Four years since the passage into law, Obama’s health care law called ‘Obamacare’ is still dropping slowly but surely in the public interest. Marketing and poll specialists have hinted to Obama’s marketing advisers to change their marketing strategies by changing the name as its popularity in social media was lower than its other name ‘Affordable Care Act’ (ACA).
Last year’s analysis given to Bloomberg Businessweek showed the name ‘Affordable Care Act’ had twice positive mentions than negative. While the name ‘Obamacare’ had its positive mentions just a bit higher than negative.
Some people have inferred that maybe Obama’s name being included on the label may have affected its popularity when Obama’s ratings also went down. Evidently this is only one point of the issues circulating the healthcare law and the office of the President. Another issue is Obama’s inability to pursue and implement his promises not only on healthcare but to all that was mentioned throughout his campaigns, therefore, giving doubt to Obamacare’s ability to deliver proper health services.
Another apparent concern which could have inadvertently been used by Republican oppositions is the natural prejudice of Americans to foreign influences or intrusions. For example, the prejudice of many against all illegal workers and sometimes on immigrants who have taken over some of the working class jobs making it difficult for native-born citizens to compete with low-paid foreign workers.
This type of prejudice is called ‘nativism’ or distrust of foreigners. It was somehow correlated to the conspiracy theory of Obama’s not being a natural-born citizen which, although debatable, supposedly disqualifies him to run or become an American president. Parties interested in pursuing this issue were known as ‘birthers’ or those who sought to know where Obama was born. A senator and a congressman actually pushed this issue before the campaigns for presidential elections and even after the court rulings favoring Obama’s eligibility to run for elections.
The sentiment was somehow carried over to Obamacare making many suspicious of Obama’s intentions. It worsened when Obama’s advisers commissioned a think tank group called Heritage Foundation which created the ‘individual mandate’ in 1989 and incorporated it into Obamacare. The mandate specifies a plan to get everybody into Obamacare. Meaning not only the sick ones but the healthy ones also should be included which will seem to work like social security services but everybody will be obligated to pay for membership and will penalize non-members with a double of the membership fee.
This will ensure funding for Obamacare and assure a health care program for every sick person. However people resent this since they think that the healthy ones will be supporting the sick ones just like what is already happening on social welfare where tax contributions of those who have are supporting the have-nots or welfare riders. Other than that it becomes compulsory for everybody to be in the program.
Despite the widespread negative attitude towards Obamacare, a higher number of Americans do not necessarily want it repealed or delayed. They are still hopeful that Congress will still be able to iron out the kinks and complications within Obamacare. The definite question therefore is ‘How to get funding for Obamacare without burdening the public’.
One possible solution, but this will entail a lot of planning and much backing by banks and multi-million dollar companies, is that Obamacare must create an offspring or even several as corporate entities whose main objective is to generate funding through businesses solely to support Obamacare. This would definitely generate thousands of jobs from numerous entities.
One of its businesses could be fund management or investment portfolio management. Another one could be foreign exchange (FOREX), or investment and acquisition of precious metals and stones. An extremely lucrative business is the entertainment industry where one can come up with shows, sponsored MTVs, concerts and tours like Justin Moore’s concert tour.
With government persuasions, celebrated entertainers may be asked to help on a regular basis in the fund raising shows and tours all over the country or the world. The government will help in the ticket sales to multi-million dollar conglomerates or get them as sponsors. Think Vegas.
The objective is not to burden the working-class public and instead give them free entertainment paid by companies, possibly partially-subsidized health care programs and new jobs for the unemployed.