Honorable Mary Fallin, Governor
Program Director
Health Policy Analysis and Memorandum
Although the State of Oklahoma has made significant progress in overcoming the disparities in the provision of high quality health care services to all citizens, the state has not been immune from the same forces that are driving the costs of health care up throughout the nation. For example, the GOP's official Web site for its health care alternative to The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (hereinafter alternatively "Obamacare") emphasizes that, "Skyrocketing medical liability insurance rates have distorted the practice of medicine, routinely forcing doctors to order costly and often unnecessary tests to protect themselves from lawsuits, often referred to as 'defensive medicine'" (A plan for replacement, 2012, para. 2). The rejection of federal funds that would have assisted with the development of a health care exchange for the state which remains a work in progress, but the governor has allowed individual state agencies to apply for and receiving other types of funding through Obamacare.
The state's rejection of the full contingent of funds available through Obamacare is based on the governor's view that Obamacare will result in new taxes, unfunded mandates, increased bureaucracy and decreased patient choice (Campfield, 2012). This dynamic environment is further complicated by the imminent presidential elections and the mandates that will ensue thereafter as discussed further below.
Background:
This study is provided in response to your request for an analysis of the state's current health care system compared with at least two other alternatives. The costs associated with these initiatives have made this analysis both timely and relevant. The state's infant mortality rate is fully twice the national average, and many Oklahomans remain ineligible for or unable to afford private insurance or they do not receive it through their employers (State of the State's Health Report, 2012).
Landscape Identification:
The key stakeholders in this analysis are the three million Oklahoma citizens who continue to receive suboptimal health care services and the hundreds of thousands who are without any health care coverage at all. In a broader sense, the stakeholders include all American citizens since the state receives tens of millions of dollars in federal funding that is tied to compliance with federal mandates.
Alternatives Section:
The three alternatives considered in this analysis are the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the Patient's Choice Act and the continuation of the state's current SoonerCare Choice health care insurance program as described further below.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")
Proponents of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act maintain that the popularly termed "Obamacare" does not necessarily "represent a full national takeover of health insurance regulation and the pre-Obamacare world was not replete with state control" (Moncrieff, 2012, p. 288). Despite its purported across-the-board increases in the costs of health care, advocates of Obamacare even argue that the courts should "cut them some slack" because they mean so well. For instance, one analyst suggests that, "Obamacare strikes an eminently rational federalist balance, which deserves judicial deference" (Moncrieff, 2012, p. 289). Rather than forcing the decision whether to purchase health insurance down the throats of its citizens, Oklahoma provides free (but limited) health insurance for all qualifying citizens using a combination of federal and state funds and resources. For instance, Obamacare advocates "are uniting around proposals to vastly expand federal regulation of health insurance, require everyone to have coverage, and compel employers to provide federally prescribed insurance or pay a new tax. A new Medicare-like insurance plan is still being debated, but even if it doesn't make the cut, Congress could regulate its way to a government-dominated market" (Moncrieff, 2012, p. 290).
By contrast, critics argue that all provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act actually increase the cost of providing care, although they "redistribute the burden of meeting the costs from subscribers to insurers, patients to providers, or one group of taxpayers to another. The key themes are redistribution of wealth, political and racial favoritism, and expansion of the welfare state" (Orient, 2011, p. 82). Fortunately, a more reasoned approach is provided by the Republican Party which is discussed further below.
Patients' Choice Act
A recent report from Turner and Antos (2011) emphasizes that Republican congressional leaders have developed a viable alternative to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; although the goals (i.e., cover the uninsured, allow people to keep the coverage they have, provide more choices of affordable health insurance, and rein in health care costs) of both alternatives are similar, the policy approaches used differ significantly. The GOP's alternative to Obamacare was co-sponsored by four Republicans Congressmen,...
That this case has emerged internally gives us an opportunity to ensure that situations like this do not arise out of our control, i.e. discovered by a customer. We have the opportunity to built our compliance and audit procedures from scratch, so that the level of oversight these departments have on the firm's operations is complete, and insulates the firm against further risk. An investigation should be conducted into
In contrast, within the firm, the entrepreneur directs production and coordinates without intervention of a price mechanism; but, if production is regulated by price movements, production could be carried on without any organization at all, well might we ask, why is there any organization?" (Coase, 1937, p. 387) In simpler words if markets are so efficient why do firms exist? Coase explains, "the operation of a market costs something
One other new thing brought to the attention of companies by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act is the fact that, under this law, every public company is supposed to prove strong internal systems designed to catch an employee intending to commit fraud or flag accounting errors before a company has the opportunity to make its profits official. An addendum to this rule is the obligation of a company knowing about problems with
Roles of Directors and Duties of an Audit Committee The Board of Directors is an organization's or company's governing body that is mandated with the task of ratifying all major decisions. Generally, the Board of Directors handles all issues of major strategic importance to an organization or company. This implies that the Board of Directors needs to be involved, engaged, and supportive in all issues of strategic importance, especially with regards
January 21, 2011 -- All contracts must be signed and returned by this date. January 21-Feb 1 -- interview caterers, hotels, limo services to make certain that they are appropriate. Visit all vendors and sites. February 1-4, 2011 - book all hotel, limo and catering reservations. Pay all deposits necessary. February 7-11, 2011 -- Find backup caterer and limo service in case of problems May 2-6, 2011 -- meet with caterer, choose menu, make
role that the Board of Directors should play in IT governance. The Board of Directors will have the ultimate responsibility for IT policies within a company. It is the board of directors that determine IT policies will be put into place, and will be responsible for accurately communicating those. The model also be responsible for keeping up-to-date with developments, as well as the determination and monitoring of investments and IT
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now