Why Should We Want Politicians To Redesign Our Healthcare? We shouldn’t!

          David Gibberman writing for the American Thinker would choose the free-market to solve the high cost of medical insurance. He criticizes the opposition position to the free-market solution. Opponents say that medical insurance is so complicated that consumers are not qualified to make informed decisions.

          Gibberman points out that cosmetic surgery that is not covered by insurance is an area were the consumer makes choices based upon price and practitioner. The cost for a cosmetic procedure has increased, but at a much reduced rate as compared to procedures covered by insurance. Further more the number of cosmetic procedures has increased at a greater rate with even greater advances in new procedures. LASIK vision correction surgery is less expensive than it used to be, according to Gibberman.

          Devon M. Herrick a Senior Fellow at The National Center for Policy Analysis reports that insurance has the effect of reducing quality because when doctors do not have to compete on price they do not have to compete on quality. When HMO’s and workers’ compensation carriers decide what doctor will treat the patient, the patient is powerless to decide which medical provider is best.  In an interview on healthcare a cardiologist remarked that the only person who asked the price of a procedure is the one who is paying for it.

          We know the free-market system works. It is alive and well in retail walk-in clinic where the patient pays for the service. The clinic posts its prices and minimizes waiting times. These clinics have already employed methods such as electronically stored records, and ordering prescriptions online, also according to Herrick “the quality of care is often higher because the technologies used encourage best practices, improve care coordination, reduce errors and prevent adverse drug interactions.”

          Government is responsible for the current dilemma. State bureaucrats are in charge of approving insurance contracts. They limit the number of insurance companies who are willing to participate. They limit the profit that participating insurance companies are entitled to earn, and they mandate coverage for obesity, HIV, AIDS, abortions, drug addition, and sex change operations. As a result of this liberal mentality the premium rate reflects the cost for treating these illnesses. In a free market, coverage for those conditions could be rated separately, and consumers would be able to choose a policy that covers the conditions they expect to need. Since those conditions are avoidable or unnecessary, those who are at risk should either purchase insurance protection,  or be personally responsible for paying for the treatment. It may be politically incorrect, but it is fair, and does not redistribute wealth from those who live a healthy lifestyle to those who choose a high risk lifestyle.