Opposing Conservative and Liberal Views: Health Care Issue

Conservative (CON): Obama’s health care proposals are likewise frightening, His plan to funnel those who cannot enroll in employer sponsored plans and many of the uninsured into a government plan similar to the congressional health plan will force commercial insurers to compete against a government plan which will use political considerations ( i.e. subsidized premiums} rather than actuarial considerations to determine premiums. Needless to say, this will create an unfavorable business climate for insurers and their only rational response will be to withdraw from writing health insurance business. Guess what happens then. Government becomes the sole source of health insurance, an event that will predictably be followed by an explosion of unintended consequences. We have the best and most innovative health care system in the world largely because health care providers compete as entrepreneurs in a free market. Once government becomes the single payer, its next step will be to establish control over expenditures within the system. Obviously to do that, government will move to control the health care system. Everything the health care system wants to do will require government approval. New technologies will require approval. Building a new health care facility or expanding an existing facility will require government approval. The government will become the proverbial 800 pound gorilla. Also highly suspect is Obama’s notion that the cost of his health plan will run somewhere between $50 billion to $65 billion a year. So, do the math. There are 45,000,000 uninsured individuals. Using $65 billion to insure 45,000,000 comes to about $1444 per person per year. Considering that some individuals who have commercial health insurance are currently paying monthly premiums in excess of $1,444, its clear that Obama is resorting to an old political ruse i.e. grossly underestimating the costs of his proposal. Before anyone messes with a health care system as massive as the health care system Americans depend on, they need to think through the consequences and the costs to be sure these totally predictable. To do anything else will cause irreparable harm and be bad for America.

Liberal (LIB): The uninsured are not potential customers for whom the commercial insurers compete. It would be irrational for insurers to withdraw from writing health insurance for profitable employer sponsored plans. Many would disagree with your assertions about the quality of the health care system, but let’s not confuse its performance with its accessibility or affordability. What good is it, if it creates economic havoc or ruin to access its splendid services? To continue the present health care situation is worse for America.

CON: McCain wanted to improve access to health care by reforming the private sector. Obama will go for a big government solution. From experience, I know health insurers will withdraw from the market if market conditions are unfavorable. I've seen it happen.

LIB: Unfavorable for what... profits? By offering a tax break for insurance costs, but taxing the value of the insurance benefit, McCain's plan would eventually result in taxing Medicare benefits, like Reagan taxing social security benefits. How do tax breaks and adding health benefits to taxable income reform the private sector and which part of the private sector are you referring to: insurance companies or employee benefit plans? Can you foresee governments (federal, state and local) and employers of persons who work in private schools, railroads, hospitals, trucking companies, manufacturers with union contracts, and other major employers giving up company paid health insurance for their work force? Just where is the insurance market going.

CON: Of course, ABM’s health insurance plans will create conditions where profits will be difficult if not impossible. Since insurers are in business to make a profit, they will bow out of that line of business. That was my point. My concern is that we maintain a health insurance system that relies on private enterprise. My belief is that we will be better served by a private system. You ask where the insurance market is going. What is truly ominous is that the Democrat’s agenda over the last decade or so has been to remove certain populations from the private market. The goal is to eventually collapse the private market. For example, state children’s health insurance plans remove children. Proposals to broaden eligibility for Medicare, for example to include those ages 50 to 64, would have the same effect. Creating government run pools for small businesses remove another population. What you would have left would be a small remnant of the current market. Most likely, this remnant would not be sustainable. That’s when government steps in to rescue us. As for large employers, they might be happy to dump their employees into a government plan. GM, Ford and Chrysler might be ready to do that now.

LIB: Your point is that insurers will bow out of selling employer provided insurance coverage? Everything I’ve heard about Obama’s plan is that the government won’t provide a program where one presently exists. The Democrats ‘agenda’ is to provide coverage where none exists. How is providing insurance coverage removing ‘certain populations’ from the private market when those persons are not being served by the market? I talked to a man today who was elated, because his new job’s health insurance benefit permitted him to cover his wife for $260 per month, replacing coverage for her alone cost them $970 per month. The latter premium is equal to $5.60 per hour of pre-tax income, compared to a cost equivalent of $1.50 per hour in pre-tax wages for her insurance from his new job. I have no idea what it costs his company to provide his coverage, but his employer considers it part of his compensation. It is a cost they willingly bear due to their need to hire and retain skilled employees. The real problem is the high cost of health care as exhibited by palatial hospital edifices, overpaid medical practitioners, excessive drug costs, burdensome administrative requirements, expensive diagnostic equipment, and a host of other reasons. Between greed and government regulations, it’s hard to tell which cause is the greater culprit that renders health care inaccessible.