It's probably the hottest seat in Washington, D.C. -- and you can't buy tickets to it. Next week, the U.S. Supreme Court will begin hearing oral arguments on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the almost two-year-old health care reform law. For or against it, hundreds of people will line up on the steps to try and secure one of the limited seats in the Court reserved for the public. And for good reason: The Supreme Court's decision will have major bearing on the health care experiences of Americans for generations to come.
The outcome of this case is especially important for Latinos because it will dictate future health care access for a population that is increasingly a driving force in the country, but whose health has been put at risk because they are pitifully underserved in our current system. As the data from the 2010 Census revealed, Latinos, often perceived as an emerging population, have unquestionably come of age. Already one in four children in the United States is Latino -- and that number is expected to increase to one in three by 2030. Yet Latinos have long been disconnected from the health care system, carrying many unnecessary medical burdens and ills throughout life.
Even from birth, Latinos have less equitable access to health care in almost every part of the system. Latino children have uninsurance rates double that of the general population.
Furthermore, experts from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention note that one in two Latino children born in 2000 are at risk of developing diabetes within their lifetime. Roadblocks to quality, affordable health coverage and care had been virtually cemented in place prior to the enactment of health reform. The Affordable Care Act was the first step forward in changing the status quo that made Latinos the most uninsured community in the country.
While lawyers and experts may disagree about whether or not the Affordable Care Act should move forward, there's no disagreement about one simple fact: This law has already shifted health care as we know it in the United States. From a parent's or caretaker's perspective, there are obvious gains that have been made in a short amount of time. Consider this:
• Most Americans should have seen their out-of-pocket medical expenses for necessary tests and screening decrease between 2011 and 2012. Seventy-two preventive services were declared free of charge for patients, meaning that services such as well-child visits became free. This was an important addition to the pocketbooks of Latinos, who dish out more of their financial resources for medical expenses than any other group.
• Key provisions in the law already require that states maintain eligibility levels for Medicaid. The protections have been vital in securing program access for the most vulnerable Americans, including the one in four Latino adults and one in two Latino children who are on Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
• An astonishing 736,000 young adult Latinos under the age of 26 were able to secure insurance through their parents in the two years after the enactment of the ACA. That is the highest gain in insurance of any racial or ethnic group, and a promising trend for a population in which 50,000 individuals turn 18 each month. Similar to their peers just entering the workforce or college, they may not have another option for affordable insurance.
• Finally, consumer protections have been heavily bolstered. For instance, insurance companies can no longer deny dependent coverage to a family with a very sick child.
So as the Supreme Court proceedings inch closer, legal jargon and political statements may rule the day. But hundreds of people camped out for seats show what--and who--is really at stake. Should we take away coverage for more than a million young adult workers just getting on their feet, or children suffering from cancer or asthma or heart conditions? That is exactly what would happen without the Affordable Care Act. Whatever the Supreme Court rules, one thing is undeniable -- the Affordable Care Act has already and could continue to open access to health coverage for millions of Americans who need it.
This post was originally featured on NCLR.org.
Follow Jennifer Ng’andu on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@CanDoNgandu
David M. Walker: SCOTUS and Health Care Reform: We Are Arguing Over the Wrong Things
Here is the truth nobody on this site wants to talk about...
If the Supreme Court accepts the mandate, they will give the federal government the legal right to place any and all citizens into financial slavery.
The government can tell you what to buy at the grocery store, what car to buy, what investments you can use for retirement (hint: treasuries to subsidize reckless deficits), whether to rent or own, what entertainment you can spend money on and so forth...
Want to be a financial slave? Want your children to be financial slaves? Want your grandkids to be financial slaves?
Who is at stake is very easily identified -- Obama. Everyone knows that Obamacare is the signature legislation of Obama's coup of the presidency. It is purposely designed to lead to a single-payer system -- the government. Universal healthcare has been the biggest goal of liberals for decades.
If the government controls one's health, it controls everything. Obamacare represents the death of capitalism and freedom in the U.S. If Obamacare is not defeated, the U.S. will become a socialist nation. Like every socialist nation, insolvency and disintegration will be inevitable.
This legislation is far too important for Obama to leave to the ordinary process of SCOTUS rulings. That is why it has taken so long to be heard. It takes time to formulate a plan, find loyal liberal operatives to carry it out, and to implement a plan to threaten and/or intimidate conservative Judges to rule in favor of Obamacare.
Just like conservative Judge Silberman of the D.C. Court of Appeals, one can expect one or more of the conservative judges on the SCOTUS to vote for Obamacare. Threats and intimidation are the Chicago way!
Everyone should realize that the Declaration of Independence was never intended as a one-time event. Every citizen has, as their prime duty, the responsibility to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States . . .". There is nothing therein that pledge regarding supporting the illegitimate gov't that now exists -- both at the federal and state levels.
We have been on the road to socialism/serfdom for a long time [over a century]. I am not sure there are enough Americans willing to fight for freedom to change course.
In the spirit of the Chinese saying, "give a man a fish and he eats for a day; teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime", I suggest you click the link to the actual report here: http://cbo.gov/publication/43076
Have to contradict the mention of insurance payments gone down 2011-2012, mine INCREASED. I don't drink alcohol or soda, I don't smoke, I don't do illegal substances, I am not overweight, neither obese nor diabetic, no children, and I exercise 4 hours a week. My blood pressure has returned to normal.
I started working in 1997, and my healthcare monthly was $20. Now it is $160, and my doctor visits used to be $5, now they are $35. Yet my use of hospitals and pills have decreased. So where is all these monies going, or to whom? I work 55 hours a week and I'm no Apple or Google employee. I would like to save some of my hard-earned money if I can.
Your premiums have increased steadily since 1997 because the cost of healthcare in the U.S. has also increased. Moreover, it's very likely that your annual physical carries no co-pay since this is a wellness visit.
the costs are simply shifted to another line item. Magic of the market??
The players are the same and this garbage legislation does absolutely nothing to bring cost down to where it isn't like a jumbo mortgage for a family. No, just because everyone is forced to buy will NOT force the premiums down. No reason!
Being extorted by private corporations is the rub here. The United States is so ill in so many ways.