The question of whether the PPACA met the Muscogee’s goals of reciprocity and acknowledgment is greatly considered in this paper. It was further pondered on whether doing away with the Act was beneficial or harmful to society in the long-run. The norms, values, and behaviors of the Muscogee together with the laws implemented by advanced economies were assessed to deliberate on whether the U.S. could adopt best practices to ensure national cohesion. More importantly, the PPACA was reviewed in detail and an understanding of how the Act affected various stakeholders, including healthcare practitioners, patients, insurance firms, and the government was gained. Furthermore, a “PBS News Hour” and “Kaiser Health News” report examines the viewpoints of PPACA proponents and opponents.…show more content… By doing so, they would only emulate the discriminatory behavior of earlier legislators, who excluded African-Americans and Native Indians from fundamental rights such as voting and access to education (Lecture No. 012, p.1). Laws affect every member of society, including the rich and the poor, and therefore, it would be of importance for the federal government to seek and weigh the views of every member before enacting laws. Remember, the labors of the rich and the poor, the educated and the uneducated, and the privileged and the disadvantaged, among other distinguishing demographical attributes, are all instrumental for national growth. If the poor, uneducated, or underprivileged fail to receive health coverage, because the system equates welfare to laziness, then when these people get sick, the nation loses a significant percentage of workers, who contribute to the economy. A recommended approach is to emulate the Muscogee, who Martin mentions that their culture embodied “fostering reciprocity among themselves, with other peoples, and with nature” (Martin,
