Naysayers Seem to Fear the Free Market

I recently found an article through Twitter about how President Donald Trump is working on policies to open up some free market health care in a couple of ways. This is no surprise because he signed an executive order a few months ago (when Congress failed abysmally in getting a repeal to Obamacare passed).

This executive order paved the way for a couple of free market reforms with the potential to provide some freedom of choice for U.S. citizens regarding health insurance.

They are:

Extend the legally allowable duration that short-term (in-between) insurance plans can be effective from three months to 12  months, and are not as comprehensive in terms of benefits as the Obamacare policies.

Allow association health plans (AHPs) in which business or trade groups could band together and offer insurance with a variety of options that did not necessarily include the mandated benefits that are part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

This is good news for those of us who value the freedom of choice in both the health insurance we buy (or choose not to buy) and the doctors and facilities that we want to treat us.

It’s bad news for the government control freaks who, like Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber asserted, think that the average American citizen is too stupid to make their own health care decisions. Some of these people think we all need to be led by the hand and told what is good for us by the government.

In a MedPage Today article dated February 20, 2018, the newly appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar, JD pointed out that the upcoming loosening of a few Obamacare regulations was “one step in the direction of providing Americans with health insurance options that are both more affordable and more suitable for individual and family circumstances.”

The one-size-fits-all approach to health insurance promoted by President Barack Obama’s administration may be slowly, but hopefully, sinking into the sunset, despite the unwillingness of Congress to do anything about Obamacare, except to keep it intact.

Of course the usual suspects CANNOT STAND this sweet breath of freedom for anyone who objects to all the demands of Obamacare.

The MedPage Today article quotes Chris Hansen, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network as saying the following in a press release:

“Allowing the indefinite renewability of short-term catastrophic plans — together with the recently released association health plan rule — threatens to split the individual insurance market. Young and healthy people could be tempted to purchase these low premium plans with few benefits while older and sicker people, like cancer patients, seeking more comprehensive health coverage could potentially be left struggling with rising premiums because of the market divide.”

Actually INSURANCE was never intended for people to get BECAUSE they are seriously ill. Insurance was intended as protection in case someone did get seriously ill or injured.

Why should young healthy people, who may be new in the job market and struggling to make a living on their own, be forced to fork out exorbitant premiums to get the standard care they need so they can pay for the coverage of older, sicker people? This Hansen guy needs to get a clue, that premiums have been skyrocketing for everyone because of this!

People who find themselves in a situation in which they need more than standard medical attention would probably benefit greatly by having an opportunity to belong to a Direct Primary Care practice (which is not coverage, but the provision of actual care), paying VERY reasonable monthly membership fees to manage their conditions in an affordable and personalized environment. Then the community around them could find a way to help them financially to get the care they need if they need some type of catastrophic care. Let’s not forget that care has become progressively more expensive because of government interference and the support of “health care” system monopolies that drive up the cost of this “care.”

I have no problem with paying into a safety net for those who cannot afford the catastrophic care they need, although I prefer that it would be done in a more local and personalized manner. I just don’t think it should be done in a way that drags everyone into a one-size-fits-all insurance trap that does not allow the rest of society¬† to make their own choices.

It’s NOT the American way!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *