A Libertarian Plan for Health Care Reform

0 votes

1-a)Repeal requirements as to what diseases / conditions insurance companies must cover. (a single male doesn't need prenatal coverage and one in his twenties doesn't need prostate cancer coverage) This will allow companies to tailor policies that are better suited and accurately priced for the individual. (or family)

1-b) Remove requirements to cover pre-existing conditions. Insurance is not a Rich Uncle Money Bags, it is for in case s%&t happens. Pre-existing conditions are known in advance by definition and thus not s%&t that happens later. Imagine if government required your auto insurance to cover oil changes, new tires, and routine maintenance. Do you think it might very quickly become ridiculously expensive for coverage not to mention what people have to pay that aren't covered?

2) Repeal tax incentives for business to provide health insurance. The unintended consequence of this is that people can't get insurance for a decent price outside of their employer, and lose their coverage when they change jobs. People need to buy health insurance irrespective of their workplace - just like auto or homeowners policies.

3-a) Use the Interstate Commerce Clause for what it was intended for - preventing states from erecting trade barriers between themselves thus "regulating or "keeping regular" interstate commerce. They do this by prohibiting barriers to purchasing insurance across state lines. Currently I can buy Auto insurance from a company in New Jersey if I live in Louisiana. I can't do the same with health insurance. Being able to shop around, I can buy the best policy that fits my needs without paying for stuff I don't need. Increased competition will drive down prices.

3-b) Allow drugs to be imported from other countries. Stop the protectionist nonsense that only serves to enrich big pharma. This is no longer about health, it is now about profits. That is a BIG problem. So the solution is simple: make the right decision for health. IF there is not then enough money to be made by so many companies in pharma, then some will just have to fold their doors. Too bad. We should never prop up industries or companies for which the market doesn't have a natural demand. That is unsustainable and ridiculously expensive.

4) Create medical savings accounts - allow people to defer money tax free into private savings accounts earning interest to be used for paying medical bills. No taxes at all if they are used for that purpose, and only tax the interest earned if used for another purpose. (savings is always a GOOD thing) Make sure not to restrict usage to the account holder. (the account holder can use the funds to pay for ANYONE's medical bills, their spouse, children, grandchildren, sibling, parent, friend, etc. - as long as it goes for a medical bill, who's bill it is, is not relevant)

5-a) Repeal the legislation mandating HMO's. This is where a huge part of the cost of increase care stems from. An old "government scheme" gone ary.

5-b) Repeal medicare, medicaid and the prescription drug benefit for the same reasons. Medicare started out as a "public option" and has taken over. Doctors routinely have to charge others more to cover the payments that Medicare doesn't make. Everyone should pay for their own care.

6-a) STOP confusing health "care" with health "insurance." The two are NOT one and the same. One is a service or product, the other is how it is paid for. The problem isn't the cost of how it is paid for, the problem is the cost of the original service or product. "Coverage" is irrelevant if the cost is low to begin with. I am sick and tired of hearing people bitch and whine about people who don't have insurance. WHAT ABOUT THOSE OF US THAT DON'T WANT IT????!!!!

6-b) Insurance is itself a HUGE part of the problem. If people had to pay for things out of pocket more often, they could shop around and force prices down. Leave "insurance" for catastrophic life deciding issues and conditions. Long term livable and treatable diseases should most likely not be covered, or should only be covered say for initial diagnosis and the patient shop around for the best treatment afterward.

6-c) Doctors, hospitals, clinics, etc. should be required to post and readily provide the cash price of all goods and services including all taxes and fees in an easy to understand format that allows the consumer to shop around and question what they are getting for their money. Lasik procedures are just such an example that is generally not covered by insurance and that people have to pay out of pocket. Prices have plummeted in this market, and services are competitively offered and priced.

6-d) Dept of Health and Human Services can relegate itself to a mere ratings agency and data aggregator that ranks or displays cost/efficiency/positive reviews on doctors, hospitals, and clinics. Similar to Food Safety ratings at restaurants, but more detailed and more prominently displayed and acknowledged. No need to shut low performers down, the market will take care of that swiftly.

7) TORT REFORM!! Need I say more?

*** WE MUST RESTORE THE PRICE MECHANISM

It has been interfered with by the existence of insurance and other government programs. THAT is why costs are skyrocketing. The price is not being allowed to serve its function as market regulator between supply and demand. Introducing yet another third party payer between the service and goods providers and the actual consumer will only further distort that. The law of supply and demand is as immutable as the law of gravity. And I don't see people successfully thwarting that one too often.

*** HEALTH CARE IS NOT A RIGHT.

It is a service or a product that is provided in the market by people acting in the market.

*** THERE IS NO NATIONAL "HEALTH CARE SYSTEM"

Any more than there is a national "paper clip" or "vacuum cleaner" system. Stop thinking like a socialist.

*** HEALTH CARE IS NOT A MACHINE

You can't just punch a few buttons here, twist a knob there, slide a lever like so, or flip a few switches and make everything run smooth. If you are thinking along those lines, then you are thinking like a communist. Such is the mark of CENTRAL PLANNERS. You can't "centrally plan" an economy. The "economy" is 6.5 billion people simultaneously trying to fulfill their unlimited wants, needs, and desires, with their limited resources. No one person or any group of people, no matter how smart, can "manage" that for even a small subset of 6.5 billion people. Hell, they can't even manage their own lives most likely, much less someone else's.

*** Notice, my solutions do not involve "tinkering" rather they involve efforts to "stop tinkering" and to create an environment where people are free to offer and buy medical goods and services according to their needs and resources without interference by government or any "do gooder" bureaurat. [sic]

Additionally, for the moral argument as to why government CAN NOT provide medical care or coverage see this thread:

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/105656

edit: removed unnecessary rant on trial lawyers.
edit: fixed link to moral arguments thread.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Good post

Good post Chip. Very good points to bring up.

ladies golf clubs

DUDE!

Finally you talk too much and its great.

_____________________

Thanks!

I was expecting something much more profane and incendiary, but I'll take the compliment just the same.

Glad you liked it.

Great post,

Thank you.

Add to it we wouldn't force

Add to it we wouldn't force people off medicare after they've paid into the system, rather no medicare plan for younger workers and drop requirements for paying into it. Use the money we save by reducing overseas commitments to take care of those who have paid into the system.

I understand that it would be politically tough to eliminate

some of those programs.

But the reality is, and we have to make it clear to the public now, that NO ONE has ever "paid into" any government program.

Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc. are all WELFARE payments. They are given by the grace and generosity of Congress. No one, and I mean, no one, has any claim on any funds out of the public treasury, "but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." (Article 1 § 9 clause 7)

FICA taxes are completely separate and independent of the payments. Congress can end payments tomorrow morning and still keep the taxes.

(not that I advocate keeping those taxes, I advocate the ending of both the payments AND the taxes)

I know that is a tough pill for people to swallow, but we must educate them on this. When the people understand that they are not "paying into" a fund or account, they will change their minds quickly on supporting the continuance of the program(s).

The Supreme Court has ruled that ANY insurance scheme as was sold to the people by FDR is unconstitutional. The only way to do them constitutionally is for them to have two separate components, one based on the power to tax, and the other on the power to appropriate money for the general welfare. (of course Congress is really appropriating for the SPECIFIC welfare of a select group in these cases, but that hasn't been challenged in court to my knowledge)

I can foresee a transition like you suggest as being more politically palatable, but the best solution would be to simply end the programs quickly so people can turn to buying in the marketplace sooner and we can get all the kinks out faster.

There is great danger in retaining the vestiges of a failed policy.

1) You allow the policy to continue to cause damage
2) You don't counter the existence of the policy on its merits and thus give it a chance to re-expand
3) You may cause further unintended consequences by continuing the policy
4) It becomes difficult to see the true effects of the policy as it is allowed to continue distorting the market
5) Any solution you propose is hindered and made to look less successful due to the continued distortion and damage caused by the failed policy.

Of course a first step, while you are educating people about the real nature of the programs as a prelude to their being abolished, we should allow ANYONE to opt out, and should not sign up any new people into them. Of course as people leave in droves, there needs to be a means to continue to pay benefits until it becomes politically acceptable to end them. Also, with enough advanced warning of the ending of the most dependent of these programs, most notably Social Security, people will have time to secure other means of living that are not dependent on government.

I also suspect that many state "may" temporarily take over benefit payments to those seniors who are so far advanced in age that returning to the workforce is out of the question, or who have no other means of savings or ability to pay for medical care in the open market. I would think very creative solutions would crop up from service providers in the way of discounts, payment plans, assistance etc. to help these people with their medical bills.

Thanks for your well-considered

suggestions.

Your very welcome

My next step is to write this up as legislation and shop a sponsor for it in the House and Senate. Of course some parts, such as eliminating medicare, medicaid can be designed for a quick transition rather than an immediate elimination to allow for States to design their own safety nets to catch those who rely 100% on these welfare payments.

Nice..

Good ammo for us to use in discussions..

--------
Fossils Rock!

'Cause there's a monster on the loose