Passage 1Passage 2PASSAGE 1: Government-Funded HealthcareBy Diane TewThere are many countries that have publicly-funded healthcare systems. Some countries have social insurance—it is funded by taxpayers and covers most costs. Government-funded healthcare (or what is known as “a publicly-funded healthcare system”) is a form of healthcare financing created to apply the costs of civic healthcare needs from publicly handled funds. In most countries, the government directly controls the fund in which the benefits are allotted among the population. There are different approaches to where the funds come from. This could be through major government revenues (such as in Canada) or through the government’s social security system (like in Australia, Belgium, France, Japan, and Germany). The Canadian healthcare system is a body of socialized health insurance plans that is intended to provide health coverage to all its citizens. This means that the National Healthcare System covers every Canadian citizen, regardless of background or age. The system covers different aspects of healthcare wherein all citizens are covered up to the same level. It also provides accessibility to all healthcare facilities and physicians. All attending health workers are also covered with justifiable compensation for the services they are providing. Having a government-funded healthcare system offers beneficial and favorable aspects of quality healthcare for everyone. Essentially, it would improve the basic system by offering balanced, quality healthcare for everybody. To be fair, it would cost taxpayers a good deal of money to enact this system in the United States, but should we really put a price on health?The biggest issue for the average person is being able to afford health insurance premiums, out-of-pocket expenditures, co-payments, and prescriptions. It can be incredibly hard. It has become a big deal just to afford to go to a doctor’s office for a check-up, never mind having to deal with the immense costs of emergency room visits, hospital stays, or dealing with chronic ailments.Another advantage is that it regulates insurance companies. Insurance companies tend to overcharge policyholders, deny coverage for chronic conditions, increase premiums, and refuse customers with pre-existing medical conditions. A government-subsidized plan would force insurance companies to be liable for these transgressions, while ensuring healthcare for everyone—including children, seniors, and people with pre-existing conditions.A government-funded healthcare system also eliminates competition among healthcare providers because there is only one primary healthcare organization. This eliminates the disposal of multiple claims, allocations for insurance forms, mediating contracts, and going through the process of understanding insurance regulations. This would grant more time for medical experts to focus on the treatment of their patients instead of concentrating on irrelevant structures of insurance methods—which only benefits the insurance companies.Granting access to a unified healthcare system would be beneficial to everyone, regardless of their economic background. WRITING TASKMany countries have government-funded healthcare for everyone. Should the US do away with private healthcare and provide publicly-funded healthcare for everyone? Weigh the claims on both sides, and then write an argumentative essay in your own words explaining whether the US should do away with private healthcare and provide publicly-funded healthcare for everyone or not and why.Be sure to use evidence from BOTH texts in your argumentative essay. Write your answer in the space provided.Before you write, be sure to:think about ideas, facts, definitions, details, and other information and examples you want to use;think about how you will introduce your topic and what the main topic will be for each paragraph;develop your ideas clearly and use your own words, except when quoting directly from the source texts; andbe sure to identify the sources by title or number when using details or facts directly from the sources.Now write your argumentative essay in the space provided. Be sure to:introduce your claim;support your claim with logical reasoning and relevant evidence from the texts;acknowledge and address alternate or opposing claims;organize the reasons and evidence logically;use words, phrases, and clauses to connect your ideas and to clarify the relationships among claims, counterclaims, reasons, and evidence;establish and maintain a formal style;provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the argument presented; andcheck your work for correct grammar, usage, capitalization, spelling, and punctuation.

Question

Passage 1Passage 2PASSAGE 1: Government-Funded HealthcareBy Diane TewThere are many countries that have publicly-funded healthcare systems. Some countries have social insurance—it is funded by taxpayers and covers most costs. Government-funded healthcare (or what is known as “a publicly-funded healthcare system”) is a form of healthcare financing created to apply the costs of civic healthcare needs from publicly handled funds. In most countries, the government directly controls the fund in which the benefits are allotted among the population. There are different approaches to where the funds come from. This could be through major government revenues (such as in Canada) or through the government’s social security system (like in Australia, Belgium, France, Japan, and Germany). The Canadian healthcare system is a body of socialized health insurance plans that is intended to provide health coverage to all its citizens. This means that the National Healthcare System covers every Canadian citizen, regardless of background or age. The system covers different aspects of healthcare wherein all citizens are covered up to the same level. It also provides accessibility to all healthcare facilities and physicians. All attending health workers are also covered with justifiable compensation for the services they are providing. Having a government-funded healthcare system offers beneficial and favorable aspects of quality healthcare for everyone. Essentially, it would improve the basic system by offering balanced, quality healthcare for everybody. To be fair, it would cost taxpayers a good deal of money to enact this system in the United States, but should we really put a price on health?The biggest issue for the average person is being able to afford health insurance premiums, out-of-pocket expenditures, co-payments, and prescriptions. It can be incredibly hard. It has become a big deal just to afford to go to a doctor’s office for a check-up, never mind having to deal with the immense costs of emergency room visits, hospital stays, or dealing with chronic ailments.Another advantage is that it regulates insurance companies. Insurance companies tend to overcharge policyholders, deny coverage for chronic conditions, increase premiums, and refuse customers with pre-existing medical conditions. A government-subsidized plan would force insurance companies to be liable for these transgressions, while ensuring healthcare for everyone—including children, seniors, and people with pre-existing conditions.A government-funded healthcare system also eliminates competition among healthcare providers because there is only one primary healthcare organization. This eliminates the disposal of multiple claims, allocations for insurance forms, mediating contracts, and going through the process of understanding insurance regulations. This would grant more time for medical experts to focus on the treatment of their patients instead of concentrating on irrelevant structures of insurance methods—which only benefits the insurance companies.Granting access to a unified healthcare system would be beneficial to everyone, regardless of their economic background. WRITING TASKMany countries have government-funded healthcare for everyone. Should the US do away with private healthcare and provide publicly-funded healthcare for everyone? Weigh the claims on both sides, and then write an argumentative essay in your own words explaining whether the US should do away with private healthcare and provide publicly-funded healthcare for everyone or not and why.Be sure to use evidence from BOTH texts in your argumentative essay. Write your answer in the space provided.Before you write, be sure to:think about ideas, facts, definitions, details, and other information and examples you want to use;think about how you will introduce your topic and what the main topic will be for each paragraph;develop your ideas clearly and use your own words, except when quoting directly from the source texts; andbe sure to identify the sources by title or number when using details or facts directly from the sources.Now write your argumentative essay in the space provided. Be sure to:introduce your claim;support your claim with logical reasoning and relevant evidence from the texts;acknowledge and address alternate or opposing claims;organize the reasons and evidence logically;use words, phrases, and clauses to connect your ideas and to clarify the relationships among claims, counterclaims, reasons, and evidence;establish and maintain a formal style;provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the argument presented; andcheck your work for correct grammar, usage, capitalization, spelling, and punctuation.

Answer 1

Title: The Necessity of Government-Funded Healthcare in the United States

Introduction:
In recent years, the debate surrounding healthcare in the United States has intensified. Many argue that the country should do away with private healthcare and instead provide publicly-funded healthcare for all its citizens. This essay will explore the claims made on both sides of the argument and provide a reasoned explanation as to why the United States should indeed adopt a government-funded healthcare system.

Body:

I. Affordability and Accessibility:
One of the main advantages of government-funded healthcare is its ability to make medical treatment accessible and affordable for everyone. Passage 1 details the burden faced by average citizens who struggle with the financial implications of healthcare. Rising insurance premiums, out-of-pocket expenses, and prohibitive costs for vital prescriptions pose significant challenges to individuals and families. A publicly-funded healthcare system, similar to those employed in countries like Canada, would alleviate this burden by eliminating the need for private insurance and ensuring equal access to healthcare facilities and physicians.

II. Elimination of Insurance Company Abuses:
Government-funded healthcare also has the potential to regulate insurance companies more effectively. Passage 1 highlights how insurance companies often overcharge policyholders, deny coverage for chronic conditions, and refuse those with pre-existing medical conditions. By implementing a government-subsidized healthcare plan, these malpractices would be curbed, ensuring that insurance providers are held accountable for their actions. This system would guarantee healthcare for everyone, including vulnerable populations such as children, seniors, and individuals with pre-existing conditions.

III. Streamlined Healthcare Administration:
A government-funded healthcare system would remove competition among healthcare providers, streamlining the administrative processes associated with private insurance. Eliminating multiple claims, complex insurance forms, and the need to understand convoluted insurance regulations would free up valuable time for healthcare professionals to focus on patient care. Passage 1 argues that this shift in focus would benefit both patients and medical experts by allowing them to concentrate on therapeutic treatments and eliminating the unnecessary bureaucracy that currently thrives in the private healthcare system.

Acknowledging Counterarguments:
Some argue that implementing a government-funded healthcare system in the United States would be too costly for taxpayers. Passage 1 acknowledges this concern, but counters by asking, "Should we really put a price on health?" When considering the numerous advantages of a publicly-funded healthcare system, including affordability, accessibility, and the elimination of insurance company abuses, the overall benefits outweigh the financial cost.

Conclusion:
Considering the evidence presented in both passages, it is evident that the United States should do away with private healthcare and provide publicly-funded healthcare for everyone. The current system places an excessive financial burden on individuals, allows insurance companies to exploit policyholders, and hinders medical professionals from effectively providing patient care. A government-funded healthcare system would address these issues, ensuring equal access to quality healthcare for all Americans, regardless of their economic background. By prioritizing the well-being of its citizens, the United States can create a healthcare system that truly serves its people.