Abstract

Political rhetoric is a seemingly inseparable part of life in the United States. However, many of us do not understand the actual impact of politics on us. Substantial research is lacking regarding individual players within this system and the subsequent roles of officials’ behaviors and rhetoric. Undoubtedly, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has yielded significant positive trends in health insurance access nationwide. Yet, many states have displayed varying results for citizens' insurance coverage rates. Various factors contribute to this. Still, many scholars point to Medicaid expansion, access to information regarding the ACA, insurance qualifications, and socioeconomic barriers as factors that have increased insurance access. My study examines how senators from Massachusetts and Mississippi discussed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) from 2009 to 2010 and considers the health implications of their rhetoric. My aim is not to establish a causal relationship between the senator’s ACA rhetoric and subsequent insurance coverage in each state but rather to suggest the possibility of such a relationship. For this analysis, I examine the ACA rhetoric of three Massachusetts senators (Edward (Ted) Kennedy (D), Scott Brown (R), and Paul Kirk (D) and two Mississippi senators (Roger Wicker (R) and Thad Cochran (R). These two states were chosen for their distinction in coverage results and their respective ranks in healthcare overall. To answer this research question, I conducted a content analysis of media sources from 2009-2010 that featured Massachusetts and Mississippi senators discussing the ACA. In addition to the content analysis, I provide information about health insurance rates within these states before and after ACA implementation (2009 and 2015), interpreting rhetoric’s role in legislation and implementation of the ACA on insurance coverage.

How to Cite