Paletta � PAGE �1�
A Search for Truth
U.S. Healthcare Debate: Government vs. the People
In 1965 Lyndon B. Johnson amended the Social Security Act to provide American citizens with two health insurance programs: Medicare and Medicaid. Since then the United States' healthcare system has been questionable, unreliable, and immoral. The existence of these programs goes against the very principles this country was founded upon. To this day, forty-five million citizens are uninsured, approximately one-seventh of the nation's population. Surprisingly, eighty percent of the forty-five million are all employed adults supporting families. Americans are asking themselves, "How could a plan designed for the good of the people become so detrimental to society? How did this happen?" Amongst the victims of the impartial system are people crying out for change and reform: Journalists, reporters, scientists, sociologists, governors, senators, and even current 2008 Presidential candidates. What reasons should citizens have to doubt their government? How does one discern between fact and fabrication with the information at hand? Americans have many questions that demand answers; ones that are honest and straightforward.
In order to embark on this journey, we must first explore the flaws of Medicare/Medicaid and bring up problematic questions. In addition, we will investigate the two primary sources of information: the United States government and American citizens; specifically covering past government officials, current Presidential candidates, private/public organizations and the victims of the flawed healthcare system. Looking back on the past, who is there to trust? Which source is more reliable than the other?
First and foremost, it is important to understand the purpose and principles of health insurance programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Medicare was first established and administered by the federal government in 1965; financed through federal income taxes, payroll taxes, and out-of-pocket payment by enrollees. The plan was...
Commendable.
A generally well written and focused essay. There are a number of grammatical errors and the writer doesn't seem able to recognize a run-on-sentence; but for the most part, a clear and impressive essay. Would benefit from some minor editing, in regards to the aforementioned grammatical errors as well as few poorly chosen words.
From a research point of view, there is an over dependence of electronic resources (which incidentally have not been properly cited). Perhaps college students could try picking up a book once in a while?
0 out of 1 people found this comment useful.