Health law assignment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Health law assignment - Essay Example nd Affordable Care Act (PPACA)2 by the congress was not to be perceived as an act of the government requiring that all citizens should purchase a health insurance for its own sake, but rather should be perceived from the point of view that it is a law seeking to cover universal risks (). In this respect, any legislation that seeks to cover universals risks of the citizens falls under the powers of the federal government to regulate activities that â€Å"substantially affect† interstate commerce. Thus, the introduction of the collision insurance, under the â€Å"Collision Insurance Requirement and Traffic Safety Act (CIRTSA)†, is a measure that falls under the same category of protecting universal risks. This is because, the introduction of collision insurance is targeted at ensuring that all citizens have their cars covered on the event of an accident, not for the sake of their own cars, but to protect the universal risks that are exposed to citizens when their cars cla sh. This is because; the loss of individuals’ cars during a car clash has the negative effect of causing such individuals to undergo high financial blows, while also affecting the livelihoods of the individuals, through negative consequences such as losing jobs. Therefore, through the introduction of the collision insurance, the universal livelihoods and interests of the people will be protected, since they will be compensated for their losses when their cars clash, thus helping them avoiding the financial blows, as well as avoid losing their jobs. In this respect therefore, the introduction of the â€Å"Collision Insurance Requirement and Traffic Safety Act (CIRTSA)† falls under the mandate of the federal power to regulate activities that â€Å"substantially affect† interstate commerce, because it is meant to protect the universal risks to all citizens, which is within the federal mandate under this clause. Secondly, under the ruling in the case Gonzales v. Raich [2005] 545 U.S. 1, it was provided

Standards of Training, Certification & Watchkeeping Convention Essay

Standards of Training, Certification & Watchkeeping Convention - Essay Example One of the many changes to 1978 convention, in 1995, was the requirement of obtaining a new STCW certificate. This was confusing and to some extent it still is as there were two certificates in circulation. The 1978 certificate and the 1995 certificate. The STCW 1978 certificate was there to certify that a sailor was working aboard a vessel prior to 01 Aug 98' and is yet required to fulfill some requirements. Therefore, a new mariner, after 01 Aug 98' cannot be issued a 1978 STCW certificate. New sailors, joining after the aforementioned date, are required to comply with convention requirements before they are eligible for 1995 certificate. 1978 certificate holders are required to go through a training process to close the gap before they can be issued with a 1995 certificate. The fact which gives rise to confusion is that both these certificates were created on the same date. In the US, after 31 Jan 03', no one can get a 1995 certificate by simply completing the training required for the big leap from 1978 to 1995. Each and every sailor is now required to fully comply with 1995 amendment requirements. As all the 1978 certificate holders could not complete all the formalities, the 31 Jan '03 was actually a relaxation of one year to the original date. Despite this relaxation US sailors were still required to get 1995 certification prior to entering waters of a foreign country. Why do we need standards STCW 1978 sets standards of qualification for seafarers on merchant ships. It was initially drafted in 1978 by conference at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in London. It took six years and finally in 1984 STCW was enforced. In 1995 significant changes were brought about. On an international scale 'STCW 1978' was the first to actually establish and enforce basic requirements for training, certification and watchkeeping for mariners. Prior to this such standards were set by individual governments without any reference to practices in the rest of the world. As expected, the outcome of this chaotic situation was widely varied standards, practices and procedures. STCW lays out minimum standards for training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers and countries adhering to comply are independent in their choice to accept or exceed these standards. STCW also applies to ships of countries which have not yet accepted to comply with STCW standards (non-party States), in case they visit ports of party States. An article of the convention requires all party States to apply the control without any biasing or favor to party or non-party States. This can expose the vessels of non-party States to difficult and unexpected situations. As a result, majority of the states are now party States. Revisions to SWTC 1978 In December 1992 IMO's Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) agreed to a US proposal to review in detail the 1978 Convention in light of the involvement of human element in maritime accidents. Moreover, there also had been nurturing a feeling amongst some delegations that the Convention should be more people, and standards relating to people, orientated. Rather than emphasizing on construction of ships and equipment standards, areas relating to people, training and operational practices require more concentration. This resulted in MSC directing