My Plan
The House GOP may not be able to get their arms around an Obamacare repeal plan, but John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis outlines in National Review his ideas on what a replacement should look like and he says he drew suggestions from the left as well as his more comfort zone right. Among other things, he includes a universal tax credit for health insurance — and a payment to safety net providers from unclaimed credits. Medicaid and private insurers would compete, his version of a public option. He says the government should set some rules and then get out of the way. (Politico)
Summary below the fold.
Elements of the plan:
- A universal tax credit for health insurance;
- A safety contribution for every unclaimed credit;
- More flexible Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) for everyone;
- Medicaid as an option for everyone and everyone in Medicaid can choose private insurance instead;
- And a new type of insurance to better protect those with pre-existing conditions.
This reform plan is a free market alternative to ObamaCare. It would achieve four remarkable things:
- Be more progressive than ObamaCare, because it would involve more help for lower-income families;
- Provide genuine protection for people who have a pre-existing condition, as opposed to the bait-and-switch promises of ObamaCare;
- Provide genuine access to care for everyone, as opposed to leaving 30 million uninsured and strangling the safety net, as ObamaCare does;
- And work in practice, primarily because it would confine the role of government to setting a few simple rules of the game, leaving individual choice and the marketplace to do the heavy lifting.
The reform that you are proposing seems viable. It certainly can work and will improve the current system, which is plagued with major flaws. It focuses on politically relevant topics, those that are in the interest of the majority of the population. Drawing ideas from both ends of the political spectrum might help it go through congress, but I find it hard to believe.
Individual choice for the consumers will always be a viable choice. His plan keeps big government out of health care and makes them accountable for providing a guideline. It has been shown that time and time again free market alternatives are better alternatives.
They also are more cost effective alternatives, without relying on government spending trillions of dollars and convincing the public that it will work.
Jobs are the essential part of your proposal in my opinion. Obamacare increased incentives for people to work less and for employers to stay small. The reform you recommend incentivize employment growth, something that the country desperately needs.
Employment growth is a key for economic growth and should be encouraged.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/25/news/economy/obamacare-job/
This link is one example of how Obamacare is encouraging people to work less or quit their jobs.
No better conclusion could be asked for.
“If a private insurer can’t outperform Medicaid, it doesn’t deserve to be in the market.”
This is a very bold statement that I am sure many insurance companies have a hard time wrapping their heads around. But I like this idea.
That is a free market, you either beat your competition or the competition beats you, there are no in-betweens. If a private company (theoretically more efficient) cannot outperform a governmental agency, it means that the company has fundamental flaws which they need to address to remain competitive and lucrative.
Obamacare is not the reform that will fix the healthcare system; it actually made it worse. But that is a good thing. People are seeing how inconvenient it is to have the government handle something as sensitive as your health. ACA has highlighted every issue currently on the system, and the good thing is that the reform is showing those issues to the common people, thus allowing them to understand more about the topic. Being more knowledgeable about the subject will make the people more involved in politics and will critically analyze any proposal. Obamacare is a good program, because it allows us to see what we need to change for the future reforms.
“More flexible Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) for everyone.”
I also agree that HSAs are going to (and should) become an integral part of the future of health care. It is a great way for people to pay for their coverage.
Of the whole proposal I have my doubts about the main component, which are the tax credit. I think it is the point that will raise most of the concerns and will be hard to control. Dr. Goodman dismiss the dangers of people taking advantage of it, but I think that people will start to game the system shortly after the law is in place.
Correct there are many ways to cheat the system, and the government is too big to keep ahead of those who dedicate their time to find loopholes in the laws they can take advantage from.
“A universal tax credit for health insurance”
Although people can pay less tax if they are under health insurance, the government would get more from the companies. Therefore, neither individuals nor the government will be hurt.
This is about the only proposal that does not harm safety net institutions and does expand the IRS and does not create horrible “cliffs” where subsidies disappear as incomes go up.
That is great.
What I have never seen yet is a nuts and bolts discussion of how to pay for universal credits.
If 100 million individuals got a tax credit of $2500 each, and 40 million families got a credit of $8,000 each, that would be a total of $570 billion that has to come from government.
Just taxing employer payments for health care would not raise this amount of money. Especially since employer payments will diminish in this environment.
We need a mini-CBO to take a look at this proposal!