The “left” favors it, and the “right” opposes it. The “it” is a Public Option for health insurance. I have written that I am not in favor of a Public Option. To be more specific, I am not in favor of a Public Option that does not fairly compete.
Competition is good. A Public Option is good if the rules apply to all who are competing for the health insurance business. This includes the government. If the government-run Public Option guarantees a “level playing field” then I will change my mind and be supportive of a government-run Public Option.
As of right now, here are a few of my concerns – in the form of questions:
- Does the Federal Government have to comply with State law and coverage mandates --as the insurance industry does for its insured plans?
- Does the Federal Government need individual State approval to write a national or regional plan -- as the insurance industry does for its insured plans?
- Does the Federal Government need to have Statutory Reserve Requirements -- as the insurance industry does for its insured plans?
- Will the Federal Government need to stop dictating pricing to providers (hospitals and physicians) and begin negotiating with providers -- as the insurance industry does presently?
- Do the health insurance rates charged by the Federal Government need to be sufficient to cover their cost of doing business -- as most private businesses must do to stay in business?
These are not complicated questions. However, if the answer to these questions is “No,” then the Public Option is a Trojan Horse for a Single Payer System – and I am not in favor of a Single Payer System either.
- Mark Alder, President, Herbruck Alder - malder@herbruckalder.com - www.herbruckalder.com
No comments:
Post a Comment