The Impact of Lobbyists on Healthcare Reform in the United States

1. Introduction

The purpose of this essay is to analytically review the problem of healthcare reform, which was raised in the documentary Obama’s Deal, and to evaluate the impact of lobbyists’ efforts on the legislative process. In order to achieve this goal, the following tasks will be solved: firstly, an overview of the healthcare reform in the United States will be given; secondly, an evaluation of the impact of lobbyists on the legislative process will be made; and finally, a conclusion will be drawn.

2. The problem of healthcare reform in the United States

Healthcare reform has been one of the most pressing issues in the United States for many years. The problem is that despite the fact that America is one of the richest countries in the world, its citizens do not have access to quality and affordable medical care. According to World Health Organization (WHO), "the US health system ranks 37th in terms of efficiency" (WHO, 2000). In addition, it is estimated that about 50 million Americans do not have health insurance at all (Frumkin, 2009).

The current situation with healthcare in America is caused by a number of factors. One of them is the high cost of medical services. For example, according to a recent study, "a hip replacement surgery that costs $30 000 in Spain can cost as much as $140 000 in the US" (Frumkin, 2009). Another important factor that makes healthcare unaffordable for many Americans is the way insurance companies operate. They often refuse to provide coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions or charge them very high premiums. In addition, insurance companies tend to limit coverage and access to certain types of care, such as mental health services (Frumkin, 2009).

Another significant factor that contributes to the problems with healthcare in America is the influence of special interests groups, such as insurance companies, drug manufacturers, attorneys, and medical workers. They lobby against any reforms that would make healthcare more affordable and accessible for all Americans. As a result, instead of making progress on this issue, America 's politicians are more focused on fighting each other than on finding a solution to this problem (Obama's Deal, 2010).

3. Evaluation of the impact of lobbyists’ efforts on the legislative process

Lobbyists are special interest groups that try to influence government decisions in their favor. They do this by donating money to politicians or by organizing media campaigns. In America, lobbying is a huge industry that employs thousands of people and spends billions of dollars every year (Barstow & Elliott, 2005).

Lobbyists usually target elected officials at all levels of government, but they are especially active at the federal level. This is because federal laws have a much greater impact on businesses than state or local laws. For example, if Congress passes a law that requires all Americans to have health insurance, it would have a big impact on insurance companies (Barstow & Elliott, 2005).

The impact of lobbyists on government decisions has been widely criticized. Critics argue that lobbyists often represent special interests rather than the public interest. They also argue that lobbyists have too much influence over politicians and often prevent them from doing what is best for the country (Barstow & Elliott, 2005).

4. Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be said that the problem of healthcare reform in the United States is a complex issue that has many causes. One of the most significant factors that contribute to this problem is the influence of special interest groups, such as insurance companies, drug manufacturers, attorneys, and medical workers. They lobby against any reforms that would make healthcare more affordable and accessible for all Americans. As a result, instead of making progress on this issue, America’s politicians are more focused on fighting each other than on finding a solution to this problem.

FAQ

President Obama was motivated to pursue a deal with Iran in order to prevent the country from obtaining nuclear weapons.

The negotiations unfolded over the course of several years, with representatives from both countries meeting periodically to discuss the terms of the agreement.

The agreement was ultimately reached because both sides were able to come to an understanding of what each wanted and were willing to compromise on certain issues.

The terms of the agreement state that Iran will not pursue nuclear weapons in exchange for economic sanctions being lifted.

The agreement has been implemented by both countries adhering to their respective commitments.

There has been mixed reaction to the agreement, with some people praising it as a step towards peace and others criticizing it as too lenient on Iran.

The implications of the agreement for US foreign policy are still being determined, but it has generally been seen as a positive development.