Committing HarryCare<6>
None of this is necessary to address our real health care problems. Only about 12 million Americans arguably can't afford health insurance.
We can just provide them with some government assistance to help them buy it, at little additional cost. We already spend around $400 billion
on Medicaid each year, with that slated to soar in future years. Give each state the authority to redesign its Medicaid program from the
ground up to provide a true safety net for the poor. Each state can include in that an uninsurable risk pool where those uninsured who become
too sick to get private insurance can get guaranteed coverage, paying what they can given their resources, with the government paying the
rest. Since few people actually become uninsurable, this would provide a complete safety net at little in added cost.
We can actually reduce costs by expanding rather than restricting Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), where consumers are covered by catastrophic
insurance with a high deductible, which costs far less than traditional low deductible coverage. The difference is saved in the HSA to pay
for expenses below the deductible, providing market incentives for patients to avoid overly expensive or unnecessary medical care, as they
can keep what they don't spend. With patients concerned about costs, doctors, hospitals and other health providers would have new incentives
to compete to reduce costs. Common sense solutions like allowing interstate sales of health insurance and tort reform would also reduce
health costs.
No rationing, no government takeover, no trillion dollar programs are necessary to address these problems. Quite the opposite. That reveals
that the health care debate is really about government and political power, not health care. Sucker.