Published: Sunday, September 13, 2009
Updated: Sunday, September 13, 2009
President Barack Obama was correct in his basic assumption
about health care reform. He said in his Sept. 9 speech to Congress, “Tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to [our]
future — and that is the issue of health care.” There are two main
problems with health care in the United States. The first is spiraling
costs, which many people and companies cannot afford, and the second
issue is the lack of portability. In other words, all those who receive
health insurance from employers will lose that insurance if they change
jobs or lose their jobs.
There are many reasons why
costs have skyrocketed in health care. The first is simple. The quality
of care in America has improved, and it makes sense that costs would
rise, as well. But there are other causes of unaffordable insurance
costs, and they are not as intrinsic as the correlation between costs
and quality. One of the most important reasons for the increasing costs
is that Americans are not able to purchase insurance from other states.
Congress should pass legislation to remove this barrier. This would
allow New Jersey citizens to buy insurance from North Dakota and
someone from North Dakota to buy insurance from Hawaii. The point is
that each state has very limited choices, and when there is limited
supply, prices go up. Conversely, if Americans have all fifty states to
choose from, costs would go down. This one small proposal would cost
the federal government no money, would not expand entitlements and,
most importantly, would lower the cost of health insurance.
Tort reform, or medical
malpractice reform, would also lower the costs of health insurance.
Everyone has heard stories about frivolous lawsuits, which bring in
millions of dollars. While those who successfully sue doctors and
hospitals might be better off financially, the majority of Americans
are left with a higher bill. Quite simply, somebody has to pay for the
lawsuits. Doctors get paid by their patients, and if doctors’ costs go
up, then so do patients’. Congress should pass a bill that restricts
unnecessary lawsuits, and that would cap fees for tort lawyers.
Unfortunately, the current Washington establishment would never pass
such a bill, because tort lawyers are a powerful interest group — the
sort of interest group President Obama promised he would not allow to
control Washington. But it is universally accepted that such a tort
reform bill would decrease costs for individuals.
Lastly, our portability
problem is a symptom of a misguided policy that grants tax exemption to
employers who purchase health insurance for their employees but gives
no exemptions for individuals to purchase insurance on their own. As a
result, the entire apparatus of health care is tied to employers and
not to individuals. This has many unpleasant consequences. It penalizes
people who want to switch careers or jobs. It makes it nearly
impossible to maintain the same insurance while switching jobs. Since
people are not paying for their own insurance, they are not as frugal
as they otherwise might be. How many patients who have employer-based
insurance ask their doctors how much a certain procedure will cost? I
would guess that the number is quite small.
Whenever I inform people
that I am opposed to a government takeover of the insurance market,
they begin to inform me about all the travesties and injustices. I
agree, the system is broken and needs to be fixed. More government,
though, is no fix at all. A health care industry run through government
fiat will be inefficient and will raise costs, according to the
Congressional Budget Office. Instead of increasing the size and scope
of government, I argue for free market reforms that will lower costs
and increase portability.
Noah Glyn is a School of Arts and Sciences sophomore majoring in economics.
http://www.dailytargum.com/opinions/more-government-will-not-fix-broken-health-care-system-1.1875871
