Since I arrived to the United States 18 months ago, I have been very interested in President Obama's Health Care Reform. Many controversial issues have come from it and some of them seem especially appealing to me from both legal and personal perspectives. From a personal perspective, since I come from a country with a national system of health care (Seguridad Social) in which medical care is a sort of basic right it is weird to listen to people who don't want something similar and the reasons that they set forth for that. From a legal perspective this is a very interesting issue because it has generated a big discussion about the Federal Government powers and the threat for States' sovereignty and individuals' freedom.
1.- A podcast:
Psych Drugs, Health Care Vote, Pine Mouth
This one is quite simple, in fact they just talk about health care reform in a very superficial way but it is a social approach to the issue and it is interesting to hear.
This video shows a panel organized by The Federalist Society' Litigation Practice Group. Four American lawyers set forth their views about whether or not Obama's Affordable Care Act is complying with the Constitution. It is really fascinating to hear these people, some of them professors in prestigious American universities such us Harvard or Georgetown. I have learn a lot of the U.S. Legal System by watching this video and others in the same vein. In fact, regardless of the specific topic, they address one of the most discussed issues related to the U.S. Federal System. This controversy in the relationship between the Federal Government and the States on one side and the Federal Government and citizens on the other is the eternal issue. In this sense, The Affordable Care Act contains a regulation of care insurance market and the debate is whether this regulation falls within the frame of the commerce clause that permits Federal Government to regulate commercial activity when several States are involved in. The other big issue within the act is the Individual Mandate that force citizens to have a care insurance stating fines for those who don't comply with the mandate. The arguments and counter arguments are really well formulated and it is very alluring to listen to them in order to better understand the different approaches to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.
Debating the Constitutionality of the Federal Health Care Legislation
3.- An Article:
Health Care Reform
I have chosen this article because it is pretty clear in summarizing the current situation and background of the Act. Previous attempts of addressing the reform of the Health Care System are briefly explained and the steps followed by the Act in the Congress are described in a plain language. It is a formal article that is perfect for getting an overview of the issue. When the Act was being discussing in the House of Representatives, The New York Times gave a daily coverage of the procedures and it was one of the few media that provided a sort of neutral information.
Guardar[[wikimiriampm:Glossary#|Cancelar]]
LAW: HEALTH CARE REFORM IN THE UNITED STATES
Since I arrived to the United States 18 months ago, I have been very interested in President Obama's Health Care Reform. Many controversial issues have come from it and some of them seem especially appealing to me from both legal and personal perspectives. From a personal perspective, since I come from a country with a national system of health care (Seguridad Social) in which medical care is a sort of basic right it is weird to listen to people who don't want something similar and the reasons that they set forth for that. From a legal perspective this is a very interesting issue because it has generated a big discussion about the Federal Government powers and the threat for States' sovereignty and individuals' freedom.1.- A podcast:
Psych Drugs, Health Care Vote, Pine Mouth
This one is quite simple, in fact they just talk about health care reform in a very superficial way but it is a social approach to the issue and it is interesting to hear.CommonHealthMassachusetts
2.- A Video:
This video shows a panel organized by The Federalist Society' Litigation Practice Group. Four American lawyers set forth their views about whether or not Obama's Affordable Care Act is complying with the Constitution. It is really fascinating to hear these people, some of them professors in prestigious American universities such us Harvard or Georgetown. I have learn a lot of the U.S. Legal System by watching this video and others in the same vein. In fact, regardless of the specific topic, they address one of the most discussed issues related to the U.S. Federal System. This controversy in the relationship between the Federal Government and the States on one side and the Federal Government and citizens on the other is the eternal issue. In this sense, The Affordable Care Act contains a regulation of care insurance market and the debate is whether this regulation falls within the frame of the commerce clause that permits Federal Government to regulate commercial activity when several States are involved in. The other big issue within the act is the Individual Mandate that force citizens to have a care insurance stating fines for those who don't comply with the mandate. The arguments and counter arguments are really well formulated and it is very alluring to listen to them in order to better understand the different approaches to the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.Debating the Constitutionality of the Federal Health Care Legislation
3.- An Article:
Health Care Reform
I have chosen this article because it is pretty clear in summarizing the current situation and background of the Act. Previous attempts of addressing the reform of the Health Care System are briefly explained and the steps followed by the Act in the Congress are described in a plain language. It is a formal article that is perfect for getting an overview of the issue. When the Act was being discussing in the House of Representatives, The New York Times gave a daily coverage of the procedures and it was one of the few media that provided a sort of neutral information.New York Times