05-23-2018 10:30:41 AM -0700
05-18-2018 12:27:15 PM -0700
05-17-2018 08:38:50 AM -0700
05-11-2018 07:34:04 AM -0700
05-09-2018 10:17:16 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

America Doesn't Need a Health Insurance 'Czar'

Furthermore, Fox News reports that the planned system of mandatory insurance would amount to a massive transfer of wealth from the young to the old. Most young healthy people would do best with a low-cost catastrophic-only health insurance plan to cover major emergencies, and a health savings account to cover small routine expenses. But under ObamaCare, they would be forced to pay a disproportionate share of others' medical expenses:

"If you charge people a fair price, then a 50-to-60-year-old should pay about six times as much as a 20-year-old," said John Goodman, president of the National Center for Policy Analysis. But he noted that the Senate bill says older people can be charged only three times as much; the House bill says they can be charged two times as much. "So we're going to penalize low-income young people in order to lower the premiums for older wealthier people."

Young adults who are healthy would be the most unjustly affected by mandatory insurance. They consume the fewest medical resources. Under mandatory insurance, they would most heavily subsidize the costs of the older, more-frequently-ill patients.

Mandatory insurance thus robs them of money they could use for their own goals, such as saving to buy a first house or to start a business or a family. In other words, the insurance czar would force them to sacrifice their lives and futures for the sake of the collective.

When an insurance czar requires everyone to purchase health insurance, then sets the prices and benefits independent of a free market, it turns insurance from a system of voluntarily shared risk into a thinly disguised form of government welfare.

Trying to solve the problem of the uninsured by forcing everyone to purchase government-administered insurance would be like trying to solve the problem of homelessness by forcing everyone to buy a unit in a government-run housing project.

Instead of yet another presidential czar to make our insurance purchasing decisions for us, we need genuine free-market reforms.

Patients should be allowed to purchase insurance across state lines and use health savings accounts for routine expenses. Insurers should be allowed to sell inexpensive, catastrophic-only policies to cover rare but expensive events. States should repeal laws that force insurers to offer (and patients to purchase) unwanted mandatory benefits such as in vitro fertilization coverage.

Such reforms could reduce insurance costs over 50% -- making insurance available to millions who cannot currently afford it, while respecting our freedoms.

Americans are not serfs in need of a czar. If we value our health and our freedom, we should reject both the idea of mandatory insurance and a health insurance "czar."