Tuesday, July 26, 2005
WSJ praises Association Health Plans
[Editorial, "Cheaper Health Insurance," The Wall Street Journal, 25 July 2005.]
Previous posts on Kansas Health (here and here) have highlighted U.S. Representative John Shadegg's (R-Arizona) attempts to foster competition by creating a national health insurance market. His bill is now moving forward, and the editors at The Wall Street Journal - certainly no foes of competitive markets - display their affection for the concept in this recent column:
Republicans haven't been getting much credit on the health policy front, despite their misguided 2003 drug entitlement masquerading as Medicare "reform." That could change soon. Last week the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved a bill that could dramatically reduce the ranks of the uninsured and spur general economic growth -- all without costing a dime to the Treasury.
Right now Americans who aren't lucky enough to get insurance from large employers or poor enough to qualify for Medicaid find themselves at the mercy of the legislators and insurance commissioners of the state in which they happen to live. This can be OK in states that exercise this regulatory function judiciously. But in others, the young and working poor find themselves effectively priced out of the market by special-interest regulations dressed up as consumer protections.
Interstate commerce in health insurance would remove a huge barrier to the efficient allocation of human resources in our economy. Right now untold numbers of Americans fear moving, switching jobs or starting their own businesses for fear of losing their health insurance. That would change if they were able to shop nationwide for policies that would follow them wherever they go.
But the most important issue here is justice. It is simply immoral that millions should be exposed to the possibility of financial ruin because of the all-or-nothing choice offered by the insurance regulations of states like New York and New Jersey.
[Editorial, "Cheaper Health Insurance," The Wall Street Journal, 25 July 2005.]
Previous posts on Kansas Health (here and here) have highlighted U.S. Representative John Shadegg's (R-Arizona) attempts to foster competition by creating a national health insurance market. His bill is now moving forward, and the editors at The Wall Street Journal - certainly no foes of competitive markets - display their affection for the concept in this recent column:
Republicans haven't been getting much credit on the health policy front, despite their misguided 2003 drug entitlement masquerading as Medicare "reform." That could change soon. Last week the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved a bill that could dramatically reduce the ranks of the uninsured and spur general economic growth -- all without costing a dime to the Treasury.
Right now Americans who aren't lucky enough to get insurance from large employers or poor enough to qualify for Medicaid find themselves at the mercy of the legislators and insurance commissioners of the state in which they happen to live. This can be OK in states that exercise this regulatory function judiciously. But in others, the young and working poor find themselves effectively priced out of the market by special-interest regulations dressed up as consumer protections.
Interstate commerce in health insurance would remove a huge barrier to the efficient allocation of human resources in our economy. Right now untold numbers of Americans fear moving, switching jobs or starting their own businesses for fear of losing their health insurance. That would change if they were able to shop nationwide for policies that would follow them wherever they go.
But the most important issue here is justice. It is simply immoral that millions should be exposed to the possibility of financial ruin because of the all-or-nothing choice offered by the insurance regulations of states like New York and New Jersey.
Comments:
Post a Comment
