One of the singular promises made by President Obama when elected in 2008 was that “change” was destined to permeate the landscape of America. Certainly those within the discrete world of workers' compensation have witnessed volumes of that “change” blossoming at many points throughout the practice. Several of the most salient varieties that have emerged within the past several years include healthcare reform, alternate dispute resolution, and immigration legislation.

The watchword of the 2012 election cycle has been “Obamacare.” Of course, this references the push at the national level to address the high cost of healthcare in America and the resultant drain on the U.S. economy. Washington's official response—and arguably its most comprehensive effort—has been the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) in December 2009. At more than 2,500 pages and 500,000 words in length, the act is weighty in both actuality and intention, and it is regarded by many as the most dramatic maneuver to address healthcare in the U.S. since the adoption of Medicare and Medicaid in the 1960s.

One could say PPACA has drawn praise and criticism in equal measure. Its complexity has created confusion, frustration, false expectations, and conflicts about the extent of implied coverage and impact. The legislation has already faced numerous legal challenges, including filings principally regarding the “individual mandate,” which requires individuals to either purchase health insurance or else pay a fine to the U. S. Treasury, along with the “employer mandate,” under which employers with more than 50 employees will pay a fine if any full-time employee qualifies for federal healthcare subsidies). The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for an unprecedented two days—March 26 and 27, 2012—meaning that a decision will likely be announced prior to the November elections.