Current Flawed Financing System Impairs Affordable Access to Care
The Office of the Actuary of the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services projects that our national health expenditures
(NHE) will be $2.4 trillion this year. This is more than enough to provide
comprehensive health care services for everyone. Because we finance care
through a multitude of private health plans and public programs our health
insurance pools are fragmented, with inconsistent participation in the pools
and inconsistent financial protection provided by the pools.
Tens of millions
of Americans do not qualify for the public programs and yet also do not have
enough funds to pay for the premiums of the private plans. Furthermore, because
of high health care costs, the private insurance industry has had to increase
cost sharing and reduce benefits in order to keep the premiums of their
products competitive. This growing epidemic of underinsurance frequently has
further impaired access for those with insurance simply because the
out-of-pocket expenses often are no longer affordable. Although we have enough
funds, our fragmented system continues to impair access by its failure to
remove financial barriers to care.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
JohnInOhio wrote: "It is foolish to think that all aspects of society are best served by the open market. We have surrendered our prisons and health care systems to for profit organizations. We are currently working harder than most people realize to privatize our law enforcement and military."
Apples and oranges. Law enforcement, military, and prisons are constitutional, health care is not. For decades free market health care delivery worked just fine. When I was a lad of 7 (42 years ago), my mother and father took me to a local doctor, where they paid $5 for the visit, and at the time of the visit. There was no billing, either to my parents or to a third party. He had a nurse who worked for him, who also doubled as a receptionist.
Today's doctor's office is filled with extra billing people, filing people, etc., just to fulfill the insurance requirements for billing for services. 42 years ago, $5 equates to about $20-30, which is about the cost of co-pay. Yet, insurance companies pay hundreds more for that office visit. Therein lies the problem.
It's quite simple, really. Government has mandated too damn much. It has run up the cost of the health insurance. What do I need maternity coverage for? My wife is 50 years old, and I am 49. We aren't going to have a baby any time soon. I also don't have any mental health issues, or substance abuse issues. Neither does my wife. Why do we need Mental Health parity?
The free market would allow consumers (that's us, John) to select the coverage they desire or need, if any. We could bargain with companies to get the best coverage for the best price. Consumer Reports could tell us which insurance companies would do that. Then we, the consumer, could decide which company to buy from, and what coverage we need (cafeteria style ring a bell?), if any. That's the beauty of the free market, it gives us freedom to choose what's best for ourselves and our family. Government cannot do that. They do not have the omnipresence, or omniscience to do so. Mr. Obama has never met me, and has no idea what my family needs. Neither do you John. So, I thank you to mind your own business, keep your hand out of my loved one's pockets, and pay for your own damn insurance.
He continued:
"Just stop thinking about money for a minute and think about what we are doing! Deregulation and opening up every problem to be solved by people seeking profit is not the answer to our most important problems. I would rather take my cancer or other life threatening health issue to a SHAMAN than to someone whose primary interest is personal profit or the survival of a corporation.
We can control a Democratic Republic somewhat through the democratic process. We cannot control a corporation without regulation and then we cannot force it to provide for our needs. And we once had a right to health care via the Public Health Service however bad it was. Now we are told that it is a privilege of those with money."
I'm sorry John, but I digitally signed the agreement to be nice on this site. Otherwise I would answer this balderdash with words not appropriate for polite company. Since I am a man of my word, I'll leave your comments to speak for themselves. Anyone who has ever stood in line at the mercy of a bureaucrat, and compared the service to that provided at the local retail store knows where the better service, with superior product lies. I'll give you a hint: it ain't the bureaucrat that gives me the service...
'nuff said.