Weekly Standard article --> Opinion -- Put the Patient in Charge -- Repeal Obamacare, level the playing field, and bend the cost curve (really!)

[Guest guest]

Interesting opinion piece - some will agree and some not.I like his description of how insurance creep occurred to the health insurance area -- we don't expect every little thing to be covered on our car insurance or house insurance.

We don't expect preventive care for our cars (oil changes, etc) to be covered under the auto insurance -- we change the oil because we know it is good for the car and our pocketbook in the long run.It's probably a little too free market for some and not enough for others, but always interesting to see the ideas floating around.

Put the Patient in Charge

Repeal Obamacare, level the playing field, and bend the cost curve (really!).

BY J. Hansen

May 24, 2010, Vol. 15, No. 34

The incentive structure of our present health care system is

fundamentally flawed, and the legislation signed by President Obama

will exacerbate the problem. It will increase what we spend on health

care, or lead to rationing, or both. Perhaps most important, it will

undermine the self-reliance and character of the American people. 

The only prudent response to Obamacare is to repeal it, and then

move on to real reform. Fortunately, a simple, market-based,

incremental, bottom-up approach to reforming our health care system is

possible. Unfortunately, nobody in Congress has yet proposed it.

Someone should. A bill of less than 100 pages would suffice to address

the three big problems: surging cost, uncertainty about maintaining

insurance coverage, and the uninsured.  

Bending the cost curve—for realsnip/snipOf course people often cannot pay for health care they need.

Likewise, people often cannot pay for a new house if the one in which

they live burns down. That is why we have insurance. Health insurance,

however, works in a peculiar way, unlike any other form of insurance.

Instead of protecting us when we face potentially catastrophic costs,

health insurance policies usually cover most or all health care costs.

They do not simply insure against catastrophe, but also pay routine

expenses which we could easily anticipate and budget for. It is as if

we filed a claim on our homeowner’s insurance every time we needed to

paint a room, or even change a light bulb. 

This approach creates huge administrative costs—not just in money

but also in time, the hours and hours consumers and especially

providers spend in dealing with insurance companies. (If you think this

situation is bad now, wait until the government is your insurer!)

Moreover, and perhaps more important, shielding the consumer from the

cost of what he consumes means that people shop less intelligently and

frugally than they could. 

My family of four paid $5,063 in health care costs in 2008. That

includes everything: dental, prescription drugs, yoga classes (for

lower back pain), and our health insurance policy, which was $2,380 for

the year. Our policy has a very high deductible ($10,000), so for the

most part we pay our costs out of pocket. We approach insurance as

insurance—protection against catastrophe—not as an expensive and

bureaucratic middleman whom we hire to pay our bills. This encourages

us to consume carefully. My wife and I try to avoid unnecessary

procedures and visits to the doctor. We shop around and choose our

providers, and they are happy to serve us, since we pay what they ask

and they don’t have to haggle with our insurance company. All four of

us are in good health, and my own quality of life is enhanced by

confronting very little health care-related paperwork. snip/snipHe talks a lot more about other thoughts and ideas -- some of which some will agree and some will disagree.I thought the discussion on using high deductible insurance for catastrophic care was the most interesting.

Locke, MD