Health care contiinued

Hi

Today I will address some additional thoughts concerning the pending legislation about government health care reform. It seems to me that we have conceded the fact that our free market system has caved under to a government plan. We can only limit the government plan to one which regulates health care, but does not dictate the care. That must be between doctor and patient. If they choose to include family it is their option,and it never should be mandated, especially by the government (bureaucrats). Having said that I think that the system would be best served by some change.

Previous blogs have spelled out some reforms, but these should be added.

A cap or some other control on tort legislation must be written into the law. It must NOT be a government supervised cap but one which takes into account the free market, the actual harm done to the patient, the degree of culpability on the part of the medical provider. One way this can be done is by use of a similar panel or board as we now have in most states to govern Workers Compensation (WC). WC panels are legally empowered to give damages in lieu of a negligence tort suit. Both parties present their evidence and the board makes a decision based on the evidence. The reason it works is that the board members are not influenced by the fact that an insurer is actually paying most claims. The emotional effect of a jury system is eliminated. Medical providers have an option, provide WC insurance coverage offered by a licensed entity, or pay out of pocket. The vast majority (if not all) would opt for the insurance option. This would offer an incentive for providers to be effective and do good work or else they face an exorbitant cost for insurance. The providers who do better work will find that the premiums they pay decreases. The providers who do poorly will either subsidize the others or improve, it is a matter of economics and business sense.

It is repetitive but the other aspect of health care reform include (but not limited to) all federal employees from the president to the park ranger must be covered by the same plan as the taxpayers. It is my understanding that Sen T Kennedy, D-MA, has written an amendment that would exclude congress from the new changes when made. Real leadership and a lot of care for the poor and the people of the country.

Private insurers must be allowed to cross state lines and write insurance for out of state residents. Yesterday on Fox Cable News there was a spokesman (lobbyist) for the AARP, his objection was that allowing insurers to cross state lines would serve to drive up the price of the lesser expensive carriers. Either this man has been in DC too long or he has poor human nature skills. The lower cost carrier would attract the people and would not raise prices to match the prices that the higher carriers charge. To do so would only drive the customers back to the other carriers. The mission of insurance companies is to sell insurance, not drive customers away. True unsubsidized competition would do this and would be achieved.

Another option is the use of co-ops or mutual companies. These are policy holders owned and the profit factor is therefore greatly reduced. I see this as a win-win situation. As an added feature,a mutual company would serve to diminish the lower priced carriers from raising prices. It would be economic suicide.

Let's pray our elected politicians make these changes, we need them.

Pray for the service people.
GOD Bless