creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Froma Harrop
Froma Harrop
16 Feb 2012
Missiles Aimed at Social Security and Medicare

Missiles are pointed at Social Security and Medicare, the broad-based programs for older Americans. Some are … Read More.

14 Feb 2012
French Model for American Parents

One item in the annals of American exceptionalism is how exceptionally badly behaved American children are. … Read More.

9 Feb 2012
Big Brother Is ‘Sharing'

My, how you've changed, Big Brother. What happened to the sourpuss in "1984," George Orwell's grim … Read More.

The Mandates Are the Message

Share Comment

The Cleveland debate ends, and presto, the MSNBC boys pop up to discuss "who won." Chris Matthews complains of "a lot of back and forth about health care, which I find almost absurd given the fact that we don't have a national health care plan."

That's right, Chris. We don't have national health care in America. That's why the candidates wasted 16 minutes of your precious time arguing about it — time you and Keith Olbermann could have spent throwing out more football metaphors.

Oops, my TV screen went blank.

Let's talk about health care.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were fighting "around the edges" of a health-care plan, Matthews beefed. No, these weren't edges. They were very important details that could make all the difference between a government program that works and one that fails.

Clinton favors mandates requiring everyone to buy health insurance. Obama opposes them. On this matter, Clinton is right.

Obama has a problem with forcing people who don't want insurance to buy it. What will Clinton use as a stick, he asks.

Americans don't like sticks unless they're attached to lollipops. States force drivers to buy auto coverage, however. The penalties may include loss of driver's license and, in some states, jail time and a $5,000 fine. Guess what. Most drivers comply.

Obama insists that "the reason people don't have health insurance isn't because they don't want it, it's because they can't afford it." But if his plan would make insurance affordable — as he says it would — then why can't everyone afford it?

Being liberals, Clinton doesn't want to use the unflattering term "free riders," and Obama pretends they don't exist. But they do. A free rider is someone who can afford a health insurance policy but won't buy any.

Obama wants to give Americans the freedom to not buy insurance but the right to get government-subsidized coverage when they get sick.

The inevitable result is that a lot of healthy people will avoid contributing to the insurance pool. Really. Why should they buy insurance at any price if they can glom onto a government program should disaster strike?

There are 47 million uninsured people in the United States, and 16 percent have a family income above $75,000. Another 15 percent make between $50,000 and $75,000. Some no doubt have pre-existing medical conditions, and no private insurer will sell to them. Others prefer to spend their money on vacations.

Conservatives who pooh-pooh universal coverage say the free riders tend to be healthy and don't use much health care. Not quite true. About 16 percent of the patients who received "free" medical care in 2004 came from families making at least four times the federal poverty level, according to New American Foundation estimates. They racked up $5.8 billion in uncompensated care, which others had to pay for.

Thus, Clinton is somewhat misleading when she says that the Obama plan leaves 15 million people out. Many of the 15 million are free riders who will leave themselves out.

But she is correct that a government plan that lets hearty young people opt out is doomed to collapse. It would make more sense to skip all this reliance on private coverage — the heart of both the Clinton and Obama proposals — and go to a Medicare-style government plan paid for through taxes.

Back in the MSNBC studios, no one's fretting about insurance mandates. Olbermann is observing that for Clinton, "This looks like a bunch of field goals, not touchdowns."

To which Matthews responds: "I think we learned tonight why Americans like high-scoring sports. This was a low scoring game, perhaps like a hockey game."

Click.

To find out more about Froma Harrop, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 THE PROVIDENCE JOURNAL CO.

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.


Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
First why should the well be obligated to take care of the sick. A solution to the insurance problem could be as simple as removing the mandate that treatment can't be turned down. Once a person owes and does not pay, he could be turned down. The burden would be on the irresponsible. It's nearly impossible to collect child support now. We don't need another program. The only solution is to admit we can't afford our current system and change it to something radically different. For instance, take the money spent on advertising and put it on reducing insurance rates. I'm all for socialized medicine myself.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Larry Hooks
Fri Feb 29, 2008 10:39 AM
LIABILITY INSURANCE is required for autos to protect others, but not collision is not. What about all the other "freeloaders"? How about mandates for flood (now subsidized), hurricanes, fire, earthquakes, etc. Why should responsible people keep bailing them out?
Government programs are not the answer. They just increase costs and hurt the middle class. We had to economize to pay health ins when my employer closed until becoming eligible for medicare, which is going broke. I feel sorry for the young people, who have to pay for us and will never have the benefits. We pay extra now so we can have choices. My nephew had to get special permission to choose the hospital for his daughter's open heart surgery and now they cannot contue to go there for follow-up. My relatives in UK have socialised medicine. They often have long waiting times, expecially for specialists, altho the children get quite good care. The poor on medicaid get far more coverage than the average policy.
There is now state and federal coverage for low income families, but thousands are not enrolled. Why????
I don't like mandates, perhaps some standardization in policies of different levels would help.
Comment: #2
Posted by: L Rhodes
Mon Mar 3, 2008 2:39 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Froma Harrop
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 27 Feb 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 20 Feb 2012
Mark Levy
Mark LevyUpdated 18 Feb 2012

9 Dec 2008 Democrats Must Break With Rangel

11 Oct 2007 The Joys of Pick-and-Choose Reagan

20 Dec 2011 Gifts for the Unemployed