Tax reform, ethics reform, welfare reform, and a host of other reforms keep politicians spinning. Now they are in the final stages of the holy grail of reforms – healthcare. When government reforms anything the results are greater costs and more complicated processes. These results will be horrifying to the healthcare system. There must be a better way.
We all want affordable healthcare available to every citizen. The current healthcare system stinks and the thought of millions of people uninsured is disgraceful and unacceptable for a nation so blessed. Both the house and senate versions of healthcare reform make me want to cry. I think a philosophical reform should happen first.
The only credential I have to speak to this issue is a long life experiencing the best and worst of the medical world. I read, listen, observe, and think of more effective ways of accomplishing things. Here is my answer to the healthcare mess – eliminate group insurance. Let individuals decide what coverage they want and which companies to buy it from. Insurance would then not be affected by job changes.
It seems the only solution our leaders can think of is in terms of group insurance. There is employer provided, association group plans, Unions, and the dreaded government public option. Group insurance does not have a long history and one has to ask if it is the best idea for today.
The first modern group insurance was formed in 1929. Some teachers in Dallas, TX worked out a plan with Baylor Hospital for medical services. Believe it or not, the depression decade of the 30′s was the start and boom for big insurance companies, including “non-profit” organizations Blue Cross and Blue Shield. Employer provided insurance expanded during WWII when the government froze wages. Companies got around the freeze by providing health benefits. Unions successfully bartered for tax breaks on healthcare and greater insurance benefits in the 50′s and beyond.
The medical world has changed a lot since the depression era. Science has enabled us to live much longer with thousands of new drugs, therapies, and procedures becoming available. The needs and desires of each person are profoundly different. What group plan can meet these demands?
For example, let’s say a company has 10 women 55 years old and 10 women 25. How will this company deal with maternity coverage? It’s very important to the 25 year old and not as valuable to the lady who is 55. If it were an individual plan the person would not be paying for unnecessary coverages and could purchase a tailor made plan. The employers can focus on better employee pay rather than paying for endless negotiations and insurance bureaucracy.
In the depression times African Americans life expectancy was 6 years less than whites. Today it is still 6 years less. How can this be with all the medical advances? Could it be that group insurance favors the majority of people – whites?
Insurance companies would have to compete for each individual or family (the only group that makes sense), just like auto insurance. I imagine that many would specialize in niche markets, like old men who cliff dive and drive race cars. The government’s job would be to regulate the industry and provide backup to the insurance companies in the event of disasters. Require basic insurance for all and if the private charities fail to assist the poor, raise taxes and start paying the premiums.
The current healthcare plans in congress are not about saving lives, but saving careers. It is important for certain politicians to get this thing passed quickly so they can be elected again. Healthcare is too important to be used as a political volleyball. Will you join me in this debate?
Tags: group insurance, Healthcare, insurance companies, new idea
Not sure if I agree with you on the point that “the thought of millions of people uninsured is disgraceful and unacceptable for a nation so blessed.” I think its unacceptable for me to not own a Lexus. Should I push legislation to make the Lexus more affordable, or better yet, make my neighbor pay for it??? Just because we have a productive nation, it doesn’t mean that we should just get “stuff”. How do you think we got to this point? The best solution is to defeat this current bill, allow insurance carriers to cross state lines, and be able to sell to all. More competition=better prices. Its not the holy grail, but its better than what could be coming.
Bill,
with 20+ years of healthcare administrative experience, and as a teacher of high-school government and economics, I reckon I can speak intelligently about this issue. First, having the feds as the largest payor (Medicare & Medicaid) skews the market in an unhealthy manner. With federal money comes federal regulation, much of it idiotic and redundant, adding a heavy burden of expense to the system. Second, by not allowing insurance providers to compete across state lines the market is further constricted, causing prices to go up even more. Third, we have an entire class of government-dependent people who rely upon Medicaid and Medicare for their healthcare. Many of these people are virtually enslaved ideologically, since they do not want to lose their state-sponsored “benefits”. Fourth, the American people have been sold a bill of goods that they have a right to the best health care available, free of cost. This is socialist utopianism at its worst. It is a fantasy that does not exist. Everything has to be worked for. Every good, every service, has a cost, and someone, somewhere, will be paying. Health care is a commodity, a service, not a right. Freedom of speech is a right, healthcare is a service that requires investment in technology, supplies, trained personnel, and facilities. It is not free. For every medicaid recipient who pays nothin, there are 3 insured people who work hard and are forced to pay taxes to fund that medicaid recipient’s healthcare costs.
The solution? Let the market right itself. Eliminate the federal government as a payor. Instead, the feds could require mandatory tax-deductible, portable medical savings accounts for every person. Employers can contribute to these accounts instead of the government programs. This would eliminate the heavy hand of government in this industry, and remove a tempting target for politicians. It would also eliminate the class of government dependents who vote to get “something for nothing” just because a politician makes such promises.
Customers/patients should be responsible for managing their own portable medical savings accounts, their own health care treatments and expenses. This would result, eventually, in healthier lifestyles. Make these accounts useful only for healthcare expenses, but transferrable upon their owners deaths to their heirs.
Eliminate the federal laws that prohibit healthcare providers from negotiating fees with individuals. Allow all insurance carriers to operate across all state lines. Pass solid tort reform that caps compensation for the punitive awards (not the actual costs), and also makes the loser pay all court costs for both sides. These three legal moves would open up the power of the free market in healthcare and eliminate many of the distortions that cause it to be so expensive.
Good post, and thanks for letting me contribute.
Also, about the discrepancies in life expectancy among races: from first hand experience I can say that most of that is due to a failure to access available healthcare resources by certain minorities. They fail to access physicians and clinics until a disease process is in an advanced stage. They do this because they do not trust the healthcare “system”, or because they are unaware of how to manage their health by using the services that are available. Education and outreach help. Also, certain races are more prone to certain medical conditions. And finally, geography and culture play a role; as evidenced by the “stroke belt” in the south, due primarily to dietary habits and a culteral aversion to exercise.