[DRAFT]@@LEADER@@Care Calamity

[Eaischpnaeieacgkque Bhcieaghpodsttditf]

This is an issue dealing with something like obamacare brought into your nation and the aftermath it brings.

Title: @@LEADER@@Care Calamity

Description:
After the signing of the new healthcare reform, now officially dubbed "@@LEADER@@Care," some of the people of @@NAME@@ are outraged at some of the actions that were introduced as a result from its adoption.

Validity: nations with healthcare funding.

The Debate:
[option]"You can't let this be taken down!" cries your emotionally unstable Minister of Healthcare. "@@LEADER@@Care was enacted to increase the quality and affordability of health insurance, lower the uninsured rate by expanding public and private insurance coverage, and reduce the costs of healthcare for individuals and the government. This is one of the few things in the recent years that's balancing the budget. Not only that, but it has numerous other good qualities that it introduces. It ensures affordable coverage for more middle income families, provides tax credits to small businesses and increased coverage for employees, rewards quality of care, rather than quantity, expands coverage for young adults, and the online registration makes it easily accessible for the modern society. Please, I'm begging you, don't repel this."
[effect]universal healthcare in @@NAME@@ has caused a widespread discussion over what else it covers.

[option]"Oh really?" says a homeless person in handcuffs. "I was just arrested and fined a thousand @@CURRENCY@@s for not having this new healthcare system. I was told that if I don't pay the fine soon, I'll get another fine. How can I pay a fine if I don't even have a job! This is ridiculous and should not be tolerated. Repeal this barbaric law and go back to what we had before." At this, the homeless person is tackled to the ground by police officers for escaping them.
[effect]repealing universal healthcare has caused a number of 'accidents' to happen across @@NAME@@.

[option]"That's not going far enough!" screams @@RANDOMNAME@@, one of @@NAME@@'s wealthiest CEOs. "Providing healthcare to my employees has resulted in me losing fifty percent of my income. FIFTY PERCENT! Abolish healthcare in general and let nature take its course."
[effect]those who are hurt in work are automatically replaced by others willing.

This is a rough draft so any comments are helpful.

edit: Tried to make issue less biased by expanding the pros in option 1.

[Sanctaria]

Seems a bit biased against it.

[Eaischpnaeieacgkque Bhcieaghpodsttditf]

Seems a bit biased against it.

I had the same concept. I was thinking of this being something along the lines of a FOR option, AGAINST option, and an ABOLISH HEALTHCARE option. I will look into making option 1 more positive, but it will be on the longer side if that's alright.

[Trotterdam]

Not everyone follows US politics in-depth. Explain what distinguishes Obamacare from other forms of healthcare and why it can be considered better or worse, rather than some vague "you passed a law that people are complaining about now" thing.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Also the validity should be narrowed to countries that don't have a single-payer healthcare system or a government monopoly on employment of doctors.

[Trotterdam]

Also the validity should be narrowed to countries that don't have a single-payer healthcare system or a government monopoly on employment of doctors.

Neither of those things are ones you can make a ruling about in the game, so maybe make an issue about those first.

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

Also the validity should be narrowed to countries that don't have a single-payer healthcare system or a government monopoly on employment of doctors.

Neither of those things are ones you can make a ruling about in the game, so maybe make an issue about those first.

Just from a quick Google search, #048, #117 and #217 already do that.

[Trotterdam]

Just from a quick Google search, #048, #117 and #217 already do that.

None of those issues says anything about "single-payer healthcare system" or "government monopoly on employment of doctors". There is some talk about the government hiring doctors, but nothing about banning anyone else from doing so.

All of those issues also do a better job of explaining what the actual problem is.