 2016, during Donald Trump’s election year, he stated that he had plans to choose judges that would overturn Roe and the rulings that supported abortion (BBC News, 2020a). While in office, Trump barred federal family planning funding to organizations that supported and provided abortions. This led to millions of decreased funds to organizations, such as, Planned Parenthood (BBC News, 2020a). “I give to so many organizations over the years. Hundreds of millions of dollars, so I really don’t know. But look, Planned Parenthood has to stop with the abortions. A lot of people consider it an abortion clinic. I think those tapes that I saw were outrageous and disgusting by any standpoint. And they have to stop.” (OnTheIssues.org, n.d.-b, para. #12). Throughout the presidency, more states throughout the country have proposed abortion bans. Amongst those are Ohio, Utah, Montana, Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, and Minnesota (Lai, 2019).

It is always easier said than done what we would do if any said position. If awarded the opportunity, I believe my first decision in making any movement within this issue would be to hear from women. As a woman myself, often times I have thought and felt that men are discussing and arguing over issues that indirectly affect them. I wanted to see more women representing women. Since 2004, we have seen a significant increase in the number of women holding office, but women are still outnumbered. Out of 9 Supreme Court justices, 3 are women (33%). Of 100 Senate seats, 26 are women (26%). Out of 435 House of Representative seats, 101 are women (23.2%). In my opinion, this does not suffice in regard to making decisions about what directly affects women. I would make women the face of these decisions. I would hear from them as a collective first and then further proceed. As president, I would also dissect the numbers and risk factors. I would go deeper than age and race, but look into factors that may cause this, such as, socioeconomic status, access to health care, education barriers, community safety. I would put my personal opinion aside and focus on what women as a whole are saying what they need.

References

BBC News. (2020a). Abortion: how do Trump and Biden’s policies compare? https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54003808

BBC News. (2020b). Roe v Wade: What is US Supreme Court ruling on abortion? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54513499

Lai, K. (2019). Abortion bans: 9 states have passed bills to limit the procedure this year. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/us/abortion-laws-states.html

Library of Congress. (n.d.). S.3-108^th Congress (2003-2004). Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/senate-bill/3

OnTheIssues. (n.d.-a). Barack Obama on abortion. https://www.ontheissues.org/social/barack_obama_abortion.htm

OnTheIssues. (n.d.-b). Donald Trump on abortion. https://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/donald_trump_abortion.htm

OnTheIssues. (n.d.-c). George W. Bush on abortion. https://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/George_W__Bush_Abortion.htm

                While it is an extraordinarily broad topic, national healthcare and the reform thereof is always a topic at the forefront of the political arena.  Every president has a hand in the maintaining or changing the vast matter that is our national healthcare.  Below I will briefly discuss some of the more familiar changes and implementations of the last three United States presidents and quickly discuss how each of them handled the issues.

Former president George Bush made several reforms to healthcare during his terms in the White House; among the most notable was the prescription drug benefit.  According to The White House archives, President Bush’s prescription drug benefit plan “provided more than 40 million Americans with better access to prescription drugs” (The White House, n.d., The Bush Record).  This website also tells us that under Bush there were preventative screening programs added to the Medicare plans to assist with and improve preventative care.  The archives also state that “Increased competition and choices by stabilizing and expanding private plan options through the Medicare Advantage program, and increased enrollment to nearly 10 million Americans.  Increased private plan enrollment from 4.7 million in 2003 to nearly 10 million in 2008 (more than 20 percent of all Medicare beneficiaries).  The Administration also ensured nearly every county in America has a private plan choice, many with zero dollar premiums and supplemental benefits” (The White House, n.d., The Bush Record).

Healthcare reform was one of the Barack Obama administration’s key issues.  It was the dream of this administration to make affordable and quality health care the right of every citizen.  The reform preposed was a massive overhaul of what was in place.  For the sake of brevity, I will discuss only a few of the ideals implemented.  According to The White House archives, there was an expansion of discount and rebate programs to reduce drug costs. (The White House, n.d., Improving Health for Americans).  Another point of this massive overhaul was “Ensured individual and small business health plans include essential health benefits, covering emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, preventive care such as annual physicals, and more” (The White House, n.d., Improving Health for Americans).

The Trump administration’s attention on national healthcare has been much more focused.  The White House website offers that “President Trump has taken decisive action to lower drug prices for American patients, resulting in declines after years of rising prices” (The White House, 2020, The Fact Sheet).  This includes approving several generic drugs, and a plan to allow importation of drugs from Canada.  This site also tells us that “The President has challenged Congress to pass legislation ending the outrageous practice of surprise medical billing” (The White House, 2020, The Fact Sheet).

Every president faces a unique set of problems that the public deems important and demands they address.  One of the topics that always arises is that of our nation’s health care.  The political environment is fluid and ever-changing causing the responses to national problems to shift as well.  As the leader of our country, it is the duty of the president to do what is in the greatest good for the greatest number of people.  While it is easy to say what should be done, it is quite difficulty to accomplish what is in the best interest of such an eclectic group of people that makes up the United States.  I think the best approach would be to take experts that are on the front lines of this country’s healthcare, sift through the policies and laws that are currently in place, then identify what is working and what needs to change.  According to Milstead & Short (2019), following and utilizing the levels of political agenda (pp. 18) can assist in navigating the vast realm of national healthcare.  This is obviously a massive project that would require the expertise of countless individuals, but this is one of the best ways to assess the and revise the systems currently in place.  According to one article “The ability to accurately attribute the unique contributions of nurses working independently or as members of a team was viewed as central to professional practice and all policy recommendations” (Lamb et al., 2015).

References:

Lamb, G., Newhouse, R., Beverly, C., Toney, D. A., Cropley, S., Weaver, C. A., Kurtzman, E., … Peterson, C. (2015). Policy agenda for nurse-led care coordination. Nursing Outlook, 63(4), 521–530. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2015.06.003.

Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Chapter 2, “Agenda Setting: What Rises to a Policymaker’s Attention?” (pp. 17–18).

The White House, Fact Sheet. (February, 2020). President Trump Is Working To Ensure That Every American Has Access To Better Healthcare At Lower Cost. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-trump-working-ensure-every-american-access-better-healthcare-lower-cost/

The White House. President Barack Obama. (n.d.) Improving Health for All Americans. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-record/health-care

The White House. President George H. Bush. (n.d.) The Bush Record.  https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/bushrecord/factsheets/healthcare.html

            It is an incredibly fluid and broad topic, especially prescription drug costs and access. With former President George W. Bush increasing competition (The White House, The Bush Record, n.d.), he lowered costs (basic supply and demand), which saved millions of people money and broadened their access to much needed medications at more affordable prices. Former President Barack Obama followed that up by phasing out the “donut hole” in prescription drugs with Medicare, saving those same people even more money (The White House, n.d., Improving Health for Americans). President Donald Trump has opened up access to more medications (from Canada and in the form of generics), offering both lower prices and more competition, leading to greater choice and lower costs (The White House, 2020, The Fact Sheet).

Personally, I would continue the momentum to lowering prescription drug prices and increasing competition for more choice and lower costs to the consumer. After living for many years in Europe, it’s hard to swallow the costs of some medications once we return to the United States (for the exact same medication, from the same manufacturer). Putting caps on costs of medications, and perhaps forming a committee and/or department that deals just with prescription drugs would be on my agenda.

References

The White House, Fact Sheet. (February, 2020). President Trump Is Working To Ensure That Every American Has Access To Better Healthcare At Lower Cost. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-trump-working-ensure-every-american-access-better-healthcare-lower-cost/

The White House. President Barack Obama. (n.d.) Improving Health for All Americans. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-record/health-care

The White House. President George H. Bush. (n.d.) The Bush Record.  https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/bushrecord/factsheets/healthcare.html

Response 1

Hi Vanna,

Your posting is very informative and thorough. I must say that I am totally in agreement with you when you mentioned that the people that form this great country of the United States all vary in their opinion and priorities, therefore, the leader has to make the informed decision that will benefit the people. Health care affordability has been a presidential debate for centuries, therefore, to make it a priority where everyone has equal access regardless of socioeconomic statues the president along with the policymaker and legislators should draft a plan to copy and install a system as the “Canada’s universal public health care system that provides physician, diagnostic, and hospital services at no cost to all Canadians” (Raiche et al., 2020). With this health care coverage Americans would have health care access and no one would be denied insurance or have an excuse such as affordability.

I agree with your statement that the healthcare reform was a dream for the Obama administration as Orszag (2020) writes that the passing of the Affordable Care Act by President Obama saw the spike in numbers of up to 20 million more Americans had insurance coverage and also the cost of insurance coverage contained. Was this really the dream of the American people? If this was what they dreamed about, why lower income families who could not afford insurance coverage were penalize on their income tax for not being able to afford a basic necessity as an insurance coverage. In my opinion, until America has a universal health insurance coverage that benefit all they is going to be discrepancies with the insurance system.

 

 

References

Orszag, P. R. (2016). US health care reform: cost containment and improvement in

quality. JAMA, The Journal of the American Medical Association, 5, 493.

Raiche, T., Pammett, R., Dattani, S., Dolovich, L., Hamilton, K., Kennie-Kaulbach, N.,

McCarthy, L., & Jorgenson, D. (2020). Community pharmacists’ evolving role in Canadian

primary health care: a vision of harmonization in a patchwork system. Pharmacy Practice

      (1886-3655), 18(4), 1-12. https://doi-

org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.18549/pharmpract.2020.4.2171

 

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6050_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric

Grid View
List View

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

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.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

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.

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection 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.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection 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
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

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.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
Second Response
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

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.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6050_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric