Feb 23, 2024 NRS 440 Advocacy Through Legislation GCU
NRS 440 Advocacy Through Legislation GCU
NRS 440 Advocacy Through Legislation GCU
Currently, the high cost of health care posse a major challenge on Americans as families are finding increasingly hard to pay for health care. The similar situation is found in the state of California where the rising cost of health care remains a key challenge. According to California Health Care Foundation (2020), California spent approximately $292 billion, which is about 12% of the state’s economy. Moreover, Lown Institute (2019) reports that California has spent nearly 146% in health care between the years 2007 to 2018, which is about 26% of the state’s budget. However, this budget goes directly to the health care and leaving out spending on community conditions. This implies that California is compromising the potential long-term health benefits for short-term health temporary solutions. Therefore, the imbalance between health care and community condition spending requires dialogue and actions based on sound policy. Essentially, the increasing cost of health care in the recent decades have prompted California to forgo much needed investment in community conditions such as public health, social services, education, and environmental protections. Therefore, this policy seeks to improve health in people of California by increasing funds to community condition. This initiative can be funded by reducing excessive expenditure and curbing the waste on health care and redirecting the savings to community conditions.
Idea for Addressing Solution
The idea to advocate for balance in the investment in health care and community condition was informed by the need to avoid the focus on short-term health solutions and embrace long-term health benefits. Essentially, if the state can invest in community conditions such as public health, education, environmental protection, and social services, the citizens will be adequately informed on the health issues, leading to positive outcomes. In turn, expenditure in health care will drastically reduced since the community conditions will emphasize on preventive measures. Moreover, this idea will equally address health disparities because the community interventions will target every member of the society including the economically disadvantaged, minority groups, and people living with disabilities. and seek to provide patient-centered interventions. Therefore, this change can be best realized by changing the policy that governs health care spending in California.
Struggling to Meet Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on NRS 440 Advocacy Through Legislation GCU done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
Meet my deadline
In this case, legislation is deemed the best course of advocacy because it will help in soliciting public support for the idea since formulation of legislations is an open process that needs perspectives, participation, and scrutiny by the people. Moreover, legislation will enhance clarity on the idea and act as a basis for policy’s consistency in application and operation.
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NRS 440 Advocacy Through Legislation GCU
NRS 440 Advocacy Through Legislation GCU
Assessment Description
Nurses often become motivated to change aspects within the larger health care system based on their real-world experience. As such, many nurses take on an advocacy role to influence a change in regulations, policies, and laws that govern the larger health care system.
For this assignment, identify a problem or concern in your state, community, or organization that has the capacity for advocacy through legislation. Research the issue and use the “Advocacy Through Legislation” template to complete this assignment.
You are required to cite a minimum of three sources to complete this assignment. Sources must be published within the last 5 years, appropriate for the assignment criteria, and relevant to nursing practice.
While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
The legislator I chose is Congresswomen Cori Bush who serves in Missouri’s first congressional district. She was sworn into office in 2021. She is the first Nurse and first African American women to serve in the first district for the state of Missouri(ANA, 2019) . She worked as a community health nurse, triage nurse and became politically active during the Ferguson riots in 2014. Cori Bush has advocated for her community as a Nonviolence 365 Ambassador(Bush, 2021). In congress she has supported several bills that are influential on our health care system. One of note is the Rural Opioid Abise and Prevention Act. This act is an amendment to Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 that would create grants for rural communities to create opioid awareness education programs. The grants will also provide funding for drug treatment programs to be created and run (Civic Impulse, 2023).
Cori Bush is also a huge proponent for Medicare For All Act. She is a cosponsor and supporter for the bill. As a healthcare worker she is using her background and experience to push for healthcare coverage for everyone. She is advocating for those with health disparities to gain accessible coverage. This act will not only provide medical coverage but will lower prescription costs. She is also advocating for the repeal of the Hyde Amendment that prevents federal funds from being used to pay for abortion services. The Hyde amendment disproportionately impacts low income, minorities, immigrants, and the LGBTQ communities. Cori Bush is a supporter of reproductive rights and is trying to secure reproductive healthcare for all (Bush, 2022).
References
American Nurses Association. (2019, October 20). Nurses Serving in Congress. ANA. Retrieved January 16, 2023, from https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/advocacy/federal/nurses-serving-in-congress/
Bush, C. (2022, June 30). Medicare for all. Cori Bush for Congress. Retrieved January 16, 2023, from https://coribush.org/issue/medicare-for-all/
Civic Impulse. (n.d.). Rural Opioid Abuse Prevention Act (2022 – S. 2796). GovTrack.us. Retrieved January 16, 2023, from https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/s2796
Cori Bush Congresswomen for Missouri’s First. (2021). Votes & Legislation. Cori Bush. Retrieved January 16, 2023, from https://bush.house.gov/about/votes-and-legislation
Attachments
Advocacy Through Legislation – Rubric
Criteria Description
Problem, Those Affected, Current Ramifications, and Consequences if Problem Continues
5. Excellent
23.25 points
A well-develop discussion of the problem, those affected, current ramifications, and consequences if the issue continues is presented. Strong and compelling rationale is provided. Insight into the problem and consequences is demonstrated.
4. Good
20.69 points
A discussion of the problem, those affected, current ramifications, and consequences if the issue continues is presented. Some rationale is needed.
3. Satisfactory
18.37 points
A summary of the problem, those affected, current ramifications, and consequences if the issue continues is presented. There are some omissions and inaccuracies. Rationale is needed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
17.44 points
A partial or vague discussion of the problem, those affected, current ramifications, and consequences if the issue continues is presented. Why the problem would be best addressed through legislation is unclear.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A description of the problem, those affected, current ramifications, and consequences if the issue continues is omitted.
Criteria Description
Idea for Addressing Solution
5. Excellent
15.5 points
A logical and well-developed idea for addressing the issue is outlined. Why legislation is the best course for advocacy is thoroughly explained. Strong and compelling rationale is provided.
4. Good
13.8 points
Idea for addressing the issue is outlined. Why legislation is the best course for advocacy is generally explained. Some rationale is needed.
3. Satisfactory
12.25 points
Idea for addressing the issue is generally outlined. Why legislation is the best course for advocacy is summarized. There are some minor omissions. Rationale is needed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
11.63 points
Idea for addressing the issue is vague. Why legislation is the best course for advocacy is unclear. There are major omissions.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Idea for addressing the issue and why legislation is the best course for advocacy is omitted.
Criteria Description
Research Supporting Solution for Problem
5. Excellent
23.25 points
Substantive evidence-based findings that support the idea for addressing the problem, including similar legislation in other states, are presented and demonstrate strong and compiling support for the idea.
4. Good
20.69 points
Idea for addressing the issue is outlined. Why legislation is the best course for advocacy is generally explained. Some rationale is needed. Substantive evidence-based findings that support the idea for addressing the problem, including similar legislation in other states, are presented. There are minor inaccuracies. Some detail is needed.
3. Satisfactory
18.37 points
Substantive evidence-based findings that support the idea for addressing the problem, including similar legislation in other states, are generally presented. More information is needed. There are some inaccuracies.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
17.44 points
Some support for the idea and its effectiveness in addressing the problem is presented. Findings presented are not substantiated, or do not provide evidence-based support for the idea.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Substantive evidence-based findings that support the idea for addressing the problem, including similar legislation in other states, are omitted.
Criteria Description
Stakeholder Support
5. Excellent
15.5 points
All significant stakeholders in support of the proposed idea are presented and a well-supported explanation of why they are in support of the idea are provided.
4. Good
13.8 points
Key stakeholders in support of the proposed idea are presented. It is generally clear why they are in support of the idea. Some detail or rationale is needed.
3. Satisfactory
12.25 points
Substantive evidence-based findings that support the idea for addressing the problem, including similar legislation in other states, are generally presented. More information is needed. There are some inaccuracies.General stakeholders in support of the proposed idea are presented. It is unclear why they are in support of the idea. More information is needed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
11.63 points
At least one stakeholder in support of the proposed idea is presented. The assignment criteria are largely incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Stakeholders in support the proposed idea are omitted.
Criteria Description
Stakeholder Opposition
5. Excellent
15.5 points
All significant stakeholders in opposition to the proposed idea are presented. A well-supported explanation for why they are opposed to the idea and strategies for debating or conversing with opposing stakeholders is presented.
4. Good
13.8 points
Key stakeholders in opposition to the proposed idea are presented. A general explanation for why they are opposed to the idea and strategies for debating or conversing with opposing stakeholders is presented.
3. Satisfactory
12.25 points
General stakeholders in opposition to the proposed idea are presented. Explanation for why they are opposed to the idea and strategies for debating or conversing with opposing stakeholders is vague.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
11.63 points
At least one stakeholder in support of the proposed idea is presented. The assignment criteria are largely incomplete.At least one stakeholder in opposition to the proposed idea is presented. The assignment criteria are largely incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Stakeholders in opposition to the proposed idea are omitted.
Criteria Description
Financial Incentives and Costs
5. Excellent
15.5 points
The financial impact for the issue and idea is clearly summarized. Strong rationale and support for claims is provided.
4. Good
13.8 points
The financial impact for the issue and idea is summarized. Support for claims is generally supported.
3. Satisfactory
12.25 points
The financial impact for the issue and idea is outlined. More information or support is needed for claims.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
11.63 points
The financial impact for the issue and idea is only partially presented. The assignment criteria are largely incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
The financial impact for the issue and idea is omitted.
Criteria Description
Legislature Process and Information for Proposal
5. Excellent
15.5 points
Legislative information needed and process to advocate for proposal are clearly and logically presented. The legislative process is clearly understood and insight into legislative advocacy is demonstrated.
4. Good
13.8 points
The financial impact for the issue and idea is summarized. Support for claims is generally supported.Legislative information needed and process to advocate for proposal are presented. Information or detail is needed in some areas for accuracy or clarity.
3. Satisfactory
12.25 points
Legislative information needed and process to advocate for proposal are generally outlined.There are some inaccuracies or omissions.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
11.63 points
Legislative information needed and process to advocate for proposal are largely incomplete.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Legislative information needed and process to advocate for proposal are omitted.
Criteria Description
Christian Principles and Nursing Advocacy
5. Excellent
15.5 points
A well-developed discussion of how Christian principles support unbiased advocacy for health care legislation is presented. The discussion demonstrates an ability to act impartially and in the interest of promoting inclusive patient care without regard to gender, sexual orientation, culture, race, religion, or belief.
4. Good
13.8 points
A discussion of how Christian principles support unbiased advocacy for health care legislation is presented. The discussion generally demonstrates how the principles support positive patient outcomes and inclusiveness for all populations. Some detail or information is needed for clarity.
3. Satisfactory
12.25 points
A summary of how Christian principles support unbiased advocacy for health care legislation is presented. Some rationale or information is needed to demonstrate how the principles support positive patient outcomes and inclusiveness for all populations.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
11.63 points
A discussion of how Christian principles support unbiased advocacy for health care legislation is incomplete. It is unclear how the principles support positive patient outcomes and inclusiveness for all populations.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
A discussion of how Christian principles supporting unbiased advocacy for health care legislation is omitted.
Criteria Description
Research
5. Excellent
7.75 points
Research is supportive of the rationale presented. Sources are distinctive. Addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria.
4. Good
6.9 points
Research is timely and relevant, and addresses all of the issues stated in the assignment criteria.
3. Satisfactory
6.12 points
Research is adequate. Sources are standard in relevance, quality of outside sources, and/or timeliness.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
5.81 points
Few outside sources were used to support the assignment. Limited research is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
No outside sources were used to support the assignment.
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use)
5. Excellent
3.1 points
The writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good
2.76 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Satisfactory
2.45 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
2.33 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is employed.
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent
4.65 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good
4.14 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory
3.67 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory
3.49 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory
0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 155 points
Order a similar assignment, and have writers from our team of experts write it for you, guaranteeing you an A
