Healthcare

The first word that comes to mind after looking at the "Obamacare" bill is unbelievable. Unfortunately, after my initial reaction I realize that there is actually nothing unbelievable about it. At least the democrats are starting to be open about where they really stand, within their legislation that is, I doubt they wanted this to be picked up by the public. Here are some excerpts from an Investor's Business Daily editorial (which I would recommend reading every day at ibdeditorials.com):

"It didn't take long to run into an "uh-oh" moment when reading the House's "health care for all Americans" bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal."

"Under the Orwellian header of "Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage," the "Limitation On New Enrollment" section of the bill clearly states:
"Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law."

"So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers."
The full article can be found here.

Do you still think Obama is being honest and open with the American public? Last month at a town hall he said "“We should be able to find a way to create a uniquely American solution to this problem that controls cost but preserves the innovation that is introduced in part with a free- market system". Someone please explain to me what a "free market system" is because I have apparently been mistaken all these years if the president is to be believed.

I always hear the line that the republicans have nothing better to offer and that is true to some extent. Our supposed leaders don't seem to have one but I do. I'll try to provide just a basic outline and I'll possibly write up the entire plan in full detail at some point.

Although I hate for the government to mandate anything, I have to have them involved when it comes to children's health care because many people are unfit parents in this country. That and you're just not going to get any democratic support without this provision. At birth, a parent or guardian should be required to purchase a health plan for their child. This can be from any private insurer and could be any plan with at least some basic level of coverage. Insurers would gladly take on this risk with no medical underwriting because they will have very good actuarial models on which to base their assumptions on the morbidity of such a group. This takes away the 'what about people with pre-existing problems' argument. If you couldn't tell, I am very familiar with the insurance industry, I'd be happy to explain any of these concepts if you are not.

The insured would be free to switch coverage to another company at any time (that is what a free market is). Many insurers would accept a new customer without underwriting again because their actuarial models could account for the risk. Basically this plan would be like on giant group plan, similar to what you have with your employer. Adverse selection (meaning the risk that people looking for insurance are more likely to do so when they are not in good health) would not be much of a concern either since people would mostly be switching plans due to market concerns like customer service and price.

At age 18, you can drop coverage altogether if you wanted to. Adults should be free to make their own decisions. Just remember that there may not be a plan available to you at the point that you decide to get coverage again without medical underwriting. Also, if you want to maintain your existing coverage you would have the option to convert to an adult plan with no underwriting. This would protect people who do get a disease or other health problem before adulthood. Under this plan, if you were to never let your coverage lapse you would always be guaranteed to have coverage at a price that is consistent with other members of your age and sex.

Another option that insurers would be eager offer is a fully underwritten policy. If you are an adult and you feel you are healthier than the average person you could qualify for better rates, just like individual policies work now. And remember, on the other hand if you are in poorer health your coverage can never be taken away as long as you keep it current.

Another key component of this plan is the Health Savings Account, which is another benefit the democrats would like to end. Throughout your life you should be able to place before tax money into your own account to pay for premiums or any other medical care. If the government really had your best interests at heart, wouldn't these accounts be preserved and even enhanced?

This seems like such an easy solution to me. Perhaps that's why it actually looks profound when compared to anything a politician could come up with. Health "crisis" solved.