Health Care Reform Solution
I would
like to offer my suggestions on how we can best resolve the health care crisis
in our country.
There are
two basic problems to health care: the cost and the availability.
The best way to reduce costs
without compromising the quality of coverage and to maximize the availability
of coverage without government insurance is the use of group coverage in place
of individual coverage.
I propose the creation at every
insurance company of virtual groups, based on occupations, as reported on one’s
annual income taxes. These virtual
groups would include all occupations including typically self-employed ones as
entrepreneur, home business, writer, inventor, small business owner, homemaker,
and sales. Unique occupations can be
grouped with the closest similar group by mutual agreement with the insurance
companies. So there would no longer be
‘individual’ medical insurance policies, unless, of course, say, a wealthy
person wanted to create a unique policy with customized options.
COBRA would continue indefinitely,
but an unemployed person would be able to switch to a lower costing plan at any
insurance company for that group. I
worked most of my career in the meat business with an excellent union insurance
plan. If I found that COBRA costs to
continue this coverage was prohibitive, I could change to other plans at the
same or different insurance companies for people in the meat industry.
Health plans have long been a part
of a company’s employee benefits, and this should continue. For two reasons. As a nation, we want to encourage people to
work. And, secondly, it keeps employers
informed of the true cost of living and helps to insure that working people
have livable wages.
Employers need to be encouraged
(i.e. need incentives) to provide health insurance, and this is best done
through tax breaks. Our society benefits
as a whole when all of it has medical insurance, so the tax breaks would be
cost effective. Perhaps a dollar for
dollar tax reduction for all employer contributions or even slightly higher to
cover the actual costs of implementing and administering the plans.
Why Not a Government
Alternative Plan?
It has been proposed that the
government offer an alternative plan to compete with private plans. The problem with this is that the government
does not have to work with true costs and true income. The government has long refused to work
within a budget. So any prices it would
offer for an insurance plan would be arbitrary and not true competition.
Why Not a Single
Payer Option?
This is not good for the same
reason that our country abolished monopolies a hundred years ago. It’s competition that spurs efficiency and
innovation. A government program is the
least efficient way of doing anything.
Creating a new right of universal health insurance creates also huge disincentives
for the work force. We want as a nation
to encourage our people to find meaningful work, and tying health insurance to
that might be the best way to do that.
Thank you.
Larry Craig
