The Parente/Feldman/Pauly Health Reform Plan
Beginning with BHO’s basic approach to health reform, Steve Parente, Roger Feldman and Mark Pauly propose a reform with much less regulation and less spending. The plan reduces the number of uninsured by one-third and does so at about half the cost of the plans on Capitol Hill:
- There are no mandates on individuals or employers.
- There is no net increase in taxes (subsidies for people in the Exchange are paid for by capping the current tax subsidies).
Although the authors call their proposal, “Meaningful Market-Based Health Reform,” competition in the Exchange is managed competition which we have previously analyzed and criticized.
Although details are missing, the dangers are (1) the subsidy system will become a new entitlement and (2) regulations pertaining to the Exchange will prevent entrepreneurs from developing innovative solutions to the problems of cost, quality and access.
Why are so many “conservatives” advocates of managed competition?
I think this is Obama lite.
Each stakeholder has a different vision of what an ideal health care system would look like. These visions tend to be in conflict. If health care is free — it will be over-consumed. If health care is high tech — it will be costly. If health care is both free and high-tech, the expenditure will be enormous.
Health care is a scarce and valuable resource. All scarce resources must be paid for in some way and rationed to prevent shortages. Liberals want health care that is paid for (and rationed by) government. Conservatives want health care paid for directly and rationed by consumers. The only other choice is to designate a third party to ration care. Yet people complain when insurers or employers ration care.
Bret, it’s definitely Obama lite.