creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell
14 Feb 2012
The 'Progressive' Legacy

Although Barack Obama is the first black President of the United States, he is by no means unique, except for … Read More.

14 Feb 2012
The Progressive Legacy: Part II

"Often wrong but never in doubt" is a phrase that summarizes much of what was done by Presidents … Read More.

14 Feb 2012
The Progressive Legacy: Part III

The same presumptions of superior wisdom and virtue behind the interventionism of Progressive Presidents … Read More.

Alice in Health Care: Part III

Share Comment

With all the controversies, charges, counter-charges and buzzwords swirling around the issue of medical care in the United States, there is a lot to be said for going back to square one and asking just what is the fundamental problem.

The quality of the medical care itself is not the problem. Few— if any— countries can match American medical training, medical technology or the development of life-saving pharmaceutical drugs in the United States. Most countries with government-controlled medical care cannot come close to matching how fast an American can get medical treatment, particularly from specialists.

Political hype is no reason to throw all that away. In fact, policies based on political hype over the years are what have gotten us into what is most wrong with medical care today— namely, the way it is paid for.

Insurance companies or the government pay directly for most of the costs of most medical treatment in the United States. That is virtually a guarantee that more people will demand more medical treatment than they would if they were paying directly out of their own pockets, instead of paying indirectly in premiums and taxes.

Since people who staff either insurance company bureaucracies or government bureaucracies have to be paid, this is not bringing down the cost of medical care, but adding to it.

What also adds to the costs are politicians at both state and federal levels who mandate additional benefits to be paid for by insurance companies, thereby driving up the cost of insurance.

If medical insurance simply covered risks— which is what insurance is all about— that would be far less expensive than covering completely predictable things like annual checkups. Far more people could afford medical insurance, thereby reducing the ranks of the uninsured.

But all the political incentives are for politicians to create mandates forcing insurance companies to cover an ever increasing range of treatments, and thereby forcing those who buy insurance to pay ever higher premiums to cover the costs of these mandates.

That way, politicians can play Santa Claus and make insurance companies play Scrooge.

It is great political theater. Politicians who are pushing for a government-controlled medical care system say that it will "keep insurance companies honest." The very idea of politicians keeping other people honest ought to tell us what a farce this is. But if we keep buying it, they will keep selling it.

One of the ways of reducing the costs of medical insurance would be to pass federal legislation putting an end to state regulation of insurance companies. That would instantly eliminate thousands of state mandates, which force insurance to cover everything from wigs to marriage counseling, depending on which special interests are influential in which states.

It would also promote nationwide competition among insurance companies— and competition keeps prices down better than politicians will. Moreover, competition can bring down the costs behind the prices, in part by forcing less efficient insurance companies out of business.

Another very real and very big cost behind the high prices for medical treatment are the many forms of expensive "defensive medicine" that doctors and hospitals have to practice, in order to avoid being sued by unscrupulous lawyers. Expensive and unnecessary tests and treatments cost even more than the multimillion dollar awards that clever lawyers can get from gullible juries.

Tightening up the laws, so that junk science does not prevail in courts, would create some real savings in medical costs. But, since plaintiff's lawyers are big financial contributors to the Democratic Party, that is unlikely to happen during this administration.

Finally, there are costs that are high because people want medical care in more comfortable surroundings— a private room rather than a bed in a ward, for example— and are willing to pay for that. This is more common among Americans.

There is no reason for others to interfere with that, just because of a mindless mantra of "bringing down the cost of medical care" or class warfare rhetoric about "Cadillac health plans."

To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
Thank you Mr Sowell for always having great perspective on this. I have written about this myself on my blog at http://talkofliberty.com regarding how we pay for health care. One smart way to fix Medicare would be to take a page out of the idea of School Vouchers. Instead of giving someone medicare why not give them a voucher for the amount of medicare.

Instead of giving someone the 15k worth of coverage medicare gives we should give them a voucher for that amount put into a Health Savings account. They then would be able to buy into a 10,000 dollar deductible plan that may only cost 400 per month. This would cover 100% of the expenses after the deductible is met. The total cost will still be $15,000 but this is where the interesting part begins. If that person rations their own care and lives a healthy lifestyle they may only use $1,000 of that years voucher plus the $4,800 leaving a balance of $9,200 that went unspent.

Most voucher programs make the mistake of being a use it or lose it mentality so in this case at the end of the year any money saved by the recipient would go to them as earned income thus creating the incentive to live a healthy lifestyle. This would create downward pressure among the medical industry to innovate and become more cost effective thus lowering the cost of health care. It would also give a much needed raise to our elderly, and most importantly would halt medical inflation in its tracks and "bend the cost curve" down.

The ultimate goal of this should not be a never ending voucher program, but eventually it will create the path away from our current unsustainable trajectory. In the end I know my numbers may not be 100% accurate, but this is conceptually how are country needs to move forward on fixing health care.

Comment: #1
Posted by: Matt
Wed Mar 3, 2010 4:36 PM
Mr. Sowell, I read your first article on health care today in the Omaha World-Herald (Alice in Wonderland). EXCELLENT article. I have been in health care for 40 years and totally agree with what you are saying. Thank you for the logical look at the real issues with health care in the USA. Lynn Rathjen
Comment: #2
Posted by: Lynn Rathjen
Fri Mar 5, 2010 7:10 AM
I have never heard a more laughable comment than yours in the Part III column above (also reprinted in my local paper last weekend):
"One of the ways of reducing the costs of medical insurance would be to pass federal legislation putting an end to state regulation of insurance companies. That would instantly eliminate thousands of state mandates, which force insurance to cover everything from wigs to marriage counseling, depending on which special interests are influential in which states"
These ideas went out the window with Reaganomics - left to themselves, the insurance companies would continue to collude and with the overiding pressure of the profit motive to satisfy investors, ever more Americans would lose any sort of access to medical care. You really are a dinosaur.
Steve McDonald, PhD
Comment: #3
Posted by: Steve McDonald
Mon Mar 8, 2010 6:02 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
Thomas Sowell
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
Author’s Podcast
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 27 Feb 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 20 Feb 2012
Mark Levy
Mark LevyUpdated 18 Feb 2012

24 Feb 2009 "Not One of Us"

23 Jan 2007 The "Greed" Fallacy

9 Jun 2009 Varieties of Nothing