Universal Health Coverage: Curtailing Liberty to Treat Symptoms

The last time I was pulled over by a policeman for a traffic violation, the first piece of documentation he asked for was my insurance card. That’s right. Before showing any interest in my driver’s license, car registration, or even a valid ID, he wanted to verify that I was in compliance with my state’s law mandating auto insurance for every driver. I remember thinking, “This is not a cop. This is an enforcer for Allstate.”

Now, we have a variety of “reformers” pushing for similar legislation mandating health insurance coverage. The pretext for this movement is the health care “crisis.” The NYT pitches it as follows:

Requiring people who can afford health insurance to buy it — the same way that car owners must buy auto insurance — appeals to those who believe that mandatory coverage is fairer than asking everyone else, directly or indirectly, to pick up the health care costs of those who choose not to buy it.

Only the NYT could see such a dramatic imposition on individual freedom as somehow “fairer” than allowing consumers full autonomy in a free market.  Even worse, the “Gray Lady” and its “progressive” accomplices are apparently unable to comprehend that such a brazen curtailment of free choice wouldn’t even cure the underlying disease afflicting American health care.

As I have pointed out before, the plight of the fabled uninsured is a symptom. Structuring a cure around that problem would be like treating skin cancer by covering the malignant moles with cosmetics.  It would create the momentary illusion that a cure had been found, while actually allowing the malady to metastasize.

The actual malady plaguing our medical delivery system is, of course, too much government involvement in the health care market. This intervention has created a mares nest of perverse incentives that causes providers, patients, and third-party payers to make choices they would never make in a market undistorted by the heavy hand of government.

Because the disease is too much government, it obviously follows that the cure is less government. Thus, a heavy-handed imperial mandate requiring everyone to buy health insurance would not only constitute an egregious imposition on individual lliberty, it would exacerbate the disease.

viagra
free viagra
buy viagra online
generic viagra
how does viagra work
cheap viagra
buy viagra
buy viagra online inurl
viagra 6 free samples
viagra online
viagra for women
viagra side effects
female viagra
natural viagra
online viagra
cheapest viagra prices
herbal viagra
alternative to viagra
buy generic viagra
purchase viagra online
free viagra without prescription
viagra attorneys
free viagra samples before buying
buy generic viagra cheap
viagra uk
generic viagra online
try viagra for free
generic viagra from india
fda approves viagra
free viagra sample
what is better viagra or levitra
discount generic viagra online
viagra cialis levitra
viagra dosage
viagra cheap
viagra on line
best price for viagra
free sample pack of viagra
viagra generic
viagra without prescription
discount viagra
gay viagra
mail order viagra
viagra inurl
generic viagra online paypal
generic viagra overnight
generic viagra online pharmacy
generic viagra uk
buy cheap viagra online uk
suppliers of viagra
how long does viagra last
viagra sex
generic viagra soft tabs
generic viagra 100mg
buy viagra onli
generic viagra online without prescription
viagra energy drink
cheapest uk supplier viagra
viagra cialis
generic viagra safe
viagra professional
viagra sales
viagra free trial pack
viagra lawyers
over the counter viagra
best price for generic viagra
viagra jokes
buying viagra
viagra samples
viagra sample
cialis
generic cialis
cheapest cialis
buy cialis online
buying generic cialis
cialis for order
what are the side effects of cialis
buy generic cialis
what is the generic name for cialis
cheap cialis
cialis online
buy cialis
cialis side effects
how long does cialis last
cialis forum
cialis lawyer ohio
cialis attorneys
cialis attorney columbus
cialis injury lawyer ohio
cialis injury attorney ohio
cialis injury lawyer columbus
prices cialis
cialis lawyers
viagra cialis levitra
cialis lawyer columbus
online generic cialis
daily cialis
cialis injury attorney columbus
cialis attorney ohio
cialis cost
cialis professional
cialis super active
how does cialis work
what does cialis look like
cialis drug
viagra cialis
cialis to buy new zealand
cialis without prescription
free cialis
cialis soft tabs
discount cialis
cialis generic
generic cialis from india
cheap cialis sale online
cialis daily
cialis reviews
cialis generico
how can i take cialis
cheap cialis si
cialis vs viagra
levitra
generic levitra
levitra attorneys
what is better viagra or levitra
viagra cialis levitra
levitra side effects
buy levitra
levitra online
levitra dangers
how does levitra work
levitra lawyers
what is the difference between levitra and viagra
levitra versus viagra
which works better viagra or levitra
buy levitra and overnight shipping
levitra vs viagra
canidan pharmacies levitra
how long does levitra last
viagra cialis levitra
levitra acheter
comprare levitra
levitra ohne rezept
levitra 20mg
levitra senza ricetta
cheapest generic levitra
levitra compra
cheap levitra
levitra overnight
levitra generika
levitra kaufen

Comments 2

  1. James Lansberry wrote:

    I totally agree. There are some small groups out there trying to show that the government interference in the health care market is the reason for high costs (Medicaid reimburses health care providers a small fraction of what they charge self pay patients) and more government involvement will only make *something* worse. The contention is that administration costs will go down (unlikely) if the government takes over.

    What you’re talking about here, though, is the “conservative” answer to socialized medicine–mandated insurance coverage. Massachusetts passed a law last year requiring just that, and California’s Governator wants to follow suit. Similar legislation has been introduced in several states this year but has thus far thankfully died. There are a few states where the legislatures are still active and may yet pass a similar law.

    Massachusetts is in trouble because they don’t have the money to pay for the subsidies.

    This “conservative” alternative (this ought to concern anyone considering voting for Romney) is being touted as a “private market” alternative. How, we should be asking, is mandating something “private market?”

    Thanks for this blog–I hope it will convince many others. I am no fan of the current messed up health care system–but until the public is willing to wake up and see (the government isn’t going to admit it) that government invention is the root cause of the messed up part it won’t get any better.

    Posted 30 Jun 2007 at 9:50 am
  2. Catron wrote:

    You are indeed correct that Romneycare doesn’t make proper use of the market. I wish Massachusetts had not gone for the whole mandate thing, but it was probably inevitable. As for the “Governator,” he has gone completely off the rails.

    Posted 30 Jun 2007 at 4:41 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *