Discussion: Presidential Agendas.

Discussion: Presidential Agendas

Are you looking for help on this assignment? We will write a custom paper specifically for you.

Do my nursing essay on Discussion: Presidential Agendas.

Discussion: Presidential Agendas

Regardless of political affiliation, every citizen has a stake in healthcare policy decisions. Hence, it is little wonder why healthcare items become such high-profile components of

NURS 6050 Discussion Presidential Agendas ESSAYS

presidential agendas. It is also little wonder why they become such hotly debated agenda items.

Consider a topic that rises to the presidential level. How did each of the presidents (Trump, Obama, and Bush) handle the problem? What would you do differently?

To Prepare:

Review the Resources and reflect on the importance of agenda setting.
Consider how federal agendas promote healthcare issues and how these healthcare issues become agenda priorities.

By Day 3 of Week 1

Post your response to the discussion question: Consider a topic that rises to the presidential level. How did each of the presidents (Trump, Obama, and Bush) handle the problem? What would you do differently?

Click HERE to ORDER A UNIQUELY CRAFTED Nursing Essay Assignment: Discussion: Presidential Agendas

RE: Discussion – Week 1

Collapse

Policies, Problems, and Planning to Reach Rural Veterans

Suicide accounts for 8.3% of deaths among U.S. adults, and Veterans alone represent an unignorable 14.3% of these tragedies (Department of Veterans Affairs [VA], 2018). Consequently, death by suicide for the veteran patient population is 1.5 times the rate of non-veteran sufferers (VA, 2018). Our current and previous presidential administrations have contributed to the funding and development of veteran suicide research and interventions. Since the inception of the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act (CHOICE Act) of 2014, veteran suicide data and research has enabled policy makers to focus on reaching veterans living in rural areas. Veterans living in rural areas account for nearly one fourth of the veteran population (VA,2018). Veterans living in rural areas have a 20%-22% greater risk of death by suicide in comparison to veterans living in urban areas. According to the Veterans Affairs Office of Rural Health, 4.7 million veterans return from active military careers to live in rural areas, only 2.5 million are enrolled to receive VA health care services, and far more than half of enrolled veterans living in rural areas have service-connected disabilities (VA.gov: Veterans Affairs 2016).

In 2014, President Barrack Obama and Senator John McCain III set the groundwork for veteran mental health care reform with the passage of the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act (CHOICE Act) of 2014. With this act, veterans in rural areas had expanded options to receive care from non-VA providers with the VHA’s coordination and approval. The CHOICE Act also highlighted health care staffing disparities via staff shortage reports required by the VA Office of Inspector General, and the identification of the need to increase Graduate Medical Education (GME) residency positions in the mental health specialty.

The Choice Act was further amended in 2016 with the passing of the Jeff Miller and Richard Blumentha Veterans Heath Care and Benefits Improvement Act to further increase the number of GME residency positions over 10 years instead of five and extended the program to 2024 (Albanese et al., 2019). Despite the increase in GME residency positions and extensions of program funding, health care disparities in rural areas continued their negative trend. At this point, veteran advocates and policy makers identified the physician shortage gap in rural areas as a mission-critical priority for the VHA and began working towards the John S McCain III, Daniel K. Akaka, and Samuel R. Johnson VA Maintaining Internal System and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks (MISSION) Act of 2018.

In June 2018, the Obama administrations groundwork for the MISSION Act paved the way for the Trump Administration to see it through to fruition. With the problem stream of rural access leading policy formation, the MISSION Act created interventions based on physician shortages that now determine location, specialty, and amount GME residency positions within outlined parameters. Essentially focus has shifted from interventions to bring veterans to health care providers (HCP), to interventions to bring HCP to veterans. These interventions include expanding VA Health Care Profession Scholarships (HPSP) to graduate education for nurse practitioners select, who are allowed to practice at their full scope of practice without physician supervision. These expansions will increase patient access to quality health care and improve staffing shortages in rural veteran communities (American Association of Colleges of Nursing [AACN], 2016). In addition to GME improvements, veterans now could seek medical assistance from non-VA facilities without penalty when in need.

Most recently, the Biden Administration passed the Sgt. Ketchum Rural Veterans Mental Health Act of 2021. This bill was created in honor of its name’s sake, Sergent Brandon Ketchum, in addition to many other sailors, marines, and soldiers who lost their battles with suicidal ideation in the face of limited access to care. Sgt. Ketchum was a 33-year-old Operation Iraqi Freedom Veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan struggled with post-traumatic stress disorder and substance abuse after returning home to a rural area in Iowa. In 2016 he presented to the Iowa City VA Hospital where he asked to be admitted before the psychiatrist determined inpatient care was not needed at the time. Brandon returned home and committed suicide that night. An investigation was completed and no HCP’s were found to be directly responsible for his death; however, quality patient education on suicidal ideation, risk factor ratings, and access to routine outpatient psychiatric mental health services or the lack there of could be at fault. Under this bill, rural veterans diagnosed with Schizophrenia, Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Affective Disorder, Major Depression, PTSD, and any severe or chronic mental health condition will have access to Rural Access Network for Growth Enhancement (RANGE) programs (Veterans Health Administration, VA.gov: Veterans Affairs 2013). The RANGE program provides intensive case management to veterans with serious mental illness who are experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of experiencing homelessness with an emphasis on recovery. The Sgt. Ketchum Rural Veterans Mental Health Act of 2021 bill also requires the government to conduct a study and report on whether the VA has adequate resources to provide services to rural veterans whose lives depend on mental health care the is more intensive than traditional outpatient therapy (Monteith et al., 2020).

Unfortunately, VA healthcare reform is faced with similar challenges of establishing universal health care but on a smaller scale. Agendas, interest groups, insurance stakeholders, pharmaceutical suppliers, and access to care are all variables in creating policies that appear to be relentless barriers to healthcare reform; however, change is a process. The evolution of the CHOICE act to the Sgt. Ketchum Rural Veterans Mental Health Act of 2021 is promising. Findings from this living body of veteran health data and research will continue to shape policy improvement. I am hopeful that with each future bill and amendment passed, a new layer of protection will be provided to those who have sacrificed their lives to protect us.

References

Albanese, A. P., Bope, E. T., Sanders, K. M., & Bowman, M. (2019). The VA mission act of 2018: A potential game changer for rural GME expansion and Veteran health care. The Journal of Rural Health, 36(1), 133–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12360

American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2016, December 13). VA ruling on APRN practice: a breakthrough for veterans health care. Message posted on the American Association of Colleges of Nursing Listserv:web@aacn.nche.edu

Department of Veterans Affairs (2018b). VA National Suicide Data Report: 2005–2015. Retrieved from

https://www.mentalhealth.va.gov/ docs/data-sheets/OMHSP_National_Suicide_Da ta_Report_2005-2015_06-14-18_508-compliant.pdf

Monteith, L. L., Wendleton, L., Bahraini, N. H., Matarazzo, B. B., Brimner, G., & Mohatt, N. V. (2020). Together with veterans: Va national strategy alignment and lessons learned from community‐based suicide prevention for rural veterans. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 50(3), 588–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12613

VA.gov: Veterans Affairs. RURAL VETERANS. (2016, January 19).

https://www.ruralhealth.va.gov/aboutus/ruralvets.asp.

Veterans Health Administration, D. U. S. for O. and M. (2013, May 8). VA.gov: Veterans Affairs. Enhanced RANGE Program. https://www.lexington.va.gov/services/Enhanced_RANGE_Program.asp.

RE: Discussion – Week 1

Collapse

Top of Form

Many people living in the united states and the world in general are having one or two mental health illnesses that are neglected such as stress, depression and emotional distress. Mental health patients are at high risk for sudden death. Shortage of mental health resources and facilities is a problem. I will be looking on how President Bush, Obama, and Trump made some reforms to improve these mental health patients.

George Bush the 43rd president of the United States of America saw the need for improving mental health care that is why he created the New Commission that was made of mental health experts who came up with 19 recommendation to improve mental illness for adult, youth and children (National Alliance for Mental Health (NAMH), 2021). This reduces the way people treated mentally ill. More so the President also sign an act which provided resources to prevent mentally ill patient from been imprison. President Bush prevented the co-occurring of substance used. Another act that was sign in 2008 was that which provided equality in health insurance the mentally ill and a medical patient. (NAMH, 2021)

Barack Obama the 44^th President sign the patient protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) which added mental health patients to Medicaid, making uninsured patients to be insured. In 2010, President Obama provided an act for supportive resources for patients with mental health. National conference for mental health in 2013 with dialogue on mental health. Was created by Obama More so President Obama provided a budget of 500million to be invested in mental health care. Obama sign an act called the clay hunt suicide prevention which was in favor of the veteran who suffer mental diseases and needed help this act provided immediate action in the favor (White House, 2016).

During President Trump reign he supported community health clinic for mentally ill with 700million dollars for the community mental health. Around 100million was allocated for children with mental illness. He went ahead and reduce funding’s for substance abuse (National Council for Behavioral health, 2020) More, so he fought for the affordable care act that prevented mental health patients from the care they need.

My passion has always looking for opportunities to impact others wherever need arises I realized that there are so many individuals that we interact each day with mental problems but due to stigmatism are scared to seek medical attention. It is amazing how many of my friends and family members suffers from depression and anxiety. As nurse I realized that am ethically responsible to advocate and be the change agent in my family, community, and the world as a whole.

References

National Alliance for Mental Health, (2021). How President have shaped mental health care

https://www.nami.org/Blogs/NAMI-Blog/February-2016/How-Presidents-Have-Shaped-Mental-Health-Care

National Council for Behavioral Health. (2020). President Trump releases fiscal year 2020 budget proposal. Https://www.thenationalcouncil.org/capitol-connector/2019/03/president-trump-releases-fy-2020-budget-proposal/

The White House. (2016). Making healthcare better. Addressing mental health: Progress in research, prevention, coverage, recovery and quality.https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/Documents/MentalHealthReport.pdf

Learning Resources
Required Readings
Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.).
Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
 Chapter 1, “Informing Public Policy: An Important Role for Registered Nurses” (pp.
11–13 only)
 Chapter 2, “Agenda Setting: What Rises to a Policymaker’s Attention?” (pp. 17–36)
 Chapter 10, “Overview: The Economics and Finance of Health Care” (pp. 171–180)
 Chapter 12, “An Insider’s Guide to Engaging in Policy Activities”
o “Creating a Fact Sheet” (pp. 217-221) Discussion: Presidential Agendas.

DeMarco, R., & Tufts, K. A. (2014). The mechanics of writing a policy brief. Nursing Outlook,
62(3), 219–224. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

Kingdon, J.W. (2001). A model of agenda-setting with applications. Law Review M.S.U.-D.C.L.,
2(331)

Lamb, G., Newhouse, R., Beverly, C., Toney, D. A., Cropley, S., Weaver, C. A., Kurtzman, E.,
… Peterson, C. (2015). Policy agenda for nurse-led care coordination. Nursing Outlook, 63(4),
521–530. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2015.06.003.

O’Rourke, N. C., Crawford, S. L., Morris, N. S., & Pulcini, J. (2017). Political efficacy and
participation of nurse practitioners. Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice, 18(3), 135–148.
doi:10.1177/1527154417728514

Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Enhancing Environmental Health Content in Nursing
Practice, Pope, A. M., Snyder, M. A., & Mood, L. H. (Eds.). (n.d.). Nursing health, &
environment: Strengthening the relationship to improve the public's health.

USA.gov. (n.d.). A-Z index of U.S. government departments and agencies. Retrieved September
20, 2018, from https://www.usa.gov/federal-agencies/a

USA.gov. (n.d.). Executive departments. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from
https://www.usa.gov/executive-departments

The White House. (n.d.). The cabinet. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-trump-administration/the-cabinet/

Document: Agenda Comparison Grid Template (Word document)

Module 1: Agenda Setting (Weeks 1-2)

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Meet the Experts: Pioneers in Policy [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). The Policy Process [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.
Learning Objectives
Students will:

Compare U.S. presidential agenda priorities
Evaluate ways that administrative agencies help address healthcare issues
Analyze how healthcare issues get on administrative agendas
Identify champions or sponsors of healthcare issues
Create fact sheets for communicating with policymakers or legislators
Justify the role of the nurse in agenda setting for healthcare issues

Due By
Assignment
Week 1, Days 1–2
Read/Watch/Listen to the Learning Resources.
Compose your initial Discussion post.
Week 1, Day 3
Post your initial discussion post.
Week 1, Days 4-5
Review peer Discussion posts.
Compose your peer Discussion responses.
Begin to compose your Assignment.
Week 1, Day 6
Post at least two peer Discussion responses on two different days (and not the same day as the initial post).
Continue to compose your final draft of your Assignment.
Week 1, Day 7
Wrap up Discussion.
Week 2, Day 1–6
Continue to compose your Assignment.
Week 2, Day 7
Deadline to submit your Assignment.

Learning Resources

Required Readings

Milstead, J. A., & Short, N. M. (2019). Health policy and politics: A nurse’s guide (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Chapter 1, “Informing Public Policy: An Important Role for Registered Nurses” (pp. 11–13 only)
Chapter 2, “Agenda Setting: What Rises to a Policymaker’s Attention?” (pp. 17–36)
Chapter 10, “Overview: The Economics and Finance of Health Care” (pp. 171–180)
Chapter 12, “An Insider’s Guide to Engaging in Policy Activities”
“Creating a Fact Sheet” (pp. 217-221) Discussion: Presidential Agendas.

DeMarco, R., & Tufts, K. A. (2014). The mechanics of writing a policy brief. Nursing Outlook, 62(3), 219–224. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2014.04.002

Kingdon, J.W. (2001). A model of agenda-setting with applications. Law Review M.S.U.-D.C.L., 2(331)

Lamb, G., Newhouse, R., Beverly, C., Toney, D. A., Cropley, S., Weaver, C. A., Kurtzman, E., … Peterson, C. (2015). Policy agenda for nurse-led care coordination. Nursing Outlook, 63(4), 521–530. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2015.06.003.

O’Rourke, N. C., Crawford, S. L., Morris, N. S., & Pulcini, J. (2017). Political efficacy and participation of nurse practitioners. Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice, 18(3), 135–148.

Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Enhancing Environmental Health Content in Nursing Practice, Pope, A. M., Snyder, M. A., & Mood, L. H. (Eds.). (n.d.). Nursing health, & environment: Strengthening the relationship to improve the public’s health.

USA.gov. (n.d.). A-Z index of U.S. government departments and agencies. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from https://www.usa.gov/federal-agencies/a

USA.gov. (n.d.). Executive departments. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from https://www.usa.gov/executive-departments

The White House. (n.d.). The cabinet. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-trump-administration/the-cabinet/

Document: Agenda Comparison Grid Template (Word document)

Required Media

Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Setting the Agenda [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Required Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2018). Setting the Agenda [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Content
Name: NURS_6050_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric

Grid View
List View

Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting
Points Range: 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Discussion: Presidential Agendas.

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible sources.

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Points Range: 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Post is cited with two credible sources.

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only one or no credible sources.

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness
Points Range: 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3.
First Response
Points Range: 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
Second Response
Points Range: 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

Points Range: 12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.
Participation
Points Range: 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Points Range: 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100
Name: NURS_6050_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric