As a central part of his agenda, President Obama has succeeded in instituting universal health care, without being sensitive to the potential dangers of the law. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was passed in 2010 requiring every American citizen to purchase health insurance. (Elmendorf, 2010) The PPACA would be detrimental to the country fiscally, medically, and constitutionally.

The new health care act is one that would cause many monetary challenges to some citizens and to the country as a whole. There are many that argue that universal health care would benefit citizens fiscally. They assert that health care rates may drop due to universal health care. (Messerli) This is probably so, but citizens who would otherwise not spend as much on health care are now forced to do so. In addition, taxes will be raised to subsidize the program. (Pryde, 2010) It is also likely that the government will cut spending in other areas to compensate for the new health care bill.(Messerli) Even though the act may lower insurance rates, the other fiscal implications could be very unfavorable for Americans.

Universal health care would be detrimental to Americans medically as well. The Act would lower doctors’ incentive to work at optimum performance. It would limit competition between doctors and cause doctors not to strive to be the best. In addition, pharmaceutical companies wouldn’t strive to make novel and improved products, either. (Messerli) This is because to cut costs, the government may institute price controls on drugs and equipment. Also, with this act, the government can ration these things and services. (Messerli) The negative medical implications of the PPACA are plenty, and could be very harmful for society.

Most importantly, along with the fiscal and medical implications, many contest that the PPACA is unconstitutional. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Act is indeed unconstitutional. The court affirmed that it is the choice of every citizen to buy and choose his or her health insurance, and may not be forced to. (Danner, 2011) Furthermore, if Congress can go so far as to require citizens to purchase health care, what limits Congress from requiring citizens to purchase any other product? Also, the PPACA infringes on states’ sovereignty. Health care is a power reserved for state governments. Under the PPACA, many states would have to spend a much larger amount on health care. (State of Florida, et al. v. US Department of Health and Human Services, et al.)

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a law that would hurt Americans in many ways. Higher taxes and spending cuts would not be helpful. Medically speaking, a lack of technology and drug innovation would hurt many Americans. Finally, the law is likely to be unconstitutional. This act may be helpful for some, but harmful for many. Therefore, it is imperative that the citizens of the nation urge our government representatives to reconsider the implementation of this act.

Bibliography
Danner, Dan. ""Send Obamacare to the Supreme Court Right Now"" Forbes. 23 Aug. 2011. Web. 7 Feb. 2012.

Elmendorf, Douglas W. (January 22, 2010). "Additional Information on the Effect of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund". Congressional Budget Office. Retrieved 2012-02-07. "This letter responds to questions you posed about the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO's) analysis of the effects of H.R. 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)"

Messerli, Joe. "Should the Government Provide Free Universal Health Care for All Americans?" BalancedPolitics.org. Web. 09 Feb. 2012.

Pryde, Joan. "Health Care Reform: 13 Tax Changes on the Way." Kiplinger. 8 Oct. 2010. Web. 7 Feb. 2012.

United States Court of Appeals Eleventh Circuit. State of Florida, Et Al. v. US Department of Health and Human Services, Et Al. 2011.