Health Care

A recent letter in the September 19th edition of The Brick Times makes some cogent points about an issue on the minds of Americans these days- health insurance. The letter is authored by John J. O'Rourke of Brick. The subject matter is rich and I'll therefore devote multiple entries to it. Quoting from the third paragraph:

Since about 80 percent of Americans are satisfied with their health benefits, Congress could consider individually other areas that will improve the medical industry such as:

When 80% of the population is satisfied with anything, instituting changes which upsets that vast majority in order to make reforms affecting the remaining 20% is ill-advised on many levels and ultimately politically dangerous for those pushing the idea. For about four-fifths of the population the system works satisfactorily. Not perfectly, but most Americans receive better health care than citizens of other nations.

So what about the remaining 20%? There are clearly options that could make health insurance more affordable. Let's look at the next part of the letter:

Allowing the interstate purchase of health insurance which would create competition, more choices and lower cost; Permitting patients to shop around (which) would effectively eliminate expensive state mandates; Allowing insurance companies to sell catastrophic health insurance, especially to 18-to 35-year-olds;

Competition brings customers better service, more attractive options and lowers costs. So why do we shoot ourselves in the foot by artificially restricting competition? At the root of this problem lies a misplaced and somewhat blind faith in the power of government to effect beneficial changes through regulation. It would be wiser to let the market work for consumers. More from John J. O'Rourke:

Using the state of Texas as a model for instituting tort reform so that doctors will not have to practice defensive medicine. This would lower the cost of malpractice insurance for physicians and would enable them to make reductions in their fee schedules;

Meaningful tort reform would go far to lower the high cost of medical care. It's not simply the costliness of added tests and procedures as undesireable as they are. Some procedures, like imaging for example, expose patients to unneeded radiation. When doctors feel they are constantly second guessed and that justice is less important than the deep pockets of hospitals and insurance companies, medical treatment is distorted and doctor/patient relationships suffer. Most legislative bodies are dominated by attorneys. Tort reform is a problem in need of resolution.

Other points raised in the letter will be analyzed in a subsequent entry.