Posted: April 12th, 2022

NURS5050 Legislation Grid and Testimony/Advocacy Statement

Legislation Grid and Testimony/Advocacy Statement – NURS5050 Assignment

To Prepare:

Select a bill that has been proposed {FOCUS ON Medical Marijuana Research Act

Bill Number: H.R.5657} using the congressional websites provided in the Learning Resources.

The Assignment: (1-page Legislation Grid; 1-page Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement)

Be sure to add a title page, an introduction, purpose statement, and a conclusion. This is an APA paper.

Part 1: Legislation Grid

Based on the health-related bill (proposed, not enacted) you selected, complete the Legislation Grid Template. Be sure to address the following:

· Determine the legislative intent of the bill you have reviewed.

· Identify the proponents/opponents of the bill.

· Identify the target populations addressed by the bill.

· Where in the process is the bill currently? Is it in hearings or committees?

Part 2: Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement

Based on the health-related bill you selected, develop a 1-page Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement that addresses the following:

· Advocate a position for the bill you selected and write testimony in support of your position.

· Explain how the social determinants of income, age, education, or gender affect this legislation.

· Describe how you would address the opponent to your position. Be specific and provide examples.

· At least 2 outside resources and 2-3 course-specific resources are used.
Agenda Comparison Grid Assignment Template for Part 1 and Part 2

Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid

Use this Agenda Comparison Grid to document information about the population health/healthcare issue you selected and the presidential agendas. By completing this grid, you will develop a more in-depth understanding of your selected issue and how you might position it politically based on the presidential agendas.

You will use the information in Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid to complete the remaining Part 2 and Part 3 of your Assignment.
Identify the Population Health concern you selected.
Describe the Population Health concern you selected.
Administration (President Name)
Explain how each of the two presidential administrations approached the issue.
Identify the allocations of resources that the current and previous presidents dedicated to this issue.
Describe the administrative agenda focus related to this issue for the current and two previous presidents.

Part 2: Agenda Comparison Grid Analysis
Using the information, you recorded in Part 1: Agenda Comparison Grid, complete the following to document information about the population health/healthcare issue you selected
Administration Donald Trump Barrack Obama George W. Bush
Which administrative agency (like HHS, CDC, FDA, OHSA) would most likely be responsible for helping you address the healthcare issue you selected? Why is this agency the most helpful?

How do you think your selected healthcare issue might get on the presidential agenda? How does it stay there?
Who would you choose to be the entrepreneur/ champion/sponsor (this can be a celebrity, a legislator, an agency director, or others) of the healthcare issue you selected? An example is Michael J. Fox, a champion for Parkinson’s disease.

References

—–
Sample Notes:
Legislation Grid

Legislation Grid

Name of Health-Related Bill
The Restoring Hope for Mental Health and Well-Being Act of 2022 (H.R.7666)
Bill No. H.R.7666
Rep. Pallone, Frank, Jr. [D-NJ-6] introduced the bill on 5/6/2022. The bill’s purpose is to propose an amendment to the Public Health Service Act in order to reauthorize certain mental health and substance abuse programs (GovTrack.us., 2022).
State or federal?
Federal
The bill’s legislative intent is to amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize certain mental health and substance abuse programs (GovTrack.us., 2022). The goal is to increase access to mental health and substance abuse treatment programs.
Proponents/Detractors Proponents:
The bill’s supporters believe that reauthorizing mental health and substance abuse programs will benefit low-income families. The goal is to broaden the scope of healthcare services for affected groups suffering from mental health issues and drug and substance addiction. Opponents:
Opponents of the bill argue that expanding healthcare services by reauthorizing the mental health issue will cost the government money. Opponents believe the bill will have little impact on mental health and drug addiction. They believe the bill fails to address the real issues surrounding mental health and drug and substance abuse.
People with mental health issues and drug and substance addiction are the target population.
The Human and Health Services Department.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The bill’s current status (is it in committees or hearings?)
The bill has been introduced and scheduled for further action on the union calendar.

General Remarks/Comments

Millions of people in America suffer from mental health issues and drug and substance addiction. It is critical to restore hope to millions of people by amending the public health service. The act’s goal is to reauthorize certain mental health and substance abuse programs for the benefit of all Americans.
Part 2: Advocacy Statement/Legislative Testimony
The legislation’s goal is to reauthorize specific mental health and substance abuse programs. The goal is to ensure that people in different states have access to mental health services. The dynamics of the Covid-19 pandemic show an increase in the number of people at risk of mental health issues as a result of job losses, high living costs, and the risk of losing property and savings (Knopf, 2022). It is all too easy for people to seek solace through substance, alcohol, and drug abuse. The legislation is timely because the country requires improved delivery of mental healthcare services as well as substance and alcohol abuse treatment.
Because millions of people are at risk of anxiety and depression, I believe the legislation is timely. Treatment reauthorization and network expansion will eliminate the risk of preventable deaths. Reauthorization effectively grants access to millions of people who are suicidal or depressed (Makwana, 2019). According to research, healthcare services are critical in saving lives, changing people’s lifestyles, and educating them (Knopf, 2022). The provision of healthcare services for mentally challenged people will increase the number of people who can be reached by the government and receive free and professional care.
The opposing arguments are based on the allocation of funds. The goal is to first assess past mental health and alcohol, drug, and substance abuse to identify weaknesses. The knowledge will provide a more solid foundation for making an informed decision. The opposing side, in my opinion, is making an insensitive argument that ignores the health of millions of people who are missing out on healthcare services intended for mentally ill people and addicts of alcohol, drugs, and substances. To increase mental healthcare services and alcohol and substance abuse, especially in the post-pandemic era, the legislation requires support from a wide range of stakeholders.

References
GovTrack.us. (2022). H.R. 7666 — Restoring Hope for Mental Health and Well-Being Act of 2022, 117th Congress Retrieved from http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr7666.
A. Knopf (2022). A massive bipartisan bill would overhaul SAMHSA programs. 1-4 in Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly, 34(19).
N. Makwana (2019). A narrative review of disaster and its impact on mental health. 3090, Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 8(10).
—-
Sample notes 2:
Legislation Grid and Testimony/Advocacy Statement

Testimony/Advocacy Statement and Legislation Grid

Legislation Grid
Module 2 Assessment Legislation Grid Part 1 and Testimony/Advocacy Statement
H.R. Name of Health-Related Bill 1346 – 2019 Medicare Buy-In and Health Care Stabilization Act
Bill No. H.R. 1346
Representative Brian Haggins introduced the bill on February 25th, 2019. The bill establishes qualified individuals’ buy-in options and changes in healthcare costs (Congress, 2019). The bill makes it possible for adults aged 50 to 64 to apply for Medicare. The bill’s goal is to create a Medicare supplement to establish cost-covering beneficiaries, repeal prohibitions, and develop market reinsurance programs to address cost issues among individuals (Congress, 2019).
State or federal?
Federal
Legislative Intent The legislation’s purpose is to amend Title XVIII of the National Social Security Act. It enables people aged 50 to 64 to apply for Medicare. Another objective is to stabilize Medicare and the national health insurance sector (Congress, 2019). Stabilization will necessitate filling current gaps in coverage, such as dental, hearing, and vision care. Another goal is to provide a buy-in option for people who are struggling financially (Congress, 2019). Allowing people aged 50 to 64 to enroll expands healthcare coverage.
Congress recognizes that the current healthcare package contains a number of gaps in the healthcare provision. The legislative body recognizes that the population aged 50 to 64 faces financial challenges when it comes to paying for essential health services such as vision, hearing, and dental care (Congress, 2019). The introduction of new legislation is intended to fill gaps in Medicare policy.
Proponents/ Opponents Proponents argue that people who are enrolled in the plan are eligible for a premium reduction. Individuals can benefit from cost-sharing arrangements. Silver plans will be eligible for increased cost-sharing reductions (Tipirneni, 2020). It will make Medicare services more accessible. The plan allows states to enroll in Medicare as soon as they become eligible.
The supporters demonstrate that people aged 50 to 64 face financial difficulties and thus are unable to pay for essential services such as vision, hearing, and vision care (Tipirneni, 2020). Supporters argue that the policy will end the current exploitation of people seeking dental, vision, and hearing care. Data show that insurance companies exploit the elderly by charging them exorbitant fees when they pay for critical services out of their own pockets (Tipirneni, 2020). The policy’s implementation is a step toward eliminating the inequality that exists in today’s society. Inequality will ensure that people in financial difficulty have quality access to health care. Failure to access services can lead to a deterioration of the workforce, resulting in high levels of poverty and crime (Tipirneni, 2020). The government is responsible for enacting policies that will prevent negative outcomes that will harm the nation’s financial performance or social well-being.
Opponents argue that enrollees would still be subject to the high cost of sharing if they sought expensive healthcare services (Wilcock & Eibner, 2020). Proponents argue that the growing number of enrollees makes healthcare buy-in and stabilization unsustainable.
Opponents of the bill claim that it is discriminatory or intends to create health inequality because it excludes people over the age of 65 who require urgent oral, hearing, and vision care (Wilcock & Eibner, 2020). People over the age of 65 are retired, which means they are more likely to face financial difficulties and difficulties in paying for healthcare services that are not covered by the general healthcare package (Wilcock & Eibner, 2020). Opponents argue that the bill should include additional provisions, such as extending coverage beyond 64 years.
The target population includes vulnerable populations as well as people aged 50 to 64.
The bill’s current status (is it in committees or hearings?)
The bill is currently being heard in subcommittee. The bill was introduced on February 25th, 2019, but it has received little support (Congress, 2019).
General Remarks/Comments

The bill is critical in stabilizing the health insurance sector in order to avoid gaps and issues that could jeopardize the delivery of quality care. Another advantage is that the bill aims to expand health insurance coverage. It will look after the financially challenged members of society (Wilcock & Eibner, 2020). The inclusion will help to reduce healthcare inequalities.

Part 2: Advocacy Statement/Legislative Testimony
I am in favor of H.R. As a healthcare provider, you must sign the 1346 – Medicare Buy-In and Health Care Stabilization Act of 2019. The policy’s goal is to close the gaps that exist in the healthcare sector (Tipirneni et al., 2020). I believe that people aged 50 to 64 will welcome the bill because it will provide them with access to high-quality, low-cost care. I support the bill because it will allow relatives and the elderly in society to receive quality care. People between the ages of 50 and 64 are barred from enrolling in the healthcare services guaranteed by the Buy-In and Health Care Stabilization Act of 2019. Another reason I support the current bill is that it fills gaps in care, such as dental, hearing, and vision care (Tipirneni et al., 2020). As a result, patients pay more for treatment for various healthcare issues such as hearing, vision, and dental.
Statistics show that closing gaps in the healthcare sector can help to close disparities. According to a 2017 health report, 75 percent of patients with hearing problems and 43 percent of those with vision problems did not receive quality care (Willink et al., 2020). The Buy-In and Health Care Stabilization Act of 2019 will provide high-quality relief to patients suffering from costly medical issues. Increasing access to care will help to avoid negative effects on workplace productivity. I support the legislation because it will improve societal health. It will serve the elderly population with hearing and vision problems (Willink et al., 2020). Eliminating the problems will lead to equality in healthcare provision, as opposed to the current landscape, which favors some over others.
Proponents of the legislation argue that the Buy-In and Health Care Stabilization Act of 2019 is insufficient to provide various healthcare solutions. One strategy for overcoming opposition is to educate the public about the benefits of the Buy-In and Health Care Stabilization Act of 2019. (Willink et al., 2020). The majority of people who oppose or will oppose new legislation do so because they lack the necessary skills to understand the benefits. The educational programs should allow people to ask questions and make comments about the policy (Willink et al., 2020). The approach will ensure that the team educating them understands all of their issues. People’s attitudes will shift as a result of the education.
Legislators and supporters of the legislation should use real-world data and scenarios to demonstrate the policy’s benefits to opponents. Real-life examples should include poor-neighborhood residents and the elderly (Tipirneni, 2020). The scenario should demonstrate how the current healthcare policy has affected and marginalized them. Statistics should show how many people miss out on care each year as a result of gaps in the healthcare system (Tipirneni, 2020). The data should show the difficulties in paying for oral, hearing, and vision services among people aged 50 to 64.

References
Congress. (2019). H.R. 1346 – 2019 Medicare Buy-In and Health Care Stabilization Act (2019). Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1346/text format=txt
R. Tipirneni, E. Solway, P. Malani, J. Luster, J. T. Kullgren, M. Kirch,… & A. M. Scherer (2020). Concerns about health insurance affordability and avoidance of health care among US adults nearing retirement. e1920647-e1920647, JAMA Network Open, 3(2).
R. Tipirneni, E. Solway, P. Malani, J. Luster, J. T. Kullgren, M. Kirch,… & A. M. Scherer (2020). Concerns about health insurance affordability and avoidance of health care among US adults nearing retirement. 1920647-e1920647, JAMA Network Open, 3(2).
A. Wilcock and C. Eibner (2020). Medicare for 50-to-64-Year-Olds: Evaluating the Effects of Allowing Older Adults to Purchase Medicare The American Society of Health Economists’ 9th Annual Conference. AsheCon.
A. Willink, N. S. Reed, B. Swenor, L. Leinbach, E. H. DuGoff, and K. Davis. (2020). Access, Spending, And Coverage For Medicare Beneficiaries: The role of Medicare Advantage plans in providing dental, vision, and hearing services to older adults, particularly low- and middle-income beneficiaries. 297-304 in Health Affairs, 39(2).

Order | Check Discount

Tags: apps that write essays for you free, assignment writing services in usa, bes, best dissertation writing services, best essay writing service, best paper writing services