Republicans, on the other hand, provided an alternative where employees would buy instead of employers. A stalemate arose and the bill did not pass. Obama introduced the bill again in 2009 and it stipulated a plan that would achieve the needed healthcare plan for the sake of meeting the main ideals of the organization. Universal care was one of the stated goals to assist in pushing the bill into an Act through the two houses (Barr, 2011).
Opposition to the bill was overwhelming from Republicans and protests were initiated to fight against its discussion. Voting, however, made the Democrats win by 60-39 vote thereby ending the debate on the bill in December 2009 (McDonough, 2011). Nonetheless, President Obama signed it into an Act on March 2010. Many termed it as the best overhaul of the healthcare system after Medicaid and Medicare (Jacobs & Skocpol, 2010). More people were insured and subsidies lowered costs by 76% for citizens who qualified for subsidies. Insurance companies now had more clients to cater for, but the law was on guard to protect them. More were eligible to Medicaid. The Act reduced the number of uninsured by 32 million, and only 23 million would be uninsured after 2019 (McDonough, 2011).
Implementation process was expensive as more people would have to get into the system and the taxpayers had to give more to meet these expenses. Complications also arose as a result of the individual mandate when it comes to the filing of taxes because of the exemption fee offered to those who can afford health coverage (Jacobs & Skocpol, 2010). Options are man but the pricing will differ amongst private companies, and that makes it difficult to equate healthcare everywhere. The tiered healthcare system would only equate healthcare to money, which is damning for the poor. Medicare payments are more for doctors than other payments, making healthcare costlier for the poor (Feldman, 2011).
Partisan disagreements in the Congress have made it