NURS 6050 Politics and the Patient Protection and Care Act DQ

Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NURS 6050 Politics and the Patient Protection and Care Act DQ

NURS 6050 Politics and the Patient Protection and Care Act DQ

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.
To Prepare:
 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.
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.
By Day 6 of Week 3
Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two different days by expanding on their
explanation and providing an example that supports their explanation or respectfully challenging
their explanation and providing an example.
*Note: Throughout this program, your fellow students are referred to as colleagues.
Submission and Grading Information
Grading Criteria
To access your rubric:
Week 3 Discussion Rubric

Post by Day 3 and Respond by Day 6 of Week 3
To participate in this Discussion:
Week 3 Discussion

Practicum Reminder
Practicum Reminder – Important
During your program, you will be required to submit your practicum application. You are
responsible for applying on time and for the information that is outlined in the practicum manual.
Applications are due the first day of the term before you intend to start practicum. For exact
dates and for an overview of the requirements, please review our website.
It is important that you find a suitable preceptor. There is information in the Practicum manual
and on our website about the requirements for preceptors. Each course has specific requirements
and you are responsible for ensuring your preceptor meet the requirements. If you have questions
about preceptor requirements, you may schedule a phone appointment by contacting Field
Experience.
CONTACT US: https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/fieldexperience/son/contactus
Module 2: Legislation (Weeks 3-4)

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Legislation [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Accessible player
Learning Objectives
Students will:
 Analyze how cost-benefit analysis affects legislative efforts
 Analyze legislative intent of bills
 Identify proponents and opponents of bills
 Analyze legislative process of bills
 Advocate policy position for bills

Due By
Assignment
Week 3, Days 1-2
Read/Watch/Listen to the Learning Resources.
Compose your initial Discussion post.
Week 3, Day 3
Post your initial Discussion post.
Begin to compose your Assignment.
Week 3, Days 4-5
Review peer Discussion posts.
Compose your peer Discussion responses.
Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 3, Day 6
Post at least two peer Discussion responses on two different days (and not the same day as the
initial post).
Week 3, Day 7
Wrap up Discussion.
Week 4, Days 1-6
Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 4, Day 7
Deadline to submit your Assignment.

Learning Resources
Required Readings
Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.).
Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

 Chapter 3, “Government Response: Legislation” (pp. 37–56)
 Chapter 10, “Overview: The Economics and Finance of Health Care” (pp.
180–183 only)

Congress.gov. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2018, from https://www.congress.gov/
Taylor, D., Olshansky, E., Fugate-Woods, N., Johnson-Mallard, V., Safriet, B. J., & Hagan, T.
(2017). Corrigendum to position statement: Political interference in sexual and reproductive
health research and health professional education. Nursing Outlook, 65(2), 346–350.
United States House of Representatives. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2018, from
https://www.house.gov/

United States Senate. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2018, from https://www.senate.gov/
United States Senate. (n.d.). Senate organization chart for the 115th Congress. Retrieved
September 20, 2018, from https://www.senate.gov/reference/org_chart.htm
Document: Legislation Grid Template (Word document)
Required Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Working with Legislators [Video file]. Baltimore, MD:
Author.
Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Introduction to Health Policy and Law with Joel
Teitelbaum [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Accessible player

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NURS 6050 Politics and the Patient Protection and Care Act DQ

Credit: Provided courtesy of the Laureate International Network of Universities.
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Contemporary Issues in Public Health Policy with Joel
Teitelbaum [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Peter Beilenson: Population Health [Video file].
Baltimore, MD: Author.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Name: NURS_6050_Module02_Week03_Discussion_Rubric
Grid View
List View
Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
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.
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.
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.
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
10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6050_Module02_Week03_Discussion_Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.