[ANSWERED] NURS 6050 Week 4 Assignment Legislation Comparison Grid and Testimony/Advocacy Statement
NURS 6050 Week 4 Assignment Legislation Comparison Grid and Testimony/Advocacy Statement
As a nurse, how often have you thought to yourself, If I had anything to do about it, things would work a little differently? Increasingly, nurses are beginning to realize that they do, in fact, have a role and a voice.
Many nurses encounter daily experiences that motivate them to take on an advocacy role in hopes of impacting policies, laws, or regulations that impact healthcare issues of interest. Of course, doing so means entering the less familiar world of policy and politics. While many nurses do not initially feel prepared to operate in this space effectively, the reward is the opportunity to shape and influence future health policy.
To Prepare:
· Select a bill that has been proposed (not one that has been enacted) using the congressional websites provided in the Learning Resources.( https://www.congress.gov/)
The Assignment: (1- to 2-page Comparison Grid; 1- to 2-page Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement)
Part 1: Legislation Comparison Grid
Based on the health-related bill (proposed, not enacted) you selected, complete the Legislation Comparison 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?
· Is it receiving press coverage?
Part 2: Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement
Based on the health-related bill you selected, develop a 1- to 2-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.
· Describe how you would address the opponent to your position. Be specific and provide examples.
· Recommend at least one amendment to the bill in support of your position.
Expert Answer and Explanation
Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement
Part 1: Legislation Comparison Grid
| Health-related Bill Name | H.R. 3 – The Lower Drug Costs Now Act
|
| Bill Number | H.R. 3 |
| Description | The Bill develops various requirements and programs relating to offering prices to prescription drugs. Also, the bill wants to give power to the US government to negotiate drug prices with private companies for Medicare recipient. |
| Federal or State? | This bill is meant to affect the federal government, and thus it is a federal bill. |
| Legislative Intent | The prices of prescription drugs are so high. According to a report by the speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi, big pharmaceutical companies in the US have raised the prices of the drugs 10 times higher than how the drugs are sold outside the US (Pelosi, n. d). Also, the report mentions that the firms make huge profits even though they sell the same drugs outside the US for lower prices. For instance, in the US, the cost of insulin drugs is ten times much higher than the cost of the same drugs in the UK, France, or Germany. The cost of the drugs has increased drastically since 1990s (Sterling, 2018). The current laws forbid Medicare from negotiating drug prices. The intention of H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act is to grant Medicare power to negotiate the drug prices in a move to reduce the cost of drugs in the country. |
| Proponents/ Opponents | Proponents: The proponents of the bill are house democrats. All the democrats in the house unanimously voted for the bill. In addition, Jaime Herrera Beutler and Brian Fitzpatrick also jointed the democrats in supporting the bill. According to Zhou (2019), out of 422 representatives, 230 passed the bills. |
| Opponents: The bill was opposed by house republicans. However, two of the republicans supported the bill along with the democrats (Benen, 2019). Apart from the house republicans, the White House led by president Donald Trump and the Senate Republicans have also opposed the bill. | |
| Target Population | The bill targets people with chronic diseases such as diabetes. When the bill will become law, the prices of prescription drugs will reduce because the government will now have the power to negotiate of behalf of Medicare recipients. |
| Status of the bill (Is it in hearings or committees? Is it receiving press coverage?) | The bill has been discussed in the house of the representatives and passed. Currently, the bill is an act that will be submitted in the house of senate for further discussions and reviews. The American media has given the bill fair coverage because it affects their health. After the bill was passed in the house of representatives, the speaker of the house gave a press conference about the bill and what she expects the senate to do about it. |
| General Notes/Comments
| This bill will change the healthcare system by providing Medicare with power to develop tools that the institution can use to force drug companies to reduce the price of drugs. As a result, the bill will ensure that people with chronic conditions get regular access to their prescriptions. |
Part 2: Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement
My Position for the Bill
As a nurse I support the H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act bill due to the following reasons. First, the bill will make the work of nurses easy. Horvath and Anderson (2019) mention that a nurse has a responsibility of ensuring that his or her patient is given quality care. However, the current prices of prescription drugs prevent nurses from delivering on their mandates. The nurses find it hard to provide care because their patients do have access to prescription drugs due to the high prices.
Second, the bill will allow the reinvestment in researches and innovations for new treatments and cure. The savings that will be collected after reducing the prices of drugs will be used in supporting evidence-based innovations and researches to improve healthcare service delivery. The bill is in the favor of Americans. It will prevent the drug companies from raising the price of prescription drugs in the country will reducing the price in countries outside the us.
Persuading Opponents to Support a Bill
People in the house of representatives must on the same side for a bill to pass. Nurses are obligated to ethically lobby people opposing bills that can improve healthcare to support the laws. I will use my nursing communication skills to address the opponents to my position. First, I will talk to the opponents and highlight to them the importance of the bill to them and the people they represent.
Second, I will remind them of their manifesto of providing quality care for their constituents and tell them that this bill is one of the ways to fulfil the promise they made during campaigns. Third, I will take them for a walk-in medical facility so that they can see how people are suffering due to high prices of drugs. Lastly, I will ask them to think of their people before voting on the bill.
Using ACA to support the Bill
The affordable care act is another amendment that can be used to argue for the H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act bill. The ACA aims at improving the healthcare system in the US by ensuring that all Americans get medical covers. Also, the act aims at supporting researches and innovations which will increase the quality of healthcare in the Us. The H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act can be used to achieve some of the objects of ACA. For instance, when the government buys drugs at low costs from pharmaceutical companies, it will save the extra money for researches.
References
Benen, S. (2019). Despite GOP opposition, Dems pass bill to lower prescription costs. MSNBC. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/despite-gop-opposition-dems-pass-bill-lower-prescription-costs
Horvath, J. C., & Anderson, G. F. (2019). The states as important laboratories for federal prescription drug cost-containment efforts. Jama, 321(16), 1561-1562.
Pelosi, N. (n. d). H.R. 3 – The Lower Drug Costs Now Act. Retrieved from https://www.speaker.gov/LowerDrugCosts
Sterling, J. (2018). President Trump Reveals Plan to Cut Drug Prices. Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News, 38(12), 1-30.
Zhou, L. (2019). The House just passed an ambitious bill to lower prescription drug prices: Progressives played a major role in shaping the final version of the legislation. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2019/12/12/21010905/house-democrats-pass-prescription-drug-price-bill
Place your order now for a similar assignment and get fast, cheap and best quality work written by our expert level assignment writers.
Use Coupon: NEW30 to Get 30% OFF Your First Order
Other Solved Questions:
SOLVED! How would your communication and interview
SOLVED! Describe the difference between a nursing practice
SOLVED! Discuss how elimination complexities can affect
SOLVED! Case C 38-year-old Native American pregnant
ANSWERED! In a 1,000–1,250 word essay, summarize two
[ANSWERED] Students will develop a 1,250-1,500 word paper that includes
[ANSWERED] Post a description of the national healthcare
ANSWERED!! Explain how you would inform this nurse
ANSWERED!! In a 4- to 5-page project proposal written to the
ANSWERED!! A 15-year-old male reports dull pain in both
ANSWERED!! Should government continue to take an
[ANSWERED] Mrs. Adams a 68-year-old widow who was
[ANSWERED] Compare and contrast the various ways you can
ANSWERED! Provide a summary of your learning style
Rubric Detail
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
| Federal and State Legislation Part 1: Legislation Comparison Grid Based on the health-related bill you selected, complete the Legislation Comparison Grid Template. Be sure to address the following: • Determine the legislative intent of the bill you have reviewed. | 32 (32%) – 35 (35%) The response clearly and accurately summarizes in detail the legislative intent of the health-related bill. The response accurately identifies in detail the proponents and opponents of the health-related bill. The response accurately identifies in detail the populations targeted by the health-related bill. The response clearly and thoroughly describes in detail the current status of the health-related bill. | 28 (28%) – 31 (31%) The response accurately summarizes the legislative intent of the health-related bill. The response accurately identifies the proponents and opponents of the health-related bill. The response accurately identifies the populations targeted by the health-related bill. The response accurately describes the current status of the health-related bill. | 25 (25%) – 27 (27%) The response vaguely or inaccurately summarizes the legislative intent of the health-related bill. The response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the proponents and opponents of the health-related bill. The response vaguely or inaccurately identifies the populations targeted by the health-related bill. The response vaguely or inaccurately describes the current status of the health-related bill. | 0 (0%) – 24 (24%) Summary of the legislative intent of the health-related bill is vague and inaccurate or is missing. Identification of the proponents and opponents of the health-related bill are vague and inaccurate or is missing. Identification of the populations targeted by the health-related bill is vague and inaccurate or is missing. The description of the current status of the health-related bill is vague and inaccurate or is missing. |
| Advocating for Legislation Part 2: Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement Based on the health-related bill you selected, develop a 1- to 2-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. | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Testimony clearly and thoroughly provides statements that fully justifies a position for a health-related bill. Response provides a detailed, thorough, and logical explanation of how to address opponents to the position for the health-related bill and includes one or more clear and accurate supporting examples. A complete, detailed, and specific synthesis of two outside resources is provided. The response fully integrates at least 2 outside resources and 2-3 course specific resources that fully supports the responses provided. The response accurately and thoroughly recommends at least one amendment to the bill that fully supports the position. | 40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Testimony clearly and accurately provides statements that somewhat justifies a position for a health-related bill. Response provides an accurate explanation of how to address opponents to the position for the health-related bill and may include at least one supporting example. An accurate synthesis of at least one outside resource is provided. The response integrates at least 1 outside resource and 2-3 course specific resources that may support the responses provided. The response accurately recommends at least one amendment to the bill that may support the position. | 35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Testimony used to justify a position for a health-related bill is vague or inaccurate. Explanation of how to address the opponents to the position for the health-related bill is vague or inaccurate, lacks logic, and/or the supporting examples are vague or inaccurate. A vague or inaccurate synthesis of outside resources is provided. The response minimally integrates resources that may support the responses provided. The recommendation of an amendment to the bill in support of the position is inaccurate or incomplete. | 0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Testimony used to justify a position for a health-related bill is vague and inaccurate, incomplete, or is missing. Explanation of how to address the opponents to the position for the health-related bill is vague and inaccurate, or is missing. A vague and inaccurate synthesis of no outside resources is provided, or is missing. The response fails to integrate any resources to support the responses provided. The recommendation of an amendment to the bill in support of the position is inaccurate and incomplete, or is missing. |
| Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization: Paragraphs make clear points that support well developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused–neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction is provided which delineates all required criteria. | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion is provided which delineates all required criteria. | 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is stated, yet is brief and not descriptive. | 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%- 79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment is vague or off topic. | 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion was provided. |
| Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards: Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors. | 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. | 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. | 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding. |
| Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list. | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors. | 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains a few (1-2) APA format errors. | 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains several (3-4) APA format errors. | 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains many (≥ 5) APA format errors. |
