Skip to main content

Obamacare: I'd be either bankrupt or dead without it

When the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was initially passed, I had mixed feelings. Like a lot of progressives, I had hoped for a more progressive healthcare reform bill, yet was pleased we were showing signs of slowly progressing on the matter, and knew it would have been next to impossible for my "ideal" healthcare law to have passed both houses of Congress on its way to the president's desk for signage. In hindsight, though, while I'd still love to see the ACA become more progressive, I'm thrilled it was passed and signed into law.

It's said regardless of a person's age, gender, race, creed, or orientation, we all have baggage. Unfortunately, most of my baggage comes in the form of health problems. I started suffering from seizures at a very young age and had a grand mal when I was 18, at which point the doctors spotted a brain tumor. I underwent surgery to remove the tumor four years later. Between 2009 and 2011 I suffered from a strange virus which lasted almost two years, as well as a gallstone attack, resulting in emergency surgery. About a year ago I suffered my first (and hopefully last) gout attack. Then this past December I suffered my first panic attack; the attacks continued for roughly three months before the medications started working. While I had healthcare coverage through 2011, I was unable to make a month's payment in 2012 and was immediately dropped from the plan. Due to pre-existing conditions, I was subsequently denied coverage from multiple insurance providers; this was until 2014 when the Affordable Care Act made such denials illegal. I may not have needed coverage through 2014 and half of 2015, but was grateful for it in the latter half of the year due to my gout attack, and think that if it weren't for the ACA providing me coverage these past 3-4 months, I'd either be bankrupt or dead. 

It boggles my mind how the Affordable Care Act has been such a partisan issue. This isn't about winning an election or about riling the base for donations; it's about people's health and well-being - it's about people's lives. While I know I shouldn't take a person's political opinion personally, that's difficult to do when it comes to my health. On December 26th of 2015, my blood pressure escalated to 197/118, my heart-rate shot up to 155, I began losing feeling in my arms and legs, and told my mother I loved her and goodbye as I was rushed to the hospital. If it weren't for the Affordable Care Act, there's a decent chance I'd either be living on the street or buried in the ground. The Affordable Care Act is far from perfect, but whenever someone I know tries to make it political and suggests it should be repealed, I have to look him/her in the eyes and say, "Obamacare saved my life; what's it done to destroy yours?" While the phrase is often used sarcastically, I would sincerely like to say, "Thanks, Obama."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"