Posted on 09/07/2009 3:28:56 AM PDT by Scanian
The first question we should be asking in the healthcare debate is: Why should anyone think that politicians would do a better job redesigning our healthcare than the free market?
After all, politicians have helped create the problems (healthcare costs increasing at an unsustainable rate and a growing number of uninsured) that politicians now are in a hurry to try to fix. For example:
Tax subsidies for employer-purchased insurance have encouraged the overconsumption of healthcare (because many employers have purchased insurance tantamount to prepaid healthcare), limited employees' choice of insurance plans to whatever the employer offers, and required employees to switch plans (and sometimes lose coverage) when changing jobs. The medical liability system has encouraged healthcare providers to practice defensive medicine (i.e., order procedures and make referrals primarily to avoid liability for malpractice rather than to benefit patients) amounting to an estimated 8-15% of total healthcare expenditures (an estimated $201-$376 billion in 2009). The government has been mismanaging the trillions of dollars held in trust for current and future Medicare beneficiaries. The trust funds will be exhausted in 2017. Medicare fraud costs up to $80 billion a year (15-20% of Medicare spending). Because Medicare and Medicaid don't fully reimburse the costs of physicians and hospitals to provide services, purchasers of private insurance pay a hidden tax of almost $90 billion each year to make up the difference. Benefits that the government mandates insurers cover increase the cost of basic health insurance by 20-50%.
Now that politicians are putting their minds to "comprehensive" reform, it's fair to ask whether proposed reforms will improve healthcare. For example:
Will the Democrats' plan reduce the rate at which healthcare costs increase? No, costs will increase at a faster rate, according to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Elmendorf. After the federal government spends $1 trillion-plus on reforms, will the amount it has to spend on healthcare be reduced? No, the CBO has estimated that government spending on healthcare will continue to grow each year (at a greater than 8% rate). At least the Democrats' plan won't increase the budget deficit, will it? Despite $583 billion in tax increases and $219 billion in Medicare and Medicaid cuts, the CBO has estimated that the plan will increase the federal budget deficit by $239 billion over the next 10 years and will "probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits" during the following decade. Will everyone be insured? No, the CBO estimates that the House Democrats' plan will leave 17 million uninsured. It estimates that the Senate Democrats' version will leave 34 million uninsured. Will defensive medicine costs be reduced? No, the Democrats haven't even tackled that issue. Oh, and a pesky little detail: who will care for the millions of newly insured?
Despite the vital importance of healthcare, individuals have been a non-factor in making financial decisions about it. Most individuals are covered by insurance purchased by their employer. Others receive healthcare provided by the government, which will spend $1.2 trillion on healthcare (47.5% of all healthcare expenditures) in 2009. The percentage of healthcare expenditures that the individual pays out-of-pocket has dropped from 40% to 14% since 1970.
Some people argue that we shouldn't even talk about market-based reforms for healthcare because consumers can't make the complicated healthcare decisions required for the free market to work.
However, consumers who've had to pay for healthcare out of their own pocket have forced healthcare providers to become innovative and price conscious to compete for business. For example, the cost of cosmetic surgery has been increasing at about half the rate for goods in general even though the number of procedures performed has increased almost 600% and there have been enormous technological advancements. The price for LASIK vision correction surgery has actually fallen.
That’s the wrong question. The question should be why is Congress attempting to create health care legislation despite Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution not expressly granting Congress the power to regulate health care?
I’d be happy if they just undid the damage Ted Kennedy caused with his 1973 Act that created the HMOs.
The United State Congress has produced multiple disastrous policies and programs over recent years while utterly failing to address obvious and serious issues (e.g., illegal alien peasants in America, and their monstrous drain on the unskilled job market and on our very generous social services programs).
Why would anyone in their right mind want to allow the United States Congress with its abysmal track record to design and control anything as personal and as serious as individual health care?
According to O!Bummer inner city supporters in Kansas City, we are just supposed to get over our aversion to Medicare and big govt. programs since medicare is the best thing to come down the pike since social security.
I was thinking the other day that having a bunch of politicians redesign the health care system is kind of like having a group of chefs telling engineers how to build bridges.
Sure...they’re both broke but Medicare is a little less broke.
In truth, liberal(progressive)despotic politicians and their constiuents could care less whether you die or not. If you live, they want to control your thought and your work output. If you die, there's one less voice of dissention in the mix; you are easily replaced by a third world immigrant.
Control gives them POWER, power gives them satisfaction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.