An oft-overlooked aspect of the much desired (by liberals) universal health care is that, order for it to work, health coverage must be mandatory for everyone.  Even if you’re not bothered by the thought of the federal government forcing you to do something that it does not have the Consitutional authority to do, consider this:

Hillary speaks of the importance of stopping health insurance companies from raising premiums on those who are sick. But she does not mention the inevitable flip side of her proposal — to raise premiums on those who are well. On the one hand, she would cover all those with chronic conditions with low cost health insurance and, on the other, would stop insurance companies from “cherry picking” healthy and young people for their insurance plans. The net effect would be a major increase in health insurance premiums for the vast majority of Americans.

In effect, her plan would turn “insurance” into “subsidy.” The concept of insurance is that one pays a relatively low premium to guard against catastrophic expenses that are outside of our ability to meet financially. But Hillary’s program would really be nothing more than a cash transfer from the healthy to the sick, not an insurance program at all.

21% of the uninsured are non-citizens (from various countries); any guesses as to how many of those are illegal aliens?  12 million “Americans” are illegal aliens, and, given that most illegal aliens are Hispanic, it is relevant that ”research has shown that Hispanics [both legal and illegal] are more likely to be employed in jobs that do not offer health insurance, such as construction and agriculture (but when offered health insurance they accept at the same rates at whites and blacks).”

26% of the uninsured don’t work (so won’t pay a dime into any universal healthcare from which they would derive benefits).  This obviously doesn’t include the vast majority of the disabled, who are already eligible for Medicare.

Half of the uninsured are below 200% of poverty level…which means half are above.  “That the uninsured comprise non-trivial percentages of middle and upper income individuals is surprising. Those with incomes above 300% of poverty should generally find employer insurance affordable. Data from employers shows that average single coverage premiums for employer sponsored insurance represent 2.0% of income at 300% FPL, and average family coverage premiums represent 4.7% of income for a family of four at 300% FPL (with a higher percentage for smaller families). ”

In 2001 half of the uninsured were without insurance for less than 12 months.

And how many uninsured Americans really NEED insurance?  At least the type of insurance we are accustomed to, that covers preventive care and minor ailments along with major illnesses and injuries?

As much as 10 percent of the uninsured population is composed of college students.  Most college age people are healthy and need little more than catastrophic coverage.  Many colleges offer such coverage at very reasonable rates, yet apparently many students (and their families) choose not to take advantage of it.  Is it the place of government to force it upon them and to force everyone else to pay for it?

There are definitely problems with health care in America.  We have some of the finest medical care available anywhere in the world - but access to it is problematic, even for those WITH insurance.  But as the above data suggests, legislating a one-size-fits-all solution for both the insured and the uninsured (many of whom truly have the option - but have declined it, for whatever reason - for health insurance) that would disproportionately affect the majority of Americans - those who DON’T need it - is short-sighted and ridiculous.

I call BS!

This entry was posted on Sunday, February 3rd, 2008 at 12:12 pm and is filed under Economy, Gov't Blindness, Government, The Law of Unintended Consequences. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.