The Bill H.R.666 Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Legislation Grid
Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Policymaking activities are essential for nurses since they allow the healthcare professionals to shape the medical industry and lead to better health outcomes. The necessity to engage in this sphere increases in times of crisis, and the Covid-19 pandemic is among them. It means that appropriate legislation pieces should appear to address the new challenges and problems. That is why the given paper will identify a current and health-related bill and comment on it. Thus, this papers purpose statement refers to locating such a bill, analyzing it according to the specific grid, and advocating for this legislation piece by refuting possible opposing arguments.

Legislation Grid

Health-related Bill Name	Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021
Bill Number	H.R.666
Description	The Covid-19 pandemic has brought essential fundamental to the whole nation, and the healthcare industry is not an exception. The crisis resulted in the fact that the population health significantly worsened, while medical professionals and organizations faced difficulties addressing the new challenges. Simultaneously, the bill under analysis demonstrates that this situation became more dangerous for the United States because American society suffers from structural racism (Congress.Gov, 2021). This term implies that people face different living conditions based on their origin and ethnicity. Cineas (2021) supports this claim and admits that Black and Latino people are three times more likely than white people to contract Covid-19 and two times more likely to succumb to the illness (para. 1). That is why bill H.R.666 establishes a National Center on Anti-Racism and Health within the Centers and Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Furthermore, the given legislation piece demonstrates that police violence is a problem, meaning that it is also necessary to address it. Consequently, the new Center should collect and analyze data, promote research, and sponsor programs to eliminate racism from health care and improve peoples health and well-being.
Federal or State?	The bill is federal because it offers to address the nation-wide issue.
Legislative Intent	Thelegislative intent is a significant concept when it comes to various legislation pieces. It is so because it refers to the extent to which a proposed bill affects and governs interactions and behavior in multiple spheres (Canale & Poggi, 2019). As for the given bill, its legislative intent is to ensure that the medical industry is free from racism and that society is not subject to law enforcement brutality. On the one hand, it offers to introduce anti-racism into the government response to the Covid-19 pandemic. On the other hand, the bill demonstrates that police violence is a public health issue. If these goals are achieved, the US healthcare system will become better because patients will face identical health outcomes irrespective of their ethnicities and origins.
Proponents/ Opponents	Proponents: Representative Ayanna Pressley, a Democrat, is the sponsor of the given bill. Furthermore, Congres.Gov (2021) demonstrates that the legislation piece has 52 cosponsors; all of them are from the Democratic party.
Proponents/ Opponents	Opponents: The bill does not have evident opponents or critics because racism and police brutality are undeniable problems in the modern United States.
Target Population	The current bill focuses on multiple minorities in the US. They include Black, Latin, American Indian, Pacific Islander, Asian American, and Alaska Native individuals. All these people have a shared feature since they can suffer from White supremacy.
Status of the bill (Is it in hearings or committees?)	Congress.Gov (2021) demonstrates that the bill was introduced in House and referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on February 1, 2021.
General Notes/Comments	Bill H.R.666 seems appropriate in the current situation within the United States. On the one hand, the Covid-19 pandemic has demonstrated that there exist essential health disparities when it comes to representatives of different ethnic groups. It is so because African Americans and Latin individuals represent most coronavirus cases in the country. On the other hand, the topic of police violence is essential because multiple people face harmful health outcomes when law enforcement agencies act brutally. Thus, it is necessary to address the two issues since they can directly influence the populations health and well-being, and the bill under analysis can be considered an adequate solution.

Legislation Testimony/Advocacy Statement

There is clear reasoning behind passing bill H.R.666 Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021. Firstly, the coronavirus data have demonstrated that peoples health outcomes significantly depend on their ethnicities. It is so because representatives of many minority groups account for a larger part of all Covid-19 cases in the United States. In addition to that, Cineas (2021) argues that white Americans have better access to vaccination when compared to people of color. Secondly, the previous year witnessed massive demonstrations against police violence since it can directly affect peoples physical and mental health, leading to fatal outcomes in some cases. Simultaneously, Congress.Gov (2021) demonstrates that the bill under analysis tries to mitigate the impact of structural racism and law enforcement brutality on society. This information allows for advocating for the bill under consideration since it has the probability to protect peoples health and well-being from harmful effects.

Even though it has been mentioned that the bill has witnessed many supporters, it is impossible to exclude a chance that some opponents will not exist. Thus, one should explain how it is possible to refute their opinions. For example, Taylor et al. (2017) mention that some criticism can emerge because experts believe that legislation pieces bring politics and ideology to clinical practice. As for bill H.R.666, it can result in the fact that minorities needs will be overvalued in the medical industry. However, one can address this point of view by stating that the bill is necessary since policymaking efforts typically lead to improved patient outcomes (Milstead & Short, 2019). Since it has been noted that minorities received insufficient care, specific and dedicated efforts are needed to improve this situation. According to Canale and Poggi (2019), this refutation refers to the concept of legislative intent that explains what change a bill wants to achieve in society. This information demonstrates that it is not reasonable to oppose passing the bill under consideration.

Conclusion

The paper has commented on bill H.R.666 Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021. It has been determined that this legislative piece is necessary to address topical issues in todays American society. They include racial disparities regarding health outcomes and law enforcement violence. Thus, these two problems result in the fact that an essential part of the US population suffers from decreased health and well-being, meaning that an adequate solution is necessary. It seems that the proposed bill is a suitable option since it offers to establish a body that will be responsible for tracking the issues and taking specific actions to mitigate their impact. The paper has also considered an opposing opinion regarding the bill and identified that sufficient reasoning exists behind passing the legislation piece under analysis.

References

Canale, D., & Poggi, F. (2019). Pragmatic aspects of legislative intent.The American Journal of Jurisprudence, 64(1), 125-138. Web.

Cineas, F. (2021). Exclusive: Pressley, Warren, and Lee introduce bill to fight racism in public health. Vox. Web.

Congress.Gov. (2021). H.R.666 Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021. Web.

Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurses guide (6^th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Taylor, D., Olshansky, E. F., Woods, N. F., Johnson-Mallard, V., Safriet, B. J., & Hagan, T. (2017). Corrigendum to position statement: Political interference in sexual and reproductive health research and health professional education.Nursing Outlook, 65(2), 346-350. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

The Bill H.R.666 Anti-Racism in Public Health Act of 2021

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)