Public Health Finance and Economics

The Anticipated Financial Impact of Mask-wearing Policy

The public health policy proposed was to prevent the spread of diseases by wearing face masks in public places. The policy on mask-wearing intends to prevent the spread of infectious diseases, which will help people and the government. However, the implementation of the policy will result in some financial impact on the government, the organizations involved, and the people. Discussing the anticipated financial impacts of implementing the mask-wearing policy is important in planning and budgeting. Implementation of the policy requires money, which directly affects the government and the citizens.

One of the financial impacts is that the national debt may increase, and funds available for other programs may decrease. First, the government will require funds to give facemasks to people. Implementation of the policy requires mass education on face masks, requiring funds to facilitate the teaching programs. Organizations such as the CDC will also require funds to carry out their activities. Thus to fully implement the policy, the government may be forced to borrow extra money, which will increase the national debt (Chernew, 2010). The government may also use the money meant for other projects and programs to implement the policy, which leaves the projects hanging. Implementation of the policy might also lead to high taxation for the government to get money to fund the policy.

The other impact is that people will spend more on healthcare, such as buying face masks or paying for insurance. People spending more on facemasks and insurance will reduce their income and spending on other things, such as food (Frick & Ma, 2009). The policy may also increase the money paid for health insurance that some people may not pay. Bills in medical hospitals are likely to increase due to the increased cost of health (Mays et al., 2006). However, the positive financial impact of the facemask policy is that it will reduce the cost of treatment since the number of people infected with airborne and contact diseases will reduce.

The Anticipated Financial Impact of the Public Health Laws

Some of the laws selected include granting the US Secretary of Health and Human Services the right to take measures that enable the prevention, entry, and spread of communicable diseases across various states and from foreign countries. The law also mandated the Centre for Disease Control (CDC) to identify and detect any incidence of a communicable disease arriving at the US borders and to detain, if possible, examine extensively to ascertain their status regarding the same (Wing et al., 2007). Quarantine orders are allowed by the law, together with restrictions on movement to prevent the spread of diseases. These laws come with various financial impacts on the government and the people.

Money is required for the various departments and organizations to implement the laws. CDC requires enough funds to detect disease incidences, which might be costly. Security agencies imposing restrictions and quarantine might also require extra money. The government may, therefore, be forced to borrow more funds or use funds meant for other programs (Kinner & Pellegrini, 2009). Restricting movement may lead to a reduction in income levels and the flow of goods and services. Some people may become poor or unable to pay their bills due to restrictions on movement (Mays et al., 2006). However, the government may collect some funds from the heavy fines on people who break the laws. The cost of treating a lot of people may also be reduced when the spread of the disease is controlled.

Funding Sources for the government in implementing mask-wearing policy

The government requires money to implement the mask-wearing policy. The government may decide to borrow money from international organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Debts will help the government fund the implementation of the policy, and therefore the national debt increases (Mays et al., 2006). The other source is taxation. The government may decide to increase the tax paid by people to get money for the implementation of the policy. Taxes may be either regulatory or general taxes which raise revenue for government programs and projects. Apart from debts and taxes, fines can also be used to fund the government to implement the policy (Smith et al., 2017). Lawbreakers and offenders are required to pay fines in court when found guilty. The fines can be taken and used to finance the implementation of the policy. The government can take funds from other projects and programs to implement the policy of wearing masks. Government earnings from its businesses can also fund the policies.

Based on the recent budget, more priority has been placed on the healthcare sector. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the loss of a lot of life. Therefore, more priority was placed on preventing the spread of the disease and helping people deal with the pandemic. Health insurance was a priority in the budget. Based on these priorities, there is more likelihood of receiving funding for the facemask policy. The policy of facemasks is essential in preventing the spread of COVID-19, making it a top priority in budgeting. Hospitals, public offices, and people should be provided with masks. Therefore, the government should allocate enough money to purchase masks and fund the implementation of other policies that prevent the spread of the virus.

References

Chernew, M. (2010). Health care spending growth: can we avoid fiscal Armageddon?. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing, 47(4), 285-295. https://doi.org/10.5034/inquiryjrnl_47.04.285

De Lemos, J. A., McGuire, D. K., & Drazner, M. H. (2003). B-type natriuretic peptide in cardiovascular disease. The Lancet, 362(9380), 316-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13976-1

Frick, K. D., & Ma, S. (2009). Overcoming challenges for the economic evaluation of investments in children’s health. Academic pediatrics, 9(3), 136-137. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2009.02.001

Kinner, K., & Pellegrini, C. (2009). Expenditures for public health: assessing historical and prospective trends. American journal of public health, 99(10), 1780-1791. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2008.142422

Mays, G. P., McHugh, M. C., Shim, K., Perry, N., Lenaway, D., Halverson, P. K., & Moonesinghe, R. (2006). Institutional and economic determinants of public health system performance. American journal of public health, 96(3), 523-531. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2005.064253

Smith, T. A., Minyard, K. J., Parker, C. A., Van Valkenburg, R. F., & Shoemaker, J. A. (2007). From theory to practice: what drives the core business of public health?. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 13(2), 169-172. journals.lww.com/jphmp/fulltext/2007/03000/from_theory_to_practice__what_drives_the_core.13.aspx

Wing, K. R., Mariner, W. K., Annas, G. J., & Strouse, D. S. (2007). Public health law. New York: LexisNexis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1646235/pdf/amjph00280-0005.pdf

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Question